I’ve come across many authors who recommend doing high volume “shock” routines to stimulate growth. In my experience of using them however, my muscles seem to be bigger during and shortly after the program, but the further into my “normal” volume routine I get, the more the muscles seem to return to what they were like before the “shock routine” (as apposed to growing the most at that time as advised would happen).
Is there any point in bumping up the volume in a routine, and then lowering it only to return back to normal?
Isn’t it wiser to just find an average volume that works best and take the occasional lay-off (e.g. every 3 months) to prevent overtraining?
i see your point and i believe it’s a matter of saturation. ok you start a training cycle, you steadily add on as you go along (weight, volume, intensity). eventually you’re gonna hit a wall and have to back off as you can’t progress indefinitely. that’s when i take a full week off to reset my body, cns and mind. so as i’m approaching the end of my cycle, i’ll really bump up the work. this is where incorporating high volume shock will work best i think. do it just until you feel that wall coming up then take your break and start over. that burst of high intensity should have put your body on a higher plain and enable you to be slightly better. so when i return to the start of my next cycle, i can usually better my efforts from the previous cycle in terms of work capacity. this is how i manage to make slow but steady progress.
Higher volume helps you store more glycogen and water, it’s likely not new muscle tissue you are gaining and losing when you switch to a “shock” routine.
[quote]Scott M wrote:
Higher volume helps you store more glycogen and water, it’s likely not new muscle tissue you are gaining and losing when you switch to a “shock” routine. [/quote]
Scott,
How does higher volume increase glycogen/water storage? Not disagreeing just wondering.
Im in agreement with Scott M. Jason Ferrugia as well. I still to this day, have no clue as to what high volume accomplishes. Dorian trained with low volume and low frequency and still had the same elite development as his competitors, if not more development, who were using 10 to 15 sets per muscle group.
My sweet spot is 2 sets per exercise for 2 to 4 exercises per muscle group, aside from back which is a whole different story (8 exercises covering lats, upper back, lower back, rear delts, traps). When I did one set per exercise, I did not grow much.
When I did 3 sets per exercise, I was exhausted and worn out and did not make significant gains either. I literally blew up in the past year from using 2 sets per exercise.
Dorian blew up when he went from 2 sets to 1 set while also making dietary adjustments, hence his outrageous 1992 to 1993 transformation. He ate more and lowered his volume.
I do believe there is a certain amount of volume needed to look like a bodybuilder, but I still cannot see the point of high volume (ie: >3 sets per exercise or >15 sets per workout) once you are past the beginner stage.
When I started out at 17, I could do five six days per week with high volume and not overtrain. As I got stronger, I had to lower the volume and frequency.
Well I’m not saying high volume doesn’t work, I have my thoughts on what works “best” but that’s not the point here and I’m not going to argue lol.
Varanid,
My understanding and experience is that higher volume(think 10x10 or giant sets similar) depletes far more glycogen than a low volume plan and thus allows for a supercompensation type effect to take action.
This is why I see Milos’ giant set protocol as being succesful pre contest. He depletes and zaps the muscles with CRAZY high volume and then loads them up with his high carb amino drinks to soak it all in. The result is a very full muscle.
Brook(JJ?),
Hypertrophy to me means PERMANENT change in muscle growth and not simply something that can be changed depending on sodium intake or water for the past 2 days. I don’t see a bodybuilder who carbs up after being depleted as experiencing any hypertrophy, just filling up what he already had.
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
I literally blew up in the past year from using 2 sets per exercise.
[/quote]
I too have experienced similar things. I wonder however, if this was due to a delayed effect from the high volume training and not due to the “perfect volume”. I was doing 6 sets per exercise, and gradually, week by week, decreasing them until doing just 2 sets per exercise (when most growth occurred). Like you too, I experienced strength gains on just 1 set/exercise, but hypertrophy slowed a lot. I wonder whether the low volume training allowed the effects from the high volume training to take place? Another theory of mine is that possibly the low volume training takes up far less calories and therefore allows more calories for growth?
Or it may be that low volume training is just the best and works from day 1! lol
[quote]its_just_me wrote:
Bricknyce wrote:
I literally blew up in the past year from using 2 sets per exercise.
I too have experienced similar things. I wonder however, if this was due to a delayed effect from the high volume training and not due to the “perfect volume”. I was doing 6 sets per exercise, and gradually, week by week, decreasing them until doing just 2 sets per exercise (when most growth occurred). Like you too, I experienced strength gains on just 1 set/exercise, but hypertrophy slowed a lot. I wonder whether the low volume training allowed the effects from the high volume training to take place? Another theory of mine is that possibly the low volume training takes up far less calories and therefore allows more calories for growth?
Or it may be that low volume training is just the best and works from day 1! lol
[/quote]
For me it was not some delayed effect. I have been using 2 sets per exercise for 8 months and the gains keep coming. Hopefully one day, I will be able to do just one set, a la Dorian.
It might allow more calories for growth. However, its not all about that. It is very hard to progress in weight with high volume as you always have to hold back to complete all of the sets. At least that’s the case for myself and MANY others.
for those of you doing such low volume (1-2 sets per exercise) are you going all out on those? i would think you’d definitely have to increase intensity with a decrease in frequency and volume.
also for the OP i would assume that with any specialization program or very high volume your growing more when your done it because it allows for more rest
I think volume should be totally addressed on an individual basis. It has always worked for me, but I know that some people don’t respond best to it. The individual’s nutrition, recovery capability, time/schedule, and genetics need to be addressed. And I don’t think high volume should be used during cutting phases when you are in a caloric deficit. If your bulking though and are going to be giving your body plenty of fuel to repair and grow, then thats a different story.
I know right now I am training super high volume, taking in a ton of food, and growing and getting stronger. My volume is ridiculously high but I’m giving my body enough fuel and rest where it is working to my benefit.
Hypertrophy to me means PERMANENT change in muscle growth and not simply something that can be changed depending on sodium intake or water for the past 2 days. I don’t see a bodybuilder who carbs up after being depleted as experiencing any hypertrophy, just filling up what he already had.
[/quote]
Ya mate, JJ.
I know - Hypertrophy is the cell growing so it can hold more energy, and produce more strength (i think). I wasnt thinking about just volumisation or whatever - basically, i agree.
And lol@asking you if your sets are ‘all out’! hehe!