New training program I might try....

<div>
(scientific muscle @ Apr. 03 2007,00:23)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Quote from Max-stim thread in November 2006
Dan Moore
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Also understand my intent was to make sure we are increasing the work over the duration. When using a very high rep number or when working to near failure with Max-Stim it can be deceiving. What I mean is, let's say you are working to near failure and adjusting the M-Time, theorhetically you could get 50 or more reps in the lighter&quot;ish&quot; weights but as time goes on and the loads get heavier the number of reps diminishes. This to me seems counterproductive. So it's not so much a matter of do whatever you can but more of a matter of making sure you do more than the last (or last couple/several) workouts. So I would rather someone do only 15 reps throughout than to start at 40 reps and have to reduce the number of reps.
__
Dan Moore </div>

If that is still the case, then 30 reps seems plenty challenging to keep it up a whole cycle.
Incidently I am already 90% certain what program I will be using and have already created a spreadsheet based on linear progression for 10 weeks and clustering to 30 reps for each exercise.  Most of my ramblings here are simply curiosity and mental masturbation...
tounge.gif
</div>
Sci,

I have not changed my views at all, I still see work (force/volume) to be a key to hypertrophy.

The reason I haven't commented is..........you already know what to do, you're a smart young man who knows his body well and how it'll respond. So go with what you know
wink.gif
 
<div>
(scientific muscle @ Apr. 02 2007,21:53)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I'm just not sure if it is better to start with high volume and only cut it down as needed, or as Dan Moore proposes, to keep the volume steady throughout the cycle.  I am not sure if Dan still has this viewpoint or not in light of new research about high-volume...</div>
Like I said earlier I haven't changed my views at all but I wanted to make some things clear or rather clearer so this is going to be a rather lengthy post, probably one of my last lengthy posts but still.........

Let's go back to the beginning, earlier research that began to look at hypertrophy.

When animals had a synergist muscle removed and made to walk about they saw a dramatic and quick hypertrophy. So one has to ask what caused this.

Well it was the increase in work, remember work = force X distance or in this case the force X volume. When the muscles where intact the animal walked about for so many contractions per day, when the synergist was removed the tension on the remaining muscle increased while the number of contractions per day stayed the same.

Another classic is the work with loaded quail wings. There were two means that this was studied. The first, was to use a fixed weight which showed a dramatic increase in hypertrophy of the birds latissimus. The second and in my opinion more important study incrementally increased this weight periodically and showed an even greater response. Now, in both cases it wasn't that the bird contracted the latissimus more times during a day it was that it had to contract against a higher load and therefore the work it performed was greater. When the loads were incremented up, the work increased via increases in the force aspect alone, not volume.

Since these classic experiments occured many years ago the research has turned towards an understanding of why, what is occuring both at the molecular level and at the whole muscle level which led to another set of classic experiments.

When rats were subjected to electrical stimulation, many maximal contractions per day the muscle under examination grew, rapidly and dramatically. Again what changed over normal contractions that the rat was perfoming by just moving about? Tension. During MVC all fibers are fully fused tetanically and therefor all fibers are exerting there maximum tension repeatedly. Unfortunately this does not represent what humans typically do during a weight training session. But it still points out that tension and increases in tension above what the muscle tissue is accustomed too is a key to hypertrophy of the tissue.

In another classic series, rats were trained to do squat like exercises with a weight vest adapted to their bodies that allowed loading. Periodically the vests weights were increased yet the number of contractions (20) stayed the same. Again hypertrophy was evidently increased. Again pointing to the fact that it was the increased work output via increased loading, not increased volume.

So what about humans, are we that different? Yes and No. Mostly we are different in the respect that we make choices, we can increase the load to a point that we are no longer able to lift it or we can increase the number of times that we lift any given load. What's the difference? A lot. Simply lifting the same load for an ever increasing number of reps gets us more adapted to lifting that load yet at some point the growth response from that load stops and it becomes more of a metabolic stimulus than anabolic. Yet if we chose a certain number of arbitrary reps and then chose to increase the load when this number is acheived, hypertrophy is the result.

So still, in my mind, what one should do is try and duplicate these classic experiments via keeping the number of repetitions the same and increasing the load. The question that still remains is; what should this arbitrary number be?

That is up to everyone individually but what ever is chosen it should represent a number that can be maintained througout (at least in my opinion) so if it is 15, 20, 30, 50, 100, is not the issue at all. The issue is what can I maintain over and over and over again while I am still abiding by what we already know to be true, adding tension increases the hypertrophic response.

Enuff said.

Peace out guys.
 
Two good points for me Dan (and I quote):

1) Simply lifting the same load for an ever increasing number of reps gets us more adapted to lifting that load yet at some point the growth response from that load stops and it becomes more of a metabolic stimulus than anabolic.

2) That is up to everyone individually but what ever is chosen it should represent a number that can be maintained througout (at least in my opinion) so if it is 15, 20, 30, 50, 100, is not the issue at all. The issue is what can I maintain over and over and over again while I am still abiding by what we already know to be true, adding tension increases the hypertrophic response.

I am going to think more about this today as I think there is a corollary or two to be had.
 
I didn't think you had changed your mind Dan.
wink.gif

Sets across with a constant load can be pretty difficult and 30 reps is probably my max when keeping only 3-4 exercises.
I had a great idea to keep volume high and still maintain the volume throughout.
Instead of alternating exercises, just do them all 3/week while dropping total volume for each lift to a reasonable 20 reps.

Like this:

Squat-20 reps
Deadlift alternated with Rows-20 reps (to save lower back)
Chinups-20 reps
Bench-20 reps
Military-20 reps
Dips-20reps

That is 120 reps a session spread out among 6 different exercises. That gives me plenty of volume each week for each lift without making the workout impossibly difficult. I want to see if I can do both dips/bench in the same day, if I run into issues I will alternate these also. Chest is a weak area for me.

Darnit....I am back to a basic max-stim type workout again! I guess I can't improve upon perfection...
wink.gif
 
i was surprised when saw this.
i thought you had gone over to powerlift training full time.
still on the see-food diet, or something more structured?

good luck
 
I am still bulking, problem is I was burning out my CNS doing too much heavy stuff.  And experienced powerlifters have told me that right now I need to focus on bulking up and gaining muscle, before I worry too much about advanced training.  I was going to do a 5x5 type routine to bulk, but honestly I think HST is superior if the goal is muscle mass.

Hope that helps, bluejacket.

P.S.- a possibility I may do this HST cycle 'assisted'.
 
<div>
(scientific muscle @ Apr. 03 2007,06:37)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">P.S.- a possibility I may do this HST cycle 'assisted'.</div>
Holy sh-it you will blow up assisted!

Cant wait to see your after pics!
 
Also Sci...I would think...and well its just my opinion b/c I know Dan is way smarter than me at this stuff...but if you are assisted I would think more volume would be a good thing???
 
Wow, this is REALLY getting interesting. Dan has basically said that HST rocks, and adding reps is less effective than adding weight, to simplify. I would have thought that Sci's use of 20 reps would be a little weak, but in retrospective thinking, 6 sets puts a LOAD on the CNS sooner or later, and the weight added will be more than what you would be using with more reps total.
So here is the principle of progression with a constant (the reps) but higher loads/more hypertrophy.
My buddy Slapshot PM'd me with an observation that new to this forum, he noticed that all the bigger lifters use less reps, more weight, and compounds out the butt. Could be due to advancement in gym time, but still...
I just thought it was more fun!
biggrin.gif


I'd wonder from that rat experiment if for at least a period of time, if the electroshock machines would do any good for a lifter, like say after a deload? Hmmm...
 
I did the math....alternating 4 exercises and doing 30 reps like my original plan would give me 120 reps session, but ONLY 45 reps/week on average for each exercise because of alternating.  Doing all the exercises EVERY workout for 20 reps would still be 120 reps/session but each exercise would get 60 reps/week.

So actually because I am not alternating, 20 reps will be HARDER than the original plan. (except BB rows and deadlifts will be easier as I alternate those and prevent lowerback blowout!)

Here is what week 10 will look like:

Week 10 Monday Wednesday Friday
Deadlift 318x20              325x20
Squat 222x20 224x20       227x20
Chinup 218x20 220x20       223x20
Rows 180x20
Dips 244x20 246x20       249x20
Bench 187x20 189x20       191x20
Press 122x20 123x20       125x20
 
That IS gonna be a serious program. Were it me, I'd have wanted to alternate the deads and squats rather than the rows and deads, but that's me. Rows don't bother me for deads.
 
<div>
(liegelord @ Apr. 03 2007,01:13)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Not to highjack the thread, but I backed off the bench also and I'm focusing on the push-press instead. Let us know how the switch works out for you. Are you using bumper plates?</div>
Unfortunately, I don't have bumper plates... I do them off the floor when it's light, and just lower it down carefully, which kind of sucks but is tolerable enough as long as the weight is under 150 lbs or so.
When it gets heavy, I've been starting them from about an inch or so off the ground, using the safety bars on my rack, and letting the safeties catch the bar on the way down so I don't destroy my floor or crack a plate. I'm probably going to ruin my safety bars doing this though.

I could always do them out in the yard, now that it is getting warm outside. It would tear up the grass, but I don't really care that much. Neighbors might think I'm weird, or trying to show off, but screw them.

I've been spending a couple weeks trying to refind my maxes and trying to build up my strength before I start the cycle proper, since I had lost a ton of strength after being sick. So far, and I'm kind of embarrassed to say this, it looks like my clean and press might actually exceed my bench soon.
 
<div>
(Totentanz @ Apr. 03 2007,09:24)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"> Neighbors might think I'm weird, or trying to show off, but screw them.</div>
LMAO...at the sight of your neighbor seeing your big ass back doing deads!
biggrin.gif
tounge.gif
 
Totentanz, don't feel bad, we are in the same boat. My push press (with neg's) is 200 3x3 and I benched 215 3x5 tonight.
biggrin.gif


Olympic lifting without bumper plates really sucks. You should look for a lifting club near you. I go to my son's high school.
 
<u>Overview of my HST plan.
</u>
Duration: 10 weeks after my 11 day SD (more like CNS recovery
tounge.gif
)

Load- start at 60% of 1rm, progress 1% each workout for 30 workouts to end up at 89% of 1rm.

Frequency- Fullbody 3 times/week.

Volume(sets/reps)- Cluster reps to 20 total per exercise.

Exercises
Olympic Squat
Deadlifts (workouts alternated with Barbell Rows)
Bench Press
Chinups
Standing Press
Dips

I really like this setup and feel I will make maximum rapid gains on this program. Any last input before I start next Monday?
 
This program is going to kick ass...just by looking at it.

Also I noted that you are averaging 40 reps per workout per muscle group interesting....maybe I should do this???
rock.gif
 
''rats were trained to do squat like exercises with a weight vest adapted to their bodies that allowed loading''

Ok Dan posted this a while ago but holy f***! those are some smart rats! I can only train my rats to do leg extensions
sad.gif
 
<div>
(style @ Apr. 06 2007,12:28)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">''rats were trained to do squat like exercises with a weight vest adapted to their bodies that allowed loading''

Ok Dan posted this a while ago but holy f***! those are some smart rats! I can only train my rats to do leg extensions  
sad.gif
</div>
ROTFLMAO!!!
laugh.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top