DC training is good. YOu need to cruise between blasts to keep the blasts working, and many people use higher volume training then AFAIK.
But the reason dante specifies a 3 year training rule is to keep people from inuring themselves with a triple-rest pause set without having built up structural integrity, mind muscle connection, tapped into the fast twitch fibers etc. If you visit the intense-muscle site and take a look at some of the old threads created by beginners doing the DC routine, you’ll understand.
Dante does different things for different people in regards to bringing up weak bodyparts.
You read enough of his stuff and you’ll see he’ll add in something that hits say, the chest better, or whatever, or, he’ll have somebody do a widowmaker set for their back.
There is wiggle room, for those monsters.
But Dante’s basic program calls for constant progression and lifting heavy weights for reps. If he said “here’s what you do if you have a lagging bodypart” well, everyone who start adding in that crazy shit and be widowmaking everything, because everything thinks they have lagging bodyparts. And its often guys who really just have lagging bodies, not just bodyparts.
[quote]mr popular wrote:
Wait I’m confused…
… who exactly is “hyping” it in the first place?
I haven’t heard anyone hyping it, in fact most of the people involved try to downplay its very existence so that the people not meant for it won’t be doing it.[/quote]
This is true. Those who like it absolutely love it, and become fanatical about it mainly because it works. But you don’t see those people out trying to convert people to DC.
I have never seen a program designer tell people not to do their program. Dante has no fear in telling people they should not do DC. He will turn away prospective trainees because he can tell they are not ready.
I think people need to feel that their lifting is scientific with a bunch of terms, different “phases”, different lifting speeds, etc.
Dante boils putting on mass down to its very basic. Lift heavy shit, and eat a lot of food.
There’s no way one can argue with the success of DC. How can something that works be over-hyped? If it’s not your cup of tea - don’t do it.
Most of the detractors are just like the OP - they have never tried it.
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
I am not bringing this up to rabble rouse or cause trouble, as I know there are some very sensitive and intolerant people on message board who foam at the mouth like a bunch of starved Dobermans when someone says something that they do not like. I personally, am quite tolerant, give credit where it is due, and like to engage in meaningful debate.
What up, Derek?![/quote]
Brick, it’s very hard to get a certain attitude across in print. I don’t want my reply to you to sound like I was being an ass where I asked what YOU thought. If you read stuff to yourself the wrong way, it sounds like an attack when it wasn’t.
With that said, I’m assuming that your mentioning my name was just as friendly as my post.
And having said all THAT…
I think people (including myself) like a “program” to adhere to, a system to follow. Sure bodybuilding can be summed up by simply adding weight to the bar and eating enough to allow you to add mass.
However, having a well defined, if not flexible map to follow seems to assure the trainer that he’s on a well-defined, well-proven path toward thier goals rather than just pulling things out of thier ass or just tossing something together with no rhyme or reason.
I know I like to follow a certain path, be it Bill Starr, DC or other "template. Sure I can create my own style to be different for it’s own sake but ignoring what has worked for thousands of trainees over dozens of years would be as idiotic as a Tony Little commercial.
It’s not unlike cooking. I can make up recipies off the top of my head, I can come up with strange and unique flavor combinations and experiment once in a while but to ignore the basic syles of food preparation MAY result in a tasty meal. It may also result in lots of wasted food. I for one am not trying to re-invent the wheel here. I just want to do what works.
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
However, despite the fact that I absolutely love some of Dante’s writings and I find much of what he says very informative and useful, I feel that DC training is overhyped. In my opinion it leaves a lot of other training options out of the picture and is similar to a consolidated program. I can’t help but wonder how one would bring up weak areas if they had them while also having overpowering other muscle groups (ie: torso muscles vs. arms dilemna as C has discussed in numerous articles). Where would one place isolation exercises within this program if he or she needed them? How about pre-exhaust? It just seems to leave very little wiggle room for some objectives and goals. But then again, I am not highly educated on it, nor have I experiemented with it.
[/quote]
Weak body parts, pre-exhaust and isolation exercises are all addressed in the “3 way split”. This split is designed to be used for truly advanced level BB’ers though who have legitimate lagging body parts. Unfortunately, for every one of those, there are probably 10 (probably more) 150 lbers who would jump into the 3 way split at the drop of a hat to bring up their “lagging” biceps.
Because the vast majority of people would be better off doing the 2 way split (as it will allow for faster overall growth), you see a lot more discussion/information on it, and very little (in comparison) about the 3 way split.
Well, first DC involves going to failure on very set, rest-pause, controlled negatives and even static holds, so there are intensity techniques built into the program. That said, DC is about doing just enough mechanical damage to the muscle to stimulate growth, but no more, in order to not overstress the CNS (allowing for more frequent stimulation). It’s also not 100 cycles vs. 50. It’s more like 70 vs. 50.
You train each body part once every 5 days (which matches up with Lonnie and CT’s advice), which allows for more growth cycles over a years time, but still allows for adequate intensity to produce growth.
Second, one of Dante’s influences in designing DC the way he did was Phil Hernon. Phil was putting on substantial amounts of muscle from year to year, even after turning pro. So much so that other pros were constantly coming up to Dante and asking him “what the hell is Phil Hernon doing?”
When Dante examined Phil’s training routine, one of the primary differences that he noticed was that Phil was hitting his body parts more frequently than most other pros. This caused him to rethink the idea of only training a body part once very 7 days (1x per week).
Just for the sake of argument, Ronnie also doesn’t train his body parts 1x per week, but 2x. I’d say it’s worked fairly well for him.
Now I’m not saying that there is a one size fits all best training frequency, if you’ve found something works best for you, definitely keep doing it. I’m just trying to give you my understanding of why Dante has designed DC the way he has.
Another reason why DC is reserved for at the very least intermediate trainees is because you have to know your body and what exercises work best for you. People often times misunderstand Dante’s advice about exercise selection and believe that DC is anti isolation exercise. It’s not, it’s just that often times the compound exercises allow for a greater potential strength increase and therefore a potential higher amount of muscular growth. For instance no one can do 1 arm reverse grip triceps pushdowns with anywhere near half of what they can use for reverse grip smith bench.
But, if someone has found that certain exercises work particularly well for their body (isolation exercises included), then they are absolutely “DC compatible”. There is even a sticky over at IM that basically says “there is NO list of DC compatible exercises, anything that works is fair game.”
[quote]derek wrote:
Bricknyce wrote:
I am not bringing this up to rabble rouse or cause trouble, as I know there are some very sensitive and intolerant people on message board who foam at the mouth like a bunch of starved Dobermans when someone says something that they do not like. I personally, am quite tolerant, give credit where it is due, and like to engage in meaningful debate.
What up, Derek?!
Brick, it’s very hard to get a certain attitude across in print. I don’t want my reply to you to sound like I was being an ass where I asked what YOU thought. If you read stuff to yourself the wrong way, it sounds like an attack when it wasn’t.
With that said, I’m assuming that your mentioning my name was just as friendly as my post.
And having said all THAT…
I think people (including myself) like a “program” to adhere to, a system to follow. Sure bodybuilding can be summed up by simply adding weight to the bar and eating enough to allow you to add mass.
However, having a well defined, if not flexible map to follow seems to assure the trainer that he’s on a well-defined, well-proven path toward thier goals rather than just pulling things out of thier ass or just tossing something together with no rhyme or reason.
I know I like to follow a certain path, be it Bill Starr, DC or other "template. Sure I can create my own style to be different for it’s own sake but ignoring what has worked for thousands of trainees over dozens of years would be as idiotic as a Tony Little commercial.
It’s not unlike cooking. I can make up recipies off the top of my head, I can come up with strange and unique flavor combinations and experiment once in a while but to ignore the basic syles of food preparation MAY result in a tasty meal. It may also result in lots of wasted food. I for one am not trying to re-invent the wheel here. I just want to do what works.
[/quote]
I did not think and never thought that you had an “attitude” in any of your writings and I have enjoyed the PMs we have shared with each other. I said hello at the end of my post so obviously you are right, I am friendly.
I stated that I like meaningful discussion about bodybuilding and that is what I am getting with this post, as it has gotten some replies within a short time period since last night.
I wanted to see other people’s opinions after I read Christian Thibaudeau stating that he feels that it is overhyped for his taste as well.
Bricknyce if you want some more discussion on DC hows and whys for potential problems you see I’ll be happy to dig you up some information later tonight.
And look I like CT, very helpful and smart guy with the physique to back it up but to see that from him is laughable to me.
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
I did not think and never thought that you had an “attitude” in any of your writings and I have enjoyed the PMs we have shared with each other. I said hello at the end of my post so obviously you are right, I am friendly.
[/quote]
Awsome! I just hate misunderstandings. Same here, Brick.
If by overhyped, you mean there are some newbies who dont take it at face value and think they will be adding 50-100 lbs of lean mass in the next three months using it while staying natural and dieting, then yes, I guess you could call it overhyped.
[quote]FightingScott wrote:
I think rest-pause training is pretty underrated. >>>[/quote]
This is something I was very wrong about. Rest Pause is quite underrated.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
FightingScott wrote:
I think rest-pause training is pretty underrated. >>>
This is something I was very wrong about. Rest Pause is quite underrated.[/quote]
I think rest-pause kicks ass in part because of the same way the standing broad jump is better than the vertical jump - let me explain.
There aren’t as many units of measurements in the vertical jump as there are in the standing broad jump. Two athletes could have the same vertical jump but one of them could be more explosive than the other, just not explosive enough to get that extra inch of vert. For this reason, you’ll see improvement faster with the broad jump than with the vert jump.
Same thing for rest-pause sets. If you Press 200 pounds for 6 reps today, then you press 200 pounds for 6 reps a week from today (going to failure each time) you can’t quantify the progress you made between the first week and the second week. You won’t have made any progress until you can press 200 for 7 or more reps - if you ever get there. But with rest-pause training you can extend the set so you get an opportunity to really test yourself. You might get 12 reps rest-paused the first week and 14 reps rest-paused the second week. Even though you may get the same amount of reps on the first mini-set for both weeks, you’ve still improved from week to week.
Unlike other Weider-esque set extending methods (like drop-sets, partials, and forced negatives) rest-pause sets give you concrete numbers to put in your logbook and beat the next time around.
[quote]FightingScott wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
FightingScott wrote:
I think rest-pause training is pretty underrated. >>>
This is something I was very wrong about. Rest Pause is quite underrated.
I think rest-pause kicks ass in part because of the same way the standing broad jump is better than the vertical jump - let me explain.
There aren’t as many units of measurements in the vertical jump as there are in the standing broad jump. Two athletes could have the same vertical jump but one of them could be more explosive than the other, just not explosive enough to get that extra inch of vert. For this reason, you’ll see improvement faster with the broad jump than with the vert jump.
Same thing for rest-pause sets. If you Press 200 pounds for 6 reps today, then you press 200 pounds for 6 reps a week from today (going to failure each time) you can’t quantify the progress you made between the first week and the second week. You won’t have made any progress until you can press 200 for 7 or more reps - if you ever get there. But with rest-pause training you can extend the set so you get an opportunity to really test yourself. You might get 12 reps rest-paused the first week and 14 reps rest-paused the second week. Even though you may get the same amount of reps on the first mini-set for both weeks, you’ve still improved from week to week.
Unlike other Weider-esque set extending methods (like drop-sets, partials, and forced negatives) rest-pause sets give you concrete numbers to put in your logbook and beat the next time around. [/quote]
If you’re doing DC and we have to fight with you about eating I’m gonna hunt you down and do mean abusive things to you.
I’ve gotten good results with drop sets, but rest pause is better. I hadn’t really thought it completely through, but my mental analysis in this case was wrong. I did not think rest pause would be more effective for me than drop sets. Scott let me borrow his DC DVD and I did some reading at intensemuscle and they convinced me to try it. I made very noticeable strength increases by the second week and it raised my eyebrows.
On the subjective side, which does count, I can feel it deeper, I don’t know how to explain it exactly, but I can feel the tension right down to the bone.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
<<< There’s no way one can argue with the success of DC. >>>[/quote]
Whatever anybody else wants to say, this a fact. His forums are full of guys who have made great progress with it. If it weren’t for the fact that I’m still doing well with my present methods I would’ve have started it already.
It does have it’s distinctive points though novel isn’t really the right word. It’s not exactly full body, but not exactly split training either, sorta. It focuses on big movements, but incorporates smaller ones. It’s very regimented, but does leave quite a bit of room for personal program building within it’s regimentation. It advocates eating huge, but not getting fat. The extreme stretching is pretty unique as is the eat like a madman, but do lotsa cardio thing.
Like others have said, there is no hype. Show me where anybody has told anybody else to even try it unsolicited.
Maybe Dogcrap just needs a better name… A program with crap in the name sounds rather self deprecating you know…
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
If you’re doing DC and we have to fight with you about eating I’m gonna hunt you down and do mean abusive things to you.
[/quote]
Being fat and not eating enough are two totally different things. Not eating enough is unforgivable. I’m getting in my 5 meals a day and eating as many pounds of animal products that I can force feed myself.
I won’t bring up the whole body composition thing. I know I can’t win there. But I will agree that people don’t eat enough. If anything, a lot of fat people are fat because they’re not eating enough. (Don’t think about the last sentence too much - it’s kind of silly).
Theres an anecdote with mentzer whos everyone knows advocate hit programs , doing 5-6 sets as " warm up " sets.
Its the same joke recycled.
do one set only but do 3-4 sets of warm ups , yea right.
3-4 warm up sets for each body part and u dont think its funny.
every set you do counts , especially when this sets has heavy weights in it.
what if i tell you , i can make you make muscles with just one protein shake per day.
but you have to warm up your stomach with another 5-6 meals per day but in a magical way these meals wont count.
gimme a break lol
[quote]topoulo wrote:
Theres an anecdote with mentzer whos everyone knows advocate hit programs , doing 5-6 sets as " warm up " sets.
Its the same joke recycled.
do one set only but do 3-4 sets of warm ups , yea right.
3-4 warm up sets for each body part and u dont think its funny.
every set you do counts , especially when this sets has heavy weights in it.
what if i tell you , i can make you make muscles with just one protein shake per day.
but you have to warm up your stomach with another 5-6 meals per day but in a magical way these meals wont count.
gimme a break lol[/quote]
I think your logic is a little flawed there. If I’m doing bench press I do 4 warm ups. The bar, 135, 225, and 315. Those four sets do abolutely nothing to build my strength or make me bigger. They warm my muscles up, loosen up my joints, help me get my form ready, and maybe burn a few calories, but thats it.
[quote]Scott M wrote:
Bricknyce if you want some more discussion on DC hows and whys for potential problems you see I’ll be happy to dig you up some information later tonight.
And look I like CT, very helpful and smart guy with the physique to back it up but to see that from him is laughable to me. [/quote]
Scott,
Please send me the information for the three day routine and how I can implement isolation exercises and pre-exhaust. I am willing to give this a try. And yes, I am ready for it. I weigh 225, not fat, at 5’10" and eat and train like a low volume psychopath as it is already.
Bricknyce I’ll be happy to answer questions you have but the actual leg work needs to be done by you. Intensemuscle.com is where the up to date 100% correct info is located and should give you the framework to set up the program. The dogg and puppy pounds have some stickies that should set up the program and some of the basic rationale behind it.
Edit: Are you referring to the 2 way(3 days) and 3 way(4 days) split? The first is where everyone starts DC training for at least a blast, those with very hectic schedules or advanced trainees(3.3 lbs per inch lean off season) use to allow a little more recovery for some extra work they may do on lagging bodyparts. I’ll be glad to answer you on the 2 way split on here, the 3 way is more for advanced minds and I would feel it unwise to do that. I’ll PM you if that’s the case.
Isolation is done at your discretion. If you feel for example lateral raises are key for your shoulders plug them into one of your rotated shoulder exercises, there aren’t that many set rules. We are only after consistent long term progression, presses will offer you more potential for strength increases but lateral raises and similar moves have their place as well sometimes. Pre exhaust is no longer a part of Dante’s training(it was once) although one could argue that by virtue of how the program is arranged there is built in pre exhaust(similar to how you set up your legs) already.
Having said that, your program seems fine and if you are experiencing success there is no reason to discontinue. Let that program run it’s course(if it ever does) and then come over to DC, my thoughts at least.
[quote]topoulo wrote:
Theres an anecdote with mentzer whos everyone knows advocate hit programs , doing 5-6 sets as " warm up " sets.
Its the same joke recycled.
do one set only but do 3-4 sets of warm ups , yea right.
3-4 warm up sets for each body part and u dont think its funny.
every set you do counts , especially when this sets has heavy weights in it.
what if i tell you , i can make you make muscles with just one protein shake per day.
but you have to warm up your stomach with another 5-6 meals per day but in a magical way these meals wont count.
gimme a break lol[/quote]
That scenario does not apply to DoggCrapp I assure you. The warmup sets are just that. Warmups nowhere near working sets.