Or maybe they just don’t give a fuck and assume people have brains and desire and shit.
If I tell some new guy starting off to do 3 sets of 10, I would not expect him to do that for the rest of his life. I would expect him to get used to it. Once he gets used to the lift he may want to push himself one day and lift more weight. If you add 20 lbs to your 10 rep max GUESS WHAT???
Or maybe they just don’t give a fuck and assume people have brains and desire and shit.
If I tell some new guy starting off to do 3 sets of 10, I would not expect him to do that for the rest of his life. I would expect him to get used to it. Once he gets used to the lift he may want to push himself one day and add a little weight.
If you add 20 lbs to your 10 rep max GUESS WHAT??? YOU WON’T BE DOING 10 REPS… multiply this by months and years… OH SHIT now your doing 400 lbs, what ass hole wakes up in the morning and throws 400 lbs on his chest… WARM UP… Do you reeeaaaallllyyyy need somebody to tell you this? Whoa you just went hard for 4 months, your feeling a little tight.
Maybe some fairly easy straight set workouts is what you need for a while. Easy enough to complete, but heavy enough to maintain possibly even gain muscle…It’s been years you should know what your body can do you come up with a magic number like 4 sets of 8. Why does the bodybuilder have to do the same exact routine you saw day in day out for the rest of his life?
If he takes a piss 13.57 minutes into his workout does he have to tell you that after 317 workouts he took a 3 minute rest period between sets 3 and 4 to take a piss?
[quote]Airtruth wrote:
Or maybe they just don’t give a fuck and assume people have brains and desire and shit.
If I tell some new guy starting off to do 3 sets of 10, I would not expect him to do that for the rest of his life. I would expect him to get used to it. Once he gets used to the lift he may want to push himself one day and add a little weight.
If you add 20 lbs to your 10 rep max GUESS WHAT??? YOU WON’T BE DOING 10 REPS… multiply this by months and years… OH SHIT now your doing 400 lbs, what ass hole wakes up in the morning and throws 400 lbs on his chest… WARM UP… Do you reeeaaaallllyyyy need somebody to tell you this? Whoa you just went hard for 4 months, your feeling a little tight.
Maybe some fairly easy straight set workouts is what you need for a while. Easy enough to complete, but heavy enough to maintain possibly even gain muscle…It’s been years you should know what your body can do you come up with a magic number like 4 sets of 8. Why does the bodybuilder have to do the same exact routine you saw day in day out for the rest of his life?
If he takes a piss 13.57 minutes into his workout does he have to tell you that after 317 workouts he took a 3 minute rest period between sets 3 and 4 to take a piss?[/quote]
You are preaching to the choir. If people were in the gym on a regular basis making progress, most of these questions wouldn’t even come up. They come up because most of these people are trying to rationalize hard work by not doing any.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Airtruth wrote:
If he takes a piss 13.57 minutes into his workout does he have to tell you that after 317 workouts he took a 3 minute rest period between sets 3 and 4 to take a piss?
You are preaching to the choir. If people were in the gym on a regular basis making progress, most of these questions wouldn’t even come up. They come up because most of these people are trying to rationalize hard work by not doing any.[/quote]
I guess. It just gets frustrating. I can understand someone asking about warm ups, or what increments helps each person but the 10nth thread on ramping where his tone sounds like he’s pissed at bodybuilders for doing a workout other than what he saw? I just don’t understand what goes on in the mind of these people.
Ron Colemans workout:
When using DB’s (let’s take seated shoulder presses/high incline OHP here) he’ll do a light warm-up (or not) and then 3 ramped “work” sets which are fairly close together in weight:
-Seated DB overhead presses (high incline ohp, really)
70’s x 12
120’s x 12
140’s x 8
160’s x 6
-Flat BB Bench Presses
Yet when doing bar work, he’ll go up in even increments for all sets (a plate per side on all bench pressing type movements, for example)
135 x 12
225 x 12
315 x 12
405 x 10
495 x 6-8 (don’t remember the exact number he did, but whatever)
Looking at Ron’s DB progression makes one thing potentially stands out. Either that 160x6 isn’t a maximum effort OR the earlier sets have fatigued him and 160x6 is indeed an all out set. I’ve not seen any video so I’m just speculating here.
But the preferred way to ramp is to keep those reps down to about 6-8 instead of his 120x12. Most would advocate using that 120 for 6-8 reps as he ramps up to stimulate the muscle without inducing too much fatigue.
Id think that he could have done this for a better strength effect on all of his sets and looked something more like this:
140x8
155x6
170x6
or something to that effect. Those reps on the 120s may well be limiting the maximal loading on those last two sets for sure. Even for a guy of Ron’s experience and steroid intake levels.
When compared to how he does his BB work, it’s a huge difference indeed. Its easy to see how the BB work allows for a warmup at 135 and 225, and then some better hypertrophy/strength stimulation on 315 and up. But again, those sets of 12 have to be preventing him from getting better loads on his higher sets.
And at his strength level, Id probably ditch using 135 on the BB work. well…at least on paper. He many have the need for them if it takes his body more time to warmup. My shoulders are like this. Otherwise they feel arthritic without a good long warmup.
Obviously he doesnt need advice on mass or strength, but there may be room for him to move his program around to more standard ramping and get a bit more on the top sets.
But then I beleive that according to the prevailing theory on hypertrophy (Zatsiorsky’s Energetic Theory) its really total workload (assuming we aren’t using pink dumbbells) that stimlulates growth rather than just straight strength work. So in that regard, Ron’s layout is likely a bit better for growth and a little less geared toward strength. Which makes sense as he is not likely to be able to get much stronger if at all.
Yep - ramping is the way to go - pyramid your poundages up while the reps drop.
I like to do 4 or 5 sets per exercise. Something like - Barbell Bench press: 135x12 185x10 225x8 315x5 365x3.
It’s a classic training style that’s built a shitload of impressive physiques…It’s an enduring principle for one reason: it works, and works well.
Moderately heavy weight 60 - 80% of one rep max, watching form and rep speed. Progressively trying to add weight and/or volume each workout, supplementing and eating wisely, and you simply can’t go wrong…
I know the vets here are sick of this discussion, but considering that it is a message board, people like to talk about this shit and there are always some new people trickling in - I’m not surprised it’s been revisited ad naseum.
But, the simple basic principles work, have always worked, and will continue to work.
It’s an individual’s work ethic, effort and consistency that makes or breaks it.
[quote]DH wrote:
Those reps on the 120s may well be limiting the maximal loading on those last two sets for sure. Even for a guy of Ron’s experience and steroid intake levels…
But again, those sets of 12 have to be preventing him from getting better loads on his higher sets.
And at his strength level, Id probably ditch using 135 on the BB work. well…at least on paper…
Obviously he doesnt need advice on mass or strength, but there may be room for him to move his program around to more standard ramping and get a bit more on the top sets. [/quote]
This kind of reminds me of Sheiko’s commentary (as reported by Pavel T) on Vladimir Volkov’s bench press ramping method, of which an example is:
140x2, 150x2, 160x2, 170x2, 180x2, 190x2, 200x2, 210x2, 220x2, 230x2 (values are in kg)
On which Sheiko commented, “For an athlete in Vladimir’s weight class (100kg) 10kg jumps between sets are too small: by the time he works up to his main training weight, say from 140kg to 220kg, he has done 8 sets. It is too many. I would recommend a reduction in the number of warm-up sets. This will enable the lifter to add a set or two with the working weight. And the training session will not be as long.”
But then had to add, “If this methodology has led to victories in European and world championships, there is no need to change anything or look for something new.”
Ultimately it’s hard to argue with success at the very top level.
[quote]DH wrote:
Ron Colemans workout:
When using DB’s (let’s take seated shoulder presses/high incline OHP here) he’ll do a light warm-up (or not) and then 3 ramped “work” sets which are fairly close together in weight:
-Seated DB overhead presses (high incline ohp, really)
70’s x 12
120’s x 12
140’s x 8
160’s x 6
-Flat BB Bench Presses
Yet when doing bar work, he’ll go up in even increments for all sets (a plate per side on all bench pressing type movements, for example)
135 x 12
225 x 12
315 x 12
405 x 10
495 x 6-8 (don’t remember the exact number he did, but whatever)
Looking at Ron’s DB progression makes one thing potentially stands out. Either that 160x6 isn’t a maximum effort OR the earlier sets have fatigued him and 160x6 is indeed an all out set. I’ve not seen any video so I’m just speculating here.
But the preferred way to ramp is to keep those reps down to about 6-8 instead of his 120x12. Most would advocate using that 120 for 6-8 reps as he ramps up to stimulate the muscle without inducing too much fatigue.
Id think that he could have done this for a better strength effect on all of his sets and looked something more like this:
140x8
155x6
170x6
or something to that effect. Those reps on the 120s may well be limiting the maximal loading on those last two sets for sure. Even for a guy of Ron’s experience and steroid intake levels.
When compared to how he does his BB work, it’s a huge difference indeed. Its easy to see how the BB work allows for a warmup at 135 and 225, and then some better hypertrophy/strength stimulation on 315 and up. But again, those sets of 12 have to be preventing him from getting better loads on his higher sets.
And at his strength level, Id probably ditch using 135 on the BB work.[/quote] He only does it on the first chest pressing exercise. The other 2 start off with 225 and total 3 sets each instead of 4-5.
Most (if not all?) world record benchers start off with the bar… And Ronnie used to be a powerlifter at some point. [quote] well…at least on paper. He many have the need for them if it takes his body more time to warmup. My shoulders are like this. Otherwise they feel arthritic without a good long warmup.
Obviously he doesnt need advice on mass or strength, but there may be room for him to move his program around to more standard ramping and get a bit more on the top sets.
But then I beleive that according to the prevailing theory on hypertrophy (Zatsiorsky’s Energetic Theory) its really total workload (assuming we aren’t using pink dumbbells) that stimlulates growth rather than just straight strength work. So in that regard, Ron’s layout is likely a bit better for growth and a little less geared toward strength. Which makes sense as he is not likely to be able to get much stronger if at all.
[/quote]
I agree on the 12 reps thing.
However, Ronnie has stated that he prefers working in the 12-15 rep range most of the time compared to the more traditional 6-8 and 8-10. (he doesn’t always go up to 495 on the bench either… Usually he stops at 405xAMRAP if I’m not mistaken… Kind of the same way pX handles his stuff… You work your way up to 12 or so reps with a given weight and then add a large chunk of iron once you can do that and work your way up again)
His preference for the 12-15 range may really be due to muscle-fiber ratios or some such, though.
Some of my old pals who used to start training with me could do 10-12 reps on all warm-ups and apparently their top set(s) did not suffer from that (we tried each others preferences out… I manged 4-5 reps less on my top set doing 12 reps on all warm-ups… Some of the others didn’t really seem to manage more reps on their top sets when using my abbreviated warm-ups, while others did… Kind of inconclusive)
I on the other hand hate having to do more than 8 reps with anything, even a light weight, and feel somewhat fatigued afterwards.
And hey, Ronnie managed to get very strong despite using largely high rep ranges… (obviously, test plays a role here, but guys like levrone used lower reps primarily yet did not manage to outdo Ronnie, or at least rarely by any significant amount… So I say it’s simply a difference in genetics).
Another thought on his preference for keeping DB work sets closer together in weight instead of going for max weight on his top set:
It’s (in my opinion) a lot easier to keep progressing fast on bar work than on DB work at least when it comes to presses.
For example, back when I started out I went from the 45lb 'bells for 8-10 or so on flat db presses to the 77.5’s for 10 very fast, and then couldn’t get past those because my wrists/hands just couldn’t keep the bells stable enough and my hands hurt from the pressure (oddly enough I had no problem with bar work).
So handling was more of an issue than muscular strength… (and yes, I was a pathetic stick of a person)
Now if we look at overhead presses, the whole handling part plays an even larger role.
If you look at his “Cost of Redemption” DVD (2003 I think), he did the 160’s or 150’s or whatever at the end, and you could see the strain those placed on his elbows, effort to stay tight etc, and the sheer effort of bringing the bells up in the first place (the spotter was one big dude, but it sure wasn’t easy for him either).
I think we’ve all had one of those days were we, say, managed the 130’s for 12 reps last time and now we want to go up in weight… But even a “small” step, say, the 135’s, just feels like too much… Suddenly rep speed is down to a crawl, wrists rebel, it’s hard to keep the scapulae where they’re supposed to be, etc.
So while I think that, muscle-strength-wise, Ronnie could have gone up to the 170’s if he didn’t do so many reps on his previous sets and maybe went up in even increments over his 4 sets… It might simply have been too dangerous/he felt he wasn’t ready yet to handle those bells. Hence he went for a little more overall load across his sets instead of sheer strength progression.
Don’t quote me on that, though. Might actually be worth asking him, just for the hell of it.
Indeed. In the end, practice over speculation.
DH
Hey Bill, do you ever keep in contact with Bryan Haycock anymore? Ever tried his HST template?
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
DH wrote:
Those reps on the 120s may well be limiting the maximal loading on those last two sets for sure. Even for a guy of Ron’s experience and steroid intake levels…
But again, those sets of 12 have to be preventing him from getting better loads on his higher sets.
And at his strength level, Id probably ditch using 135 on the BB work. well…at least on paper…
Obviously he doesnt need advice on mass or strength, but there may be room for him to move his program around to more standard ramping and get a bit more on the top sets.
This kind of reminds me of Sheiko’s commentary (as reported by Pavlov T) on Vladimir Volkov’s bench press ramping method, of which an example is:
140x2, 150x2, 160x2, 170x2, 180x2, 190x2, 200x2, 210x2, 220x2, 230x2 (values are in kg)
On which Sheiko commented, "â??For an athlete in Vladimirâ??s weight class (100kg) 10kg jumps between sets are too smallâ?¦ by the time he works up to his main training weight, say from 140kg to 220kg, he has done 8 sets. It is too many. I would recommend a reduction in the number of warm-up sets. This will enable the lifter to add a set or two with â??the working weightâ??. And the training session will not be as long.â??
But then had to add, "â??If this methodology has led to victories in European and world championships, there is no need to change anything or look for something new.â??
Ultimately it’s hard to argue with success at the very top level.
[/quote]
CC,
Yeah, the issue of positioning and balance does indeed make DB work a different animal. And it is true that PL’s will use the bar to find the “groove”. Your clarification on the use of smaller loads only on the first movement also makes more sense.
As a side note, Ronnie looks to have comparatively smaller joints vs those of an elite PL, so this also makes sense in that his musculature, being enhanced by AAS, could well out perform his support structures. Guess hes made for for BB and not so much PL, even though he was involved at a competitive level.
[quote]DH wrote:
Hey Bill, do you ever keep in contact with Bryan Haycock anymore? Ever tried his HST template?
[/quote]
Unfortunately no, not in years.
And I haven’t tried his HST template. On your mentioning it, I’ll take a look at it again though.
I like the setup overall. I do think it needs a bit more per session volume. Then it would look alot like Big Beyond Belief and Phil Hernons stuff.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
DH wrote:
Hey Bill, do you ever keep in contact with Bryan Haycock anymore? Ever tried his HST template?
Unfortunately no, not in years.
And I haven’t tried his HST template. On your mentioning it, I’ll take a look at it again though.
[/quote]
[quote]Scott M wrote:
The labels are semantics as far as I’m concerned.
Ronnie works up to a heaviest set of 8-20 reps on a given exercise, tells the magazines(if they even interview him) that he did 5 sets.
Dorian works up to a heaviest set of 8-20 reps on a given exercise, tells the magazines he only did 1(work) set.
They probably did the same exact workout but just view it from different perspectives.
[/quote]
From what I have seen is that Dorian will ramp his 1st and maybe 2nd excerise, after that if I remember correctly from I’ve seen and read, he states that he is already warmed up, so he doesn’t need to do a lot of “warmup” sets after that. I’ve seen his do as little as 1 set.
In all the vids I’ve seen of Ronnie, he ramped all his excersises, from 1st to last, same with most of the other pro’s I’ve watched
But I think that “newbies” won’t benefit from say going to their 3rd or 4th excersise and only doing one set. They don’t have the mind muscle connection or the form/technique to hit that muscle efficiently with only one set.
Also I don’t think newbie’s in the gym need to ramp. They can warmup in their 1st excersise, but their max weight is too light for ramping to be effective. So to start with straight sets might be more effective???
Once you start pushing or pulling a descent amount of weight, then ramping becomes part of the package. Nobody benching 200+KG is just going to load up the bar on there 1st set, that’s just dumb
I think the terminology is what is confusing a lot of the people. If you ramping 4 work sets, start with a weight that you can just about get 12 on, then take a weight you can just about get 10 on then 8 then take a heavier weight and try to get 6-8 reps then maybe do a drop set or a double drop set.
You can’t throw a blanket over how much you should increase the weight from set to set. Only you know your strength. Some body parts fatigue faster than other, so the increments are smaller. Others you can go up large amounts. Just try and watch some vids, or Ronnie, Branch, Vic and you will easily understand what is meant
Did Arnold use Ramping???
I never saw him work out and can only go by reports. Reportedly he favored pyramiding: adding weight each set but dropping reps.
[quote]slick123456 wrote:
Did Arnold use Ramping???[/quote]
His training was far less strength-gain-based than ours is today.
One of his preferred methods was
12 reps
10 reps
8 reps
6 reps
4 reps
The last 3 (or so) are basically work sets. He went to (positive) failure on the last set or maybe the last 2… And probably had a few reps in the tank on his third set… Hard to say.
Anyway, that method has been more or less replaced by what you see the pro’s like Ronnie, Levrone, McGrath (at least in the off-season, he uses drop-sets and such in his prep phases, or so I hear) doing today.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
I never saw him work out and can only go by reports. Reportedly he favored pyramiding: adding weight each set but dropping reps. [/quote]
I don’t see a single comma in that post of yours Bill, are you feeling well? 
All kidding aside, Bill’s post sums it up perfectly.
Not only is Bill a stickler for grammar, but he’s dressed to “the nines” too. What a guy… 
Hey CC,
I’m assuming you are a German native or at least fluent in the language, no? Do you have any well known experts or sources of information there that you could talk about or reference a bit? Perhpas compare/contrast with what we “know” here in the US?
DH
[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
I never saw him work out and can only go by reports. Reportedly he favored pyramiding: adding weight each set but dropping reps.
I don’t see a single comma in that post of yours Bill, are you feeling well? :)[/quote]
That is one of my flaws.
It’s rather as in one of the Calvin and Hobbes cartoons: Calvin is asked by his mother to dry and put some dishes back. He decides to carry them back as one giant stack, and of course falls and breaks all the plates. His mother says, not unkindly, “Calvin, your problem is you just have no common sense.”
He indignantly replies to her, “I have plenty of common sense!”
And then turns to the reader and says “I just choose not to use it.”
I do know how to write better, thanks both to a really excellent professor in a technical writing class, and also – perhaps this will surprise some – thanks to Dan Duchaine, who corrected me on remaining personal flaws such as extreme excess use of parenthetical statements.
But I just choose not to use this good advice when writing posts
On the other hand, Tim recently said that he thought it a plus that I write – he must have been referring to posts – the same way that I speak.
Well that was a useless sidetrack