My first cycle of HST...WOW
- Thread starter golfnut
- Start date
golfnut
Member
As of now, I'm doing DUP training, in an attempt to get stronger. I'm also cutting my weight, to get closer to a competition level body fat percentage. I will return to HST after my cut. I'm going to post some pics in 6-8 weeks, when I get to 5% body fat that way, everyone can see my progress.
leonardopm
Member
I was just wondering if DUP is better than HST for a cutting.
After my first cut on HST, in which I trained at 5RM all the time, I kept almost 100% of my strength but I felt I lost a reasonable size even after returning to maintenance diet. Maybe DUP'd help to keep sarchoplasmic hypertrophy due to its different rep and volume schemes, not sure, or maybe should I have cycled 10RM and 5RM during the cut.
Thoughts on this?
After my first cut on HST, in which I trained at 5RM all the time, I kept almost 100% of my strength but I felt I lost a reasonable size even after returning to maintenance diet. Maybe DUP'd help to keep sarchoplasmic hypertrophy due to its different rep and volume schemes, not sure, or maybe should I have cycled 10RM and 5RM during the cut.
Thoughts on this?
Leonardo, DUP and HST are not mutually exclusive. It just differs from the sample programs but is still in line with HST principles.
golfnut
Member
You'll always lose some of your size when you cut weight, It's kind of hard to avoid, during the cutting process. I don't think that DUP gives you as much sarcoplasmic hypertrophy as HST does, so I don't believe it would be a better avenue to take, in terms of overall size. I also don't think that you have to worry about changing the way that you do HST until you get down to the lower single digit body fat percentages. I don't start to lose my strength until I get below 5.5 to 6% body fat but I know that everyone is a little different. Try to do a standard HST program and monitor your strength levels, as you cut weight. Don't change anything until you notice your strength beginning to diminish. I hope this helps.
leonardopm
Member
I'm OK with some size loss, it's obviously usual when cutting. Point is I didn't recovered quickly the size lost. It took me a month, maybe more, to regain it. I was wondering if the long time doing only 5 rep work contributed to this.
golfnut
Member
Absolutely. The lower rep range isn't going to induce the type of hypertrophy that we're all looking for. That's one of the reasons, I can't wait to get back to HST. My muscles were fuller than they are on DUP but don't get me wrong, I love DUP. I'm trying some advice from Old and Grey about taking my rep range higher on one of my days and seeing if that helps. A lot of what we all do, is trial and error, I don't think there will ever be a "cookie cutter" program that will be one-size-fits-all.
golfnut
Member
If I understood him correctly, he was concerned about size loss, from hypertrophy (mainly sarcoplasmic), which is more in the 8-12 rep range. If we are talking about growth (myofibrillar hypertrophy) which is the actual addition of cross section of muscle fiber, it has been believed that it's best to stay in the lower rep range.
Charr, it is indeed confusing and I will attempt a rather very simplified explanation as I understand it. To build a strong body you need to build myofibrillar muscle as your base. Without this base, you cannot build substantive size. This base comes from heavy lifting in 1 -3 to 5 rep range. Also, you need to add to the myofibrillar muscle fiber, new muscle from sarcoplasmic inducing exercise. (Generally considered to be in the 8 - 12 rep range but I believe there are also benefits in much higher reps, up to 25 and more, as well). You will see many olympic style lifters who can put up amazing weights but are not that muscular. That is because they lack sarcoplasmic muscle. In fact, sarcoplasmic muscle will make them bigger but may hinder the performance of their lifts so they avoid it. Bodybuilders need both types. The more myofibrillar fiber you create, the more chiseled size and shape you can create via sarcoplasmic muscle cell expansion or multiplication. There are no weak champion bodybuilders. HST is designed to take advantage of building upon both types. You need to induce myofibrillar muscle to be strong but you need to create sarcoplasmic muscle as well to be big and strong. It is all in the goals you want to achieve.
Bulldog
Active Member
golfnut
Member
I've read several discussions on this very thing. The only thing that is confusing me is(I'm not trying to debate his knowledge in any way), why are my muscles bigger (on my non-workout days) when I'm in the higher rep range than when I stay in the lower rep range.
HST_Rihad
Active Member
I guess because higher rep glycolytic work stimulates glycogen+water super-compensation. More fiber isn't enough to cause 100% filled sarcoplasm, but what specific value 100% is always depends on fiber size.
Stuart Phillips make some great points. However, I tend to think he has strayed a bit from what little actual science we have has pointed to (without completely proving it.)
I believe, but cannot absolutely prove beyond doubt, that the answer to Golf's question resides in the building of sarcoplasmic muscle due to increased glycogen storage post metabolic (higher rep) workouts. The reverse is also true when one stops working out or is cutting but keeps using heavy weights, as is the current popular "party line." The myofibrillar muscle (and strength) tends to stay longer while the glycogen filled sarcoplasmic (showy) muscle shrinks relatively quickly.
There is much still to be learned about muscle structure but it takes a back-of-the-bus mentality with researchers, and rightfully so, when there are bigger problems to be solved such as cancer, diabetes, MS, ALS, etc.
Last edited:
golfnut
Member
Here's the real mind bender. My muscles grew (by tape measure) when I was running HST and I was bulking. I then switched to DUP and my muscles shrank, just a little but I was still bulking. Could I really lose or gain size that quick, unless it was fluid retention (what we call sarcoplasmic hypertrophy)? Believe me, I'm open minded, if what we have learned, needs to be re-learned and our knowledge and truths need to change, I'm okay with that.
I think myofibrillar hyperthrophy is related to volume and not a rep range. I've met many people in my gym that trains only with high reps and are much bigger than I am. sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is glycogen and water accumulation when somebody is training with high volume and their muscles need it, but it will go fast when you reduce the volume, so it's not the hyperthrophy that we must focus on.
I also think that the strength is quite specific, if a person (like the people in my gym) only uses high reps he will get stronger in that rep range as their body adapt to that specific stimulus and they will not need low reps to get stronger at all. That said, I think a combination of rep ranges is necessary to fully train the different muscle fibers.
I also think that the strength is quite specific, if a person (like the people in my gym) only uses high reps he will get stronger in that rep range as their body adapt to that specific stimulus and they will not need low reps to get stronger at all. That said, I think a combination of rep ranges is necessary to fully train the different muscle fibers.
HST_Rihad
Active Member
Roids?
Krysix, over the years, I have met many people who were bigger than I currently was at that point in time but they lacked the basic core strength that myofibrillar muscle provides. Sure, maybe they could do 200 push ups and I could only do 50 but they could only 1 rep 200 on the bench whereas I could do close to 50% more. I saw one of those guys at a trade show in Las Vegas after about 10 years and he had shrunk at least 10 suit sizes. He was a former Master's Mr. CT and had built this amazing body using only high reps and heavy roids over only a 5 year period. As soon as he got remarried and wanted children again, "poof' he shrunk at the rate of 2 pounds per week. Had he had a core of myofibrillar muscle, I doubt that would have happened as quickly. Sure the roids blew him up but he never got a core strength he could keep for a much longer time.
Or maybe it was because he got married?
Anyway, first determine your goal and then try to find what works best for you. The only thing I can tell you for certain is that 'best' method will change over time. GUARANTEED.
Or maybe it was because he got married?
Anyway, first determine your goal and then try to find what works best for you. The only thing I can tell you for certain is that 'best' method will change over time. GUARANTEED.
I understand your point of view but I still dont believe that if someone trains with 8-12 reps and get stronger in that rep range his hypertrophy is "worse" and will shrink. IMO there is just 1 kind of hypertrophy (sarcoplasmic hypertrophy for me is just glycogen and water, not really muscle). In fact there is a routine in the bodybuilding.com forum that only trains in the 8-12 rep range to failure in a rest pause manner and they seem to be doing great, they are much stronger and bigger than when they started.
If a bodybuilder stops training for a long time he will shrink no matter what he did to obtain that muscle.
And, as stated, this is just my opinion based on what I read and what I see, I can be mistaken.
If a bodybuilder stops training for a long time he will shrink no matter what he did to obtain that muscle.
And, as stated, this is just my opinion based on what I read and what I see, I can be mistaken.