I don’t know whom to direct you to I’m afraid.
Whom don’t you gel with, and why?
1 Like
CT for one. Because iso-quasi-eccentric tempo mtor myo-neurotype bullshit. Yes, I know or can figure out what all that means. No, I’m not going to.
Joe Bennett seems promising, but I’m not sure how much of his stuff is out there for free.
2 Likes
It’s probably the most scientific breakdown, but it’s a lot to sieve through, and it gets muddied with his own sales pitch.
Joe Bennett
Hadn’t read that name before today, so I have no idea what his style is. Does he have any articles?
It’s just not my style. Oddly, as a scientist by training, that stuff really puts me off.
I think he calls himself the hypertrophy coach. He kept getting recommended for me on YouTube so I watched a few, then spotted his name on the EliteFTS Tabletalks list so listened to that. I have no idea if he does articles, I hope so because I’m not a fan of youtube videos.
Me neither, it’s a very poor way for me to digest information.
Have you read Fortitude Training? It has a chapter iterates through three means of creating a muscle growth stimulus through training,
- Muscle loading,
- Metabolic stress,
- Muscle damage
describes the concept and describes how it is attained within the FT template. You do not have to use FT to digest the chapter and you’ll walk away with a no-frills rundown of hypertrophy.
1 Like
I’ll look into it. Ebook? Or kindle?
I have it as an ebook. No idea if it’s available on the Kindle.
His other book, Be Your Own Bodybuilding Coach, is also a phenomenal read. To me, it’s on par with 531 Forever but focuses more on nutrition, recovery, quality of life, and so forth rather than how to program. But if you had to read just one, for the sake of learning about hypertrophy, you want the book on Fortitude Training specifically.
Google can tell me.
1 Like
Mike Israetel with Renaissance Periodization and Eric Helms with 3DMJ. As legit as they come. Minimal bro science.
1 Like
Really? Israetel? “During the pre-meso cycle you have to do precisely 15,4 sets at an RPE of 7,2 before your minicut for 2 weeks and then one week of 13 sets and one of compulsory 23”
3 Likes
Never said it was easy or simple. I think Israetel covers the principles well so people can think critically about what they are doing on a macro and micro scale.
1 Like
It was a little jab. I like his stuff, but sometimes I find they want their acute meticulousness too precise for something as complex as the human body.
2 Likes
au contraire mon frère the human body could be the most complex system on earth (which it isn’t) but as far as lifting goes we are only concerned about applying a stimulus, recovering and adapting which is several orders of magnitude simpler considering an understanding of the mechanisms behind them is not a pre-requisite for applying them. FWIW I think the meticulous approach advocated is a bit overkill just to eek out an extra 1% gains or whatever. If anything from my point of view it’s too meticulous for how simple the principles for gains are.
2 Likes
I believe it has to be about this complicated, at most
Higher volume, lower intensity
If one does not train to failure, and only employs normal reps 18-26 sets per muscle per week.
Moderate volume
If one does not train to failure, and employs tempo variations (slow eccentric, pausing in the stretched position) 16-20 sets per muscle, per week.
High intensity, lower volume
If one trains to failure 10-16 sets per muscle per week. If you go beyond failure err toward the lower bound.
Frequency
Hit a muscle twice per week at least but respect weekly volume.
Practically
Assuming two direct simulations (U/L-split, lift-specific split,…) the above can be summarised as follows to guide an improvised session:
When the driver for growth is volume 9-12 working sets for a muscle should be the aim.
When the driver for growth is failure 1-2 sets should be to failure. If going beyond failure 1 set should be done. 1-3 prep sets (RPE 7 at most). For prep sets I don’t even believe the number of reps have to be high, it’s just to warm up and find a good weight!
That’s what I’ve gathered in my notes. A personal belief I haven’t read is that if failure is the aim then I believe its far superior to fatigue the muscle fibers in all contraction types (at least eccentric and concentric) to be superior to failing more sets just concentrically. Why? Because as w know we are stronger eccentrically than concentrically. If you fatigue the fibers in the mode that they are the weakest they still aren’t maximally fatigued! I’m convinced this is why Doggcrapp was so adamant about employing a slow eccentric tempo.
3 Likes
That’s a good logic but apparently ,not entirely true. Some muscle fibers can only be recruited completely during the concentric portion, as long as it’s lifted with the intent of being as explosive as possible (fibers IIa, which are the most susceptible to hypertrophy and gaining mass, sorry @queen_cobra but doing all your reps with a slow eccentric might be great for technique, not as much for gaining muscle ) and some only with light weight lifted explosively (fibers IIx)
One could argue that using slower eccentric, as we are stronger, might provide a longer TUT with a heavier weight and thus more muscle building.
You could check out John Meadows vid about tempo from a few days ago, interesting discussion.
2 Likes
No argument here. This is why, when I program lift specific I usually do the main lift using a normal eccentric and an aggressive concentric. I more meant that not being able to finish a contraction during a movement programmed to failure is inferior to not being able to finish the contraction and then fight to make it take as long as possible for the eccentric action to occur.
2 Likes
I watched that yesterday actually, oddly, because I don’t watch his stuff much. Seemed to pretty much agree with what I already thought, which as we all know, means its definitely right.
I’ll probably start playing with some eccentric tempos and stuff in the accessories, but also play with the idea of working a muscle rather than working sets and reps. It’s something I know to be a better way to do things in this context, but hard to change mindset on.
2 Likes
You mean go by feel rather than x sets of x reps? Not necessarily a bad idea. Like there were some instance where I skipped a set because the targeted muscle was so fried I didn’t see the point of doing another. I don’t think it harmed me
Pretty much that, yes. But also the idea that instead of doing 10 reps of X, I do the work for as long as it takes to have the effect I want. No cheating or resting because I have to hit “10 good reps”.
Much of my accessory work currently is done by feel anyway, so it’s really silly to be aiming to hit an arbitrary target that I pulled out my ass on the way to the gym at the expense of the effect I actually want.
2 Likes
Work for today:
Deadlift:
4 x 1 @ 145kg
SSB Good Morning:
2 x 5 @ 90kg
Row:
2 x 10 @ 70kg
Lat pulldown:
Some
Farmers walks:
5 runs with 2 x 42kg kbs
Notes:
- Deadlifts felt pretty easy, still, although I think technique was slightly off because I was almost stearing the bar round my knees, which isn’t normal for me.
- Good Mornings were limited volume because I spent a while working up to a sensible weight and trying to remember how they were supposed to work. I don’t really do good mornings because I’ve really wrapped my head around low bar positioning. The SSB makes that a non-issue, so I think I’ll try and get accustomed enough to the movement that I can load it up and push it hard.
- Wanted to do some heavy carries but there was a PT training a couple on and off the loaded carry area so I was having to dodge them periodically. Decided something easy to drop and stear was wiser than a trap bar or yoke.
5 Likes