Even then the studies will state not statistically significant . The difference is usually like .5%-3%, who cares.
1 Like
I never said anything about resting a minute vs two minutes. I was referring to how frequently we hit a muscle groupā¦ I admittedly got this concept confused with volume. Though anecdotally the notion of gymnasts seems to back volume for a certain body part may equate to greater growth for weak points, this has yet to be scientifically determined though.
There is the general consensus that we need X amount of time to recover before hitting chest, back etc again. But it appears the consistent variable is total amt of sets/repsā¦ if these are kept within reason a muscle group can be hit 2-3-4-5x weekly, and higher frequency elicits slightly greater results
yup, for the professional athlete/bodybuilder a slight change over time can equate to the difference between first and last placeā¦ what are we arguing about here? When talking about an IFBB pro bodybuilder a difference of .5 percent over a period of say 3-5 months pertains significance.
These studies are done on either untrained people or people that have been training a couple years, whatever that is since they provide no stats. They have no idea what it may take a serious lifter let alone a pro. At that level they may very well need a week to recover as there are many things to consider the heavier weights they use, volume they do, the rate which their joints/tendons are affected due to weight, muscle, drugs.
At that level they are not getting those rates of change.
Are we sure about this? We have no data
a 0.5 % increment in muscular mass over a 3 month period certainly wouldnāt be feasible for an IFBB pro. But if we documented numerous training styles, measured increases in muscle mass etc, strength gains a 0.5 % increase from one group to another would still be preferable for an IFBB proā¦ furthermore if you look at the 2x vs 5x weekly training study, the avg man benched 4 plates + (whether this equates to 100kg)ā¦ either wayā¦ not entirely untrained
Iāve provided my opinion on frequency, cited studiesā¦ can you link studies to cite the contrary (lesser frequency is more optimal)ā¦ you probably can, so do so if you wish too argue here.
P values within many of these studies were over 0.05ā¦ you can say 0.3-0.5 percent difference, but a P value of .05 indicates the correlations between variables at stake (in this case equating to frequency vs hypertrophy/strength response) are correlated within a 95% confidence intervalā¦
Real world results. Iād wager over 90% of bodybuilders use " bro splits"
I said untrained or with a couple years 225lbs bench is not strong, period. If you are benching 405 for multiple sets and higher reps you are not going to bench again in 2 days.
Also, all those studies are done by people who wish to complicate the process so that you feel lost and hire them, pay for their books, seminars etc. Menno, Krieger, Schoenfeld none of these guys look impressive and Lyle Mcdonald has ripped all their papers apart.
1 Like
So the 120-135lb guy benching 225 (Iāve seen this multiple times) isnāt strong?
It takes a good 6 months of training to bench 225ā¦ itās not āweakāā¦ youāre standards on what strong is are flawed in my opinion. I think āgeneral populaceā, how many can bench 225ā¦ very few.
This screams conspiracy theory to meā¦ these are studies published within medical journals, theyāre not looking for youāre cash
Regardless we can drop the argument at this point. Itās counterintuitive
This is pretty much hitting the nail on the head in my opinion. All these studies show very small differences in general. But the end results are āX is better than Y by 1,2,3%ā
So that must mean that X is the best way!!! But most of the participants are in 1-3 years training. Meaning they most likely have a lot of gaining left to do, you donāt know how hard they trained prior to the study, (most ppl arenāt training as hard as they think.) what split were they on? Bro split then going to 2,3,4,5x week training and pushing harder in those sessions?
2 Likes
Man this is a great post. Iām currently not doing this exact split but PPL and trying to hit 2x in 8 days basically.
I was watching some Greg duecette videos and he talks about an old school principles and was talking about 10% strength decrease is when youāve stimulated the muscle enough. He said of course 10% is not exact for everyone and is a Guide line.
His example is you do 500 for 10 then drop drop weight to 450 and canāt get ten then you trained enough to stimulate growth. This is apparently an old school idea but seems to work I suppose.
2 Likes
Larry Scott has a similar indicator, saying that the pump would visibly decrease in the target muscle, ie. a bicep suddenly losing 1/8ā .
I donāt know how much scientific validity such tales have, but I do agree that thereās a point where going beyond can be too much/just not necessary.
S
3 Likes
Itās almost impossible to account for these variables within studies. I doubt youāll ever find a study based on exercise this rigorously designed.
Exactly thatās why I feel like what Stu posted is what ppl need to look for themselves. Find what you can sustain, make progress and not be drilled into the ground. There are so many fads with dieting ex etc. and thereās always a study to prove the next one is better than the last.
2 Likes
Thank you! I got very busy in the past few days. I will try to respond in here and the other thread when I get a chance.
I like to look at the 70s guys. Arnold was 2x a day. Mentzer was really low volume. Nubret super high volume. Zane was each part 2x a week. They all looked awesome. So what?
People have been getting big using various splits.
Personaly I prefer high frequency but that doesnāt mean bro splits donāt work for me
@BrickHead I just finished going through your contest prep thread. So much gold there; I wish I followed it closer years ago!
1 Like
There are a lot of (old) contest prep threads on here that are goldmines for anyone wanting to trace the process. A few years at a back we had a solid handful of competitors posting on here, and Iāll gladly say that all were pretty darn successful in their respective shows.
S
1 Like
Thank you!
Thanks! Iāll dig though the forums and see if can find some of those old ones.
There were a couple things that really stood out.
One was the discussion on weight vs appearance and whatās decent for a natural competitor. This got me years ago and really still does now. Back around ā02, I was 9 weeks into a prep when I pulled out, not because it was hard (it wasnāt yet at that point), but because I felt I would end up too small. I now know better, but back then the only people I knew who competed or even really trained were assisted. I made faulty visual comparisons and got tied up with the scale.
Another part was training as a bodybuilder vs just putting more weight on the bar. This is a constant battle for me. Iāve always worried about getting more reps or using more weight than the previous session. This is ok, especially for a beginner, but has kept me from techniques like pre-exhaustion or proper exercise sequencing and leads to extending rest periods, faster reps, or breakdown in technique/focus in search of that extra rep/weight. I now believe adding weight/reps is important, but only in context of the bigger picture and not the goal in itself.
You mentioned training more like Jay Cutler vs Dorian Yates. This was good timing, as Iāve been reading about Jay Cutlerās training quite a bit recently and Iām on his email list. Iāve taken pieces of what heās put out, but have resisted going over too much because his focus on volume, short rest, and not worrying about weight seems contrary to whatās been put out recently for training for naturals.
The last thing Iāll mention here was the conditioning you did. Itās something Iāve generally avoided, because of fears that it would limit muscle growth during a growth phase or lead to muscle loss when dropping some weight.
I know I missed a ton and will have to go back again.
-Ben
1 Like
Just because one individual proposes something, doesnāt mean you must follow it,ā¦ Iāve taken tons of great cues from Cutler, because the guy is a student of the sport and heās hung in there at the top of his game for a seriously long while. THat doesnāt happen by accident.
As an aside, I will point out that most articles you read about training for naturals are written by guys on gear, and goes against what most top natural competitors actually do.
S
2 Likes
Yeah, youāre right, of course. The top guys do what they do for a reason. If something else worked better, theyād be doing thatā¦
Iām. It sure if I should keep asking questions here or start a new topic, but hereās one or two more. How do you see monitoring training progression? Are the top guys, or even close to the top guys using log books and recording every rep/set? I find how sets are performed early in a session can affect later sets and exercises, obviously. For example, having a day where the mind/muscle connection is on and getting a little more squeeze each rep can fatigue the muscle more and result in having to use less weight or do less reps later. Throwing in an extra set on a exercise thatās feeling good can do the same thing. For me, Iāve always kept a log book, but seeing what I did the previous session tends to lead to pushing for more the next and makes finding the balance between feel and progression difficult.
Thanks again!
Ben