Human Guinea Pig

tjframe

New Member
With all the conflicting and competing theories about the fastest way to hypertrophy out there (high volume vs low volume, high reps vs low reps, high frequency vs Low frequency etc)  I have decided to perform a few experiments on myself once my current dieting phase is over.

Now, normally when people experiment with different routines to see what works best, they do it succession. This introduces a lot of room for error. Perhaps during routine A you ate and slept in a way that deviated from routine B. Or perhaps work and outside stress had an impact during one routine more than the other. And the simple fact that if you gain 10 pounds on routine A, then it will be harder to gain 10 more on B because of diminishing returns. Thus even if you gain only 6 pounds during routine B, It might have been better than A if you had done it first.

So it seems clear that ideally you want to replicate every single factor encountered during the routines exactly. Since there is no way to do this if you train with different routines in succession, the only other alternative is to experiment with different protocols AT THE SAME TIME.

Now the only way I can think of to do this is as follows:

As an example, for 4-6 weeks at a time, I will train each arm using a competing approach. For example, I will train the left arm twice per week using heavy weight for 6 sets per muscle group. During that same time I will train the right arm 3 to 4 times per week for 12-16 total sets per week. Rep ranges will be kept the same.  During this time I will be eating a caloric surplus and training the rest of my body only minimally for maintenance purposes (1 set per body part twice per week, not to failure).   I will photograph and measure each arm during the experiment period.

After that time period is up, I can switch to two more competing approaches or rotate the less effective approach and re-introduce another routine (switching arms). I might go identical routines with high reps vs low reps, or adding negatives/forced reps vs normal sets.

My exercises for each arm will stay the same (preacher curls, dumbbell curls, single-arm overhead extensions, single-arm dips on the iso-lateral dip machine)

Any external factors will factor out of the equation since it’s happening to me at the same time. Same thing with bodyfat changes or over-training (which I think will be unlikely given my abbreviated workouts)

I would love to know, at least for myself, what the best approach actually turns out to be. I realize that this approach does not take long term adaptation into account, or the need for periodization, but within a confined 4 to 6 week time range the more effective routine should yield greater arm size since all other factors are equal.

I’d like to get people’s thoughts on this, as well as suggestions for structuring the competing arm routines. Has anyone ever done this themselves?

- TJ
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">My exercises for each arm will stay the same (preacher curls, dumbbell curls, single-arm overhead extensions, single-arm dips on the iso-lateral dip machine)</div>

Say it ain't so!!!
laugh.gif


<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I would love to know, at least for myself, what the best approach actually turns out to be. </div>

Stick to compound exercises that will work out your arms and other muscle groups.

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I’d like to get people’s thoughts on this, as well as suggestions for structuring the competing arm routines. </div>

Why are you so stuck on arms?
 
Interesting idea indeed. I will be interested in seeing how you do it. I just don't think it's possible for the average person (not in a lab setting), to really keep all else equal while experimenting on one factor. Wouldn't hurt to give it a try.
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Stick to compound exercises that will work out your arms and other muscle groups.
----
Why are you so stuck on arms? </div>

Colby, I'm not sure you understand what I'm trying to do.  

My arms are already over 20 inches at a bodyweight of 278 (5'10&quot;)   I'm not looking for the best way to make them grow in regards to compound vs isolation movements, rather I'm exploring which of the various approaches to volume, frequency, rep ranges etc. are more effective.

The reason I'm choosing arms is becuase they are small compared to larger bodyparts and will not impact my overall recovery ability as much. It is important to not let overtraining enter into the equation, and it is much easier to train the arms independently vs legs or chest or back. Arms are thus ideal candidates for this experiment.
 
if you are just going to train arms and nothing else then that would be
cool.gif

but if for instance you are going to be doing things like bench-press chins etc that would also work the arms ,so you wont get a true picture of what made them bigger,
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Arms are thus ideal candidates for this experiment. </div>

Well, it's an experiment of different training methods. IMO, if I were to do that, I would go full-body with a strict set of lifts such as squats, deadlifts, bench press, rows, and military press.
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">if you are just going to train arms and nothing else then that would be  
cool.gif

but if for instance you are going to be doing things like bench-press chins etc that would also work the arms ,so you wont get a true picture of what made them bigger,</div>

Well 2 sets per week of indirect work would hardly have much effect on someone of my size, but it is something to consider - I might end up doing machine pullovers for the back and flys/peck-deck for the chest to minimize it. My current muscle mass was built from heavy lifts and I'm somewhat meso/endo so I'm not worried about losing much mass during that period. I can go for a long time before I start to shrink up.

Thanks for the input, and thanks for actually reading the whole thing.  Colby just doesnt seem to get it.
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">With all the conflicting and competing theories about the fastest way to hypertrophy out there (high volume vs low volume, high reps vs low reps, high frequency vs Low frequency etc) I have decided to perform a few experiments on myself once my current dieting phase is over.</div>

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Colby just doesnt seem to get it. </div>

I guess I don't get it???

If you want to test different techniques but on only one body part; that's fine. You want to see different changes in hypertrophy in your arms. I say... why not go full body and measure all muscle groups. You'll have a larger sample size giving more proof to the pudding.
 
<div>
(colby2152 @ Jun. 29 2007,14:03)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">If you want to test different techniques but on only one body part; that's fine.  You want to see different changes in hypertrophy in your arms.  I say... why not go full body and measure all muscle groups.  You'll have a larger sample size giving more proof to the pudding.</div>

Colby,

In my post I mentioned that there are several inherent problems with training different routines in sucession - including maintaining the exact same eating, sleeping, and stress conditions, and the simple fact that if routine B comes after A then if will harder to gain on B even if it is better (becuase of diminishing returns)

Thus my experiment will do BOTH competing routines AT THE SAME TIME, on different arms. All other factors such as diet, sleep, external stress, daily workout intensity, and bodyfat will be the same across the board.  After the first round is over, I will switch the winning routine over to the other arm and rotate in another training approach for the other arm. I'm using arms becuase they are easy to isolate from the rest of the body and  won't introduce overtraining as readily as other bodyparts.

This simultaneous aproach will more clearly distill which aproach produces more pure hypertrophy. To train the entire body with one aproach for a month or more then switch to another routine introduces too many possible complicating factors.  

Now I realize that if, for example, it turns out that high volume and high frequency works best, I realize that you then must periodize that somewhat when applying it to a full body routine or else you could overtrain yourself very easily.  But initially I'm not concerning myself with those larger issues. Even the best approach will not work indefinately without change or variation becuase the body will adapt as best it can. But knowing the general principles that give me the best results will help me guide my routines in the future.

Once I can decide on the few most effective approaches, I will go back and apply them to my entire body using compounds etc.

The reason I'm doing this is because once and for all I want to truly see which inherent approach is the most beneficial, everything else being equal.  Sure most of the competing training approaches out there will work to some degree. I'm just curious as to which combination of factors equate to the fastest hypertrophy - Frequency, Volume, Rep-Ranges and TUT etc.

Perhaps training one arm twice per week for 6 sets will give equal results to training the other arm 3 times per week for 12 sets? Perhaps not. Perhaps training with negatives and forced reps twice per week will be superior to training 4 times pr week for 20 sets?  Or perhaps they will truly grow more off of 15 reps than 6. Or maybe the results will be the same.  I want to know these answers
smile.gif
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">
Thus my experiment will do BOTH competing routines AT THE SAME TIME, on different arms.</div>

I am with you now. Best of luck with your experimental training. Hope you don't end up like that asian chick in the one commercial where her one arm is 5 times as big and strong as the other!
laugh.gif
 
<div>
(quadancer @ Jun. 29 2007,19:10)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">It's a scientific approach IMO. What I wonder is if a guy with 20&quot; guns is gonna see anything from any approach!</div>
Well after I'm dieted down they will probably only be 19 or so.

I have only trained about 3 years total time off and on during the last 12 years so I would imagine I still have room to grow, plus the fact that my arms, when pumped, gain an over 3/4 inch which I believe (though I could be mistaken) means they can get larger still.

I was planning on taking an extend SD right before the experiment as well, so that should help amplify my results when I get back into the gym and start taking in the extra calories.
 
278lb bw is pretty darn heooge.
wow.gif
If you don't mind my asking, how much bf are you carrying and what weight were you when you started training?

Saying your arms are 'only 19&quot; or so' has just made a load of us sigh.
biggrin.gif
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I have only trained about 3 years total time off and on during the last 12 years</div>
WOOF!!! I hate your guts.
 
<div>
(Lol @ Jun. 29 2007,22:05)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">278lb bw is pretty darn heooge.
wow.gif
 If you don't mind my asking, how much bf are you carrying and what weight were you when you started training?

Saying your arms are 'only 19&quot; or so' has just made a load of us sigh.  
biggrin.gif
</div>
LOL I'm no mutant or genetic freak or anything. Just your typical thick meso/endo powerlifting-looking dude.

&quot;Lean&quot; for me is not step onstage at 5 percent lean, but rather 10-12+ percent. I have no interest in competing or anything like that. I suppose to get down to 5
percent bodyfat I'd have to lose 50-60 pounds or so.

The thing about being a meso/endo is that muscle gains and strength come easy, but so does the bodyfat. And when you take time off, the muscle tends to stay.. but then again so does the bodyfat!

What would my arms measure at 5 percent bodyfat? I have no idea.. I don't really care either becuase I'll never be at 5 percent. My point in listing my weight and arm size was that I'm no newbie to lifting. I haven't been consistent with my training over the years, but I'm not a newbie.

But I'd rather focus on what people think would be good routines to compare for my little experiment. I will post full stats and pics when this thing is all said and done.
 
I wonder if this experiment might be even better if you did consider additional exercises using dumbbells.

You could actually train each side of your entire body with a different training protocol by using 1 arm rows, 1 arm pull downs, 1 arm db bench press, 1 arm db shoulder press, 1 legged lunges, leg curls and calf raises...

Then the problem about compound exercises affecting your arm growth would be negated and the overall effect (if any) would be a lot more pronounced.

Of course you could also end up looking rather imbalanced!!

Just a thought

Cheers

Rob
 
Back
Top