Rethinking Hst

[HST_Rihad]

I'm fairly certain that a century of odd-lifts and powerlifting have debunked that it's still open to debate.

Powerlifting's goal is to lift heavier loads. Bodybulding's goal is to have bigger, defined, sufficiently lean muscles. These concepts are interrelated, but can both be achieved in different proportions. These two groups lifted for 8 weeks, one with 30RM loads, the other with 10RM loads 3 times per week:


Of course heavier loads also have their advantages, this is why my 2 week cycle will eventually look like 30-25-20-15-10-5.

 

[Jester]

Disclaimer: discussion pertains to non-chemically enhanced lifters;

Powerlifter's lift more weight by gaining more muscle. Neurological improvements only take you so far at a given body weight.

No matter what weight class you are looking at, a successful powerlifter will have significant muscle mass (within their class).

Go and look at Jonnie Candito. Very muscled for someone of his height and weight. Same goes for Brett Gibbs.



"Bodybuilding" is just a term for recreational lifters who don't compete in a sport - no, BB'ing is not a sport. It's a beauty pageant. But tangent aside, if you want to get bigger, you ought to be using a scientifically proven method. There is six decades of meta-data and anecdotal evidence that show you how to improve your strength and muscle mass; lift heavier loads. The implementation is merely details, and people who tend not to improve are the ones that have trouble executing this very simple premise.

Your 30RM is not what you should be lifting to get bigger and stronger, regardless of what a single study (with notably horrendous parameters) has concluded. I'm not saying to try and hit a 1RM PR on every exercise, every session, so don't bother intentionally misconstruing it. Just take a glance at the fitness community on YouTube or the broader internet. Massive and ripped mofo's are not pussy footing around lifting their 30RM every two weeks.


There's an old saying in my culture, and maybe in @Totentanz 's culture as well ...


Stop fuckin' around and get to work.

 

[HST_Rihad]

Massive and ripped mofo's are not pussy footing around lifting their 30RM every two weeks.

Maybe it's because they don't know of any other (natural) way? Aren't we confusing causation with correlation here?

 

[Jester]

Maybe it's because they don't know of any other (natural) way? Aren't we confusing causation with correlation here?

Always a possibility, but in turn you're ignoring clear evidence of a method that does work.

Another saying; don't try to reinvent the wheel.

Optimise that wheel, but in the end it still needs to be round and attach to something.

 

[HST_Rihad]

Always a possibility, but in turn you're ignoring clear evidence of a method that does work.

You aren't thinking I'm trying to deny the progressive overload principle, are you? You do get stronger as your muscles get bigger, it's quite natural, one bigger untrained person can curl more weight than another smaller sized untrained person.
The question is what loads are enough for triggering growth and progressing. Apparently way lower than 15RM.

Another saying; don't try to reinvent the wheel.

Optimise that wheel, but in the end it still needs to be round and attach to something.

I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel, rather trying to find another means of moving from A to B, like flying.

 

[Lol]

Rihad, whilst you're "flying" from A to B, all those who previously arrived at B will have moved on and will have already arrived at C (aka. "Genetic Potential Land"). If you're lucky the developers will have been busy and will have a new psychiatric unit ready and waiting for you at B. Not all forms of flying are faster than other methods of travel and, in fact, pilots are liable to many forms of sensory illusions along the way. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensory_illusions_in_aviation)

 

[Bulldog]

@HST_Rihad , I think you are giving SD too much flack. Do you really think you lose an appreciable amount of muscle mass during a 9 day SD? I hate to tell you, but you don't. Is there a waste of time during the first couple of weeks of each cycle? I guess that depends on how you look at it. At almost 46 years old the 15 rep weeks do my body/joints a lot of good and for me they are worth doing even if it takes me a couple extra weeks to get back to loads that cause hypertrophy.

Would a deload accomplish the same thing as a 9 day SD? Probably, but why not take a few days off and give your body some much needed rest every few months? At my age and previous history of shoulder injuries it is pretty much a requirement.

 

[adpowah]

So this thread started end of Nov and it's April now, so how have the gains been in 4 months?

 

[Jester]

You aren't thinking I'm trying to deny the progressive overload principle, are you? You do get stronger as your muscles get bigger, it's quite natural, one bigger untrained person can curl more weight than another smaller sized untrained person.
The question is what loads are enough for triggering growth and progressing. Apparently way lower than 15RM.



I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel, rather trying to find another means of moving from A to B, like flying.

You're only trying to do that for the sake of being a contrarian. Has it occurred to you that the means being used previously and currently are just better than what you attempting? i.e. you aren't a good programmer ... ?

 

[Totentanz]

@HST_Rihad , I think you are giving SD too much flack. Do you really think you lose an appreciable amount of muscle mass during a 9 day SD? I hate to tell you, but you don't. Is there a waste of time during the first couple of weeks of each cycle? I guess that depends on how you look at it. At almost 46 years old the 15 rep weeks do my body/joints a lot of good and for me they are worth doing even if it takes me a couple extra weeks to get back to loads that cause hypertrophy.

Would a deload accomplish the same thing as a 9 day SD? Probably, but why not take a few days off and give your body some much needed rest every few months? At my age and previous history of shoulder injuries it is pretty much a requirement.

So far, seems that his contention with SD is the assertion that you can grow from previously used sub-maximal loads. But we all know that you can. Pretty much every sensible program has you starting at a percentage of max and building up to your previous max, then moving beyond it as you gain strength. That's pretty obviously gains that you are getting from sub-maximal loads that you have used previously.

But to address the concern of muscle loss: as Bulldog point out, the idea that one can lose significant muscle or strength in a nine day period while eating at maintenance is laughable. You might lose some carbs and water storage in your muscles which will quickly come back once you start training again. You might lose some degree of neural coordination which will come back quickly once you start training again. But unless you drop some serious bodyweight during SD, then there is no way you are losing any amount of muscle worth even remarking on at all.

There's an old saying in my culture, and maybe in @Totentanz 's culture as well ...

Stop fuckin' around and get to work.

Around here, our saying is more along the lines of "shit or get off the pot" meaning if you aren't going to actually do it, then get out of the way and let the people who are serious show you how it's done.

 

[Jester]

So far, seems that his contention with SD is the assertion that you can grow from previously used sub-maximal loads. But we all know that you can. Pretty much every sensible program has you starting at a percentage of max and building up to your previous max, then moving beyond it as you gain strength. That's pretty obviously gains that you are getting from sub-maximal loads that you have used previously.

But to address the concern of muscle loss: as Bulldog point out, the idea that one can lose significant muscle or strength in a nine day period while eating at maintenance is laughable. You might lose some carbs and water storage in your muscles which will quickly come back once you start training again. You might lose some degree of neural coordination which will come back quickly once you start training again. But unless you drop some serious bodyweight during SD, then there is no way you are losing any amount of muscle worth even remarking on at all.

@HST_Rihad - have you ever reviewd Boris Sheiko's work? Arguably the most successful coach in any strength sport, even more so than Ivan Abadjiev. Plenty of sub-maximal work.

Around here, our saying is more along the lines of "shit or get off the pot" meaning if you aren't going to actually do it, then get out of the way and let the people who are serious show you how it's done.

Same sentiment

 

[HST_Rihad]

Rihad, whilst you're "flying" from A to B, all those who previously arrived at B will have moved on and will have already arrived at C (aka. "Genetic Potential Land"). If you're lucky the developers will have been busy and will have a new psychiatric unit ready and waiting for you at B. Not all forms of flying are faster than other methods of travel and, in fact, pilots are liable to many forms of sensory illusions along the way. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensory_illusions_in_aviation)

I think you're insane too, because you're following someone else's cooked & served training+nutrition advice, and not training how you like and eat what you please.

 

[HST_Rihad]

@HST_Rihad , I think you are giving SD too much flack. Do you really think you lose an appreciable amount of muscle mass during a 9 day SD?

This wasn't my point. The previous loads used with the same 1-2 sets per exercise were. If you work with the same loads, volume has to increase for them to be more effective. SD can't work around this.

I hate to tell you, but you don't. Is there a waste of time during the first couple of weeks of each cycle? I guess that depends on how you look at it. At almost 46 years old the 15 rep weeks do my body/joints a lot of good and for me they are worth doing even if it takes me a couple extra weeks to get back to loads that cause hypertrophy.

You either kept increasing the volume with the same loads used, or you were on drugs

 

[HST_Rihad]

So this thread started end of Nov and it's April now, so how have the gains been in 4 months?

I've been cutting. Gains is a relative term. Sometimes losing unwanted fat is gaining.

 

[HST_Rihad]

You're only trying to do that for the sake of being a contrarian. Has it occurred to you that the means being used previously and currently are just better than what you attempting? i.e. you aren't a good programmer ... ?

All muscle gaining techniques in vogue today indeed center around getting stronger. I have nothing against that, a bigger muscle is a stronger muscle. But like I said, gaining strength with your 30RM done until failure is also muscle growth of equal value at the expense of less strength gained. Which way you prefer (and how much fat you carry) is a matter of personal preference. I'm going to hit the muscle with 30-25-20-15-10-5RM loads in a two week period, gradually decreasing the reps, giving work for both slow & fast-twitch fibers over the course of the cycle, along with the metabolic stress.

 

[HST_Rihad]

@HST_Rihad - have you ever reviewd Boris Sheiko's work? Arguably the most successful coach in any strength sport, even more so than Ivan Abadjiev. Plenty of sub-maximal work.

I know, it's a useful program for getting stronger. It takes the guesswork out and insists on up to 6 sets per exercise, IIRC, not the awkward 1-2 sets.

Having said that, I'm still taking the one-set approach to its extreme. It all started with 10-9-8-7-6-5 done in two week cycles, and I'll now gradually turn them into 30-25-20-15-10-5 as the high reps have turned out to be appropriate for growth. It's actually several kinds of progression which all end up with 5RM loads:
1 rep step: 10-9-8-7-6-5
2 rep step: 15-13-11-9-7-5
3 rep step: 20-17-14-11-8-5
4 rep step: 25-21-17-13-9-5
5 rep step: 30-25-20-15-10-5

I'm gonna try them all Getting very close to failure 3 times per week won't be a problem with 10RM and lighter. And getting close to failure is needed when it's only one working set. Accumulation of metabolic byproducts, prevention of venous return, achieving a pump - are all proven ways of stimulating hypertrophy.

 

[mickc1965]

So this thread started end of Nov and it's April now, so how have the gains been in 4 months?

I've been cutting. Gains is a relative term. Sometimes losing unwanted fat is gaining.

Cutting for four months from where you were in terms of bodyweight at the time, as you posted bodyweight of 65 kgs at the end of September (your abs were visible in June at 63.4 kgs) what did you weigh in November and what do you weigh now?

 

[HST_Rihad]

Cutting for four months from where you were in terms of bodyweight at the time, as you posted bodyweight of 65 kgs at the end of September (your abs were visible in June at 63.4 kgs) what did you weigh in November and what do you weigh now?

I was cutting until mid-August to as low as 61.4kg, then I started experimenting with the usual HST 10-5-5 stuff and overate to about 66ish kg, then around February noticing the fat gain I said enough, and having devised the 10-9-8-7-6-5 progression started experimenting with it while slowly cutting the weight back down 63.1kg today. Once I reach the desired %bf there will be no more of this classical back-and-forth bulk&cut cycles. I will be slowly recomposing (more food on some days, less on others), occasionally increasing the base calories a bit to get into a new BW, ad infinitum (while maintaining lean looks).

 

[Totentanz]

All muscle gaining techniques in vogue today indeed center around getting stronger. I have nothing against that, a bigger muscle is a stronger muscle. But like I said, gaining strength with your 30RM done until failure is also muscle growth of equal value at the expense of less strength gained. Which way you prefer (and how much fat you carry) is a matter of personal preference. I'm going to hit the muscle with 30-25-20-15-10-5RM loads in a two week period, gradually decreasing the reps, giving work for both slow & fast-twitch fibers over the course of the cycle, along with the metabolic stress.

I know that you know what I am about to say. The loads used in high rep work such as your proposed 30 RM won't come close to recruiting all fibers until you get close to failure. Considering the load that you'll be exposing your muscles to once you get to full recruitment, compare that to how many reps it will take before you will be recruiting all fibers when using your 5 RM load. Most likely all reps of the set, maybe not the first one but almost all of them. Talking about working both types of muscle fibers isn't really important because you're going to be using all of them once you do enough work or once you lift a heavy enough load. Aside from that, if you're going to delve into muscle fiber type, there are a hell of a lot more than just fast and slow twitch, and the story is more complicated than just saying "my muscle is composed of x% this fiber and y% this fiber, so I should train like this" because muscle fiber composition of the muscle isn't something set in stone anyway.

It requires less overall effort on your part to simply use a heavier load and recruit more fibers, more quickly rather than doing super high rep sets for growth. I won't argue the validity of adding in ultra high rep work on occasion for metabolic stimulus or even just to work on technique, but you shouldn't be looking to ultra high rep sets for a primary growth stimulus just because of the fact that it is less effective than working with heavier loads.

You don't have to get close to failure when only using one working set. You just need to do enough volume with the right load to achieve full recruitment when only using one set. It's more like a curve where the lower the load, the closer you must work to failure in order to get adequate stimulation. Once you work with heavy enough loads, failure is something you don't need to achieve. On the other hand, when using a 30 RM load, you'll need to either reach failure or get damn close to it, like RPE 9.5

 

[mickc1965]

You don't have to get close to failure when only using one working set. You just need to do enough volume with the right load to achieve full recruitment when only using one set. It's more like a curve where the lower the load, the closer you must work to failure in order to get adequate stimulation. Once you work with heavy enough loads, failure is something you don't need to achieve

@Totentanz, I assume that would be something like 4 reps with your 5 rep max / 9 reps with 10 rep max etc? or would it be slightly lower still?