I’m friends with a guy who used to train heavily and had a few friends who were pros and competed in the universe. They all used a commonly known formula for getting results.
This consisted of three main phases, each lasting about 10 weeks.
One phase was strength building, one phase was aerobic training/lots of volume and one phase was somewhere between the two using 10-12 rep range.
I’m not 100% sure which order these came in.
Does anyone here use any kind of rotating/phasic system like this? I’m curious to know if it’s as standard a practise as he’s making it out to be.
It is a periodization. Literally EVERY olympic lifter worth noting uses it. Most bodybuilders do it to an extent. Here is an example: http://exrx.net/WeightTraining/Periodization.html Its not the best periodization template, but it gives you a good idea of what to look for. Also google: Doc Stone’s Basic Program. The lifts can obviously be changed for more of a bodybuilder style workout.
I would probably use 3-4 week microcycles, not 10 week. Its a really good, really scientific approach to becoming stronger. Size comes with it.
I don’t think a natural trainee can make strength gains without switching up his rep and %RM ranges. If he does gain strength while constantly doing 3x8 then he is one lucky mofo.
[quote]desolator wrote:
I don’t think a natural trainee can make strength gains without switching up his rep and %RM ranges. If he does gain strength while constantly doing 3x8 then he is one lucky mofo.[/quote]
if you have an imbalance…your body will plateau to protect itself…for example, to increase your bicep size, you need to have a certain level of trapezius strength…
I believe the start of muscle growth occurs during the end of a plateau…your body can no longer rely on it’s existing strength reserves since you have reached a peak in terms of strength for your current muscular size, so it forces increased muscular size which increases your strength reserves…
If someone is plateauing for an extended period of time, then obviously something is wrong…most likely they are not eating enough calories/protein to force adaptation…
[quote]D Public wrote:
i believe plateus are neccessarry…
[/quote]
I think this is wrong. Let me prove it. Let’s say that plateaus are neccessary. That means that without them, progress cannot be made (since they are neccessary). But since there is no progress, by definition a plateau exists. That is a contradiction, since we assumed we don’t have a plateau.
Maybe it’s better suited to say plateaus are unavoidable
[quote]D Public wrote:
i believe plateus are neccessarry…
[/quote]
I think this is wrong. Let me prove it. Let’s say that plateaus are neccessary. That means that without them, progress cannot be made (since they are neccessary). But since there is no progress, by definition a plateau exists. That is a contradiction, since we assumed we don’t have a plateau.
Maybe it’s better suited to say plateaus are unavoidable :P[/quote]
I agree with this. D Public, I think you’re looking at it the wrong way, or it just came out differently than it was intended. The interwebz tends to do that…
Just for your information (OP) - don’t get too caught up with this, it’s more likely going to drag you down and you’ll be thinking more about the complicated stuff that doesn’t matter compared to glaring issues like inadequate food intake etc.
A lot of things can be sorted out by having de-load/cruise weeks (e.g. every 4 weeks you go lighter/lower volume/don’t go to failure etc).
As far as I’m aware, not that many big people plan their routines weeks out in advance (certainly not the big guys on here)…they do things as and when needed according to feedback on the day/week and focus on long term strength progression.
There’s quite a few issues I have with periodization models like the PDF book alluded to (which by the way is not aimed at bodybuilders). One of which is the fact that they put everyone into a “box”…you know, ALL bodybuilders lift in the 12-15 rep range (yeah right). Another is the fact that you don’t always use the same repetition range for every bodypart - some bodyparts (in many trainees) like traps/back/arms respond better to higher reps for example.
Then there’s the issue of coaches/books/articles using this sort of terminology/‘superiorness’ to make the average gym goer feel inadequate and feel like they NEED their help and can’t possibly get big and strong without their “super dooper” methods…and so the money just keeps rolling in…
I hear you. I’m just a little stuck. I’m a personal trainer armed with some basic working knowledge. I only seek the truth, don’t care about any bullshit, just want to know what the score is and balls to my ego. Just whoever is right, they’ll do for me.
But i haven’t put on a single pound in 4 months of training. Few years ago I used to be 6 pounds heavier and now the scales won’t budge. And THIS time round i’m eating so much better and working out smarter. But i’m totally stuck.
So i figured one of the things i’m missing is cardio + volume training. Coz I don’t do ANY of that. And working it into proper periodizing. Also, I suspect that even though I think i’ve been working hard, maybe I haven’t been.
See I started to question which has the most priority - the food or the training stimulus. Ever since Poliquin said that prison inmates get huge on a couple of meals a day because they just train HARD. Sounds dubious but the principle got me thinking.
[quote]threecoaching wrote:
But i haven’t put on a single pound in 4 months of training. Few years ago I used to be 6 pounds heavier and now the scales won’t budge. And THIS time round i’m eating so much better and working out smarter. But i’m totally stuck.
So i figured one of the things i’m missing is cardio + volume training. Coz I don’t do ANY of that. And working it into proper periodizing. Also, I suspect that even though I think i’ve been working hard, maybe I haven’t been.[/quote]
You are most likely eating too clean. Low carb + low fat = shit gains. I made that mistake for far too many years. Eating clean is a good way to start, but you’ll need to dirty it up if you want to make long-term gains. I’m not talking about eating junk food, either. Dark meat chicken, burgers, barbecue pork, lots of carbs… To get to 220, I was packing down nearly 5000 calories, including ~300g of protein (more or less, I wasn’t too OCD about macro breakdown), 450-500g of carbs and 200g or so of fat. Eating that much chicken breasts and rice is damn near impossible.
Clean diet when cutting, big and dirty when bulking.
EDIT: something else I meant to say: About the last sentence in the quote above, if you’re not eating enough carbs, you’re probably not able to work as hard as you can. A Ferrari isn’t going to get very far on a quart of gasoline. You’ll feel like you’ve given it all you had, but you’re really just out of gas.
Try upping the carbs for a week and see what happens in the gym.
[quote]threecoaching wrote:
here are my figures, thoughts would be appreciated:
weight: 140 lbs
body fat guess: 12%
Daily protein: 175
Daily carbs: 225
Daily fats: 100 (approx)
Total calories around 2750/2800
any more than this and my body starts to fight back and i feel ill.[/quote]
If you can’t put on more than 140lbs and can’t eat more than 2700 calories, then my suggestion is to find another hobby, seriously. I know its harsh but come on
