Hi
Which of this intensification methods is more demending in terms of systemic fatigue etc.? Reason I’m asking is that I want to do increasingly demanding methods from block to block.
Will appraciate any thoughts from Paul and folks that tried both methods.
I have no way I could answer that.
Do you think the results in the 30-10-30 are realistic?
Realistic for what? I don’t know the context of what you’re asking here.
Have you ever read the article?
The results are pretty unrealistic.
That article was discussed in the “real driver for muscle growth” thread. Not in depth but the general outline.
I’m not going to do the thing where I answer the “what do you think about this article, Paul?”
That’s not coaching.
I’ll do both and share results afterwards. But I must add, that I’m not going to do 30-10-30 exactly like discribed in the article in terms of split, frequency etc. so it will be my few cents about method, not program per se.
Realistic is very context driven.
Firstly, the article ddidn’t (from my admittedly quick skim) mention how they determined muscle gain. If they literally just put these participants on a scale at the start and end of their training then no I don’t think these results are unrealistic at all.
From the photos they all look to have gained fat.
Secondly, circumference measurements are usually by tape, not an error free measurement. Also, were they both taken post training? Was one pre one post? An untrained person would expect to gain some circumference just from inflammation and residual tone from starting training.
Thirdly, these guys all look like they’d never touched a weight when they started, whats realistic for a beginner is different to what is realistic for someone with training under the belt.
Finally, stop using other peoples progress to assess what is and isn’t realistic and what you should do. Try it, look at what results you get.
That article was discussed in the “real driver for muscle growth” thread. Not in depth but the general outline.
Indeed, so If anyone is interested in realisticity of results and Paul’s opinion in that matter, please jump there =>
Or =>
Fourthly, they’re all entering anabolic/hormonal prime time for growth, and being trained by a guy with a PhD and supposed decades of practice.
I don’t follow the guy but it seems like the only thing I’ve ever seen from Darden has been some off the wall “super program” that adds ridiculous amounts of muscle in an extraordinary time frame.
Basically PT Barnum.