[quote]its_just_me wrote:
[quote]eyegainweightbig wrote:
EDIT: I notice that when you ramp, all your sets have fairly high reps like 10 the first, 10 the second, and 8 to failure the third.
When I ramp, for example, I do 5 reps first set, 3 reps second set, and the third set however many to failure. Weight increases each set. Is this ok? I feel like I can get more weight with less reps on the previous sets.[/quote]
Strictly speaking that is not ramping, that is simply doing two warmup sets and then 1 work set (which in my opinion isn’t all that great for hypertrophy). Ramping is all about priming the muscle for heavier loads than would normally be handled when lifting the usual way. So instead of just 2 warmup sets, you’d ramp (the muscle) by making smaller increments per set and more lower rep sets (typically at least 4-6 sets and going as high as 10).
For a decent growth stimulus you need a fair amount of volume in the 70-90% 1RM range. Or even as low as ~50% of 1RM if speed is utilised (increasing force and therefore fatigue).
Doing 2 warmup sets and 1 work set is not enough volume with a decent load (unless you’re genetically respondent to this). At least with proper ramping, many of the sets prior to the last one counts towards growth. Same principle applies to wave loading (you get enough volume done before failure/performance drops off dramatically).
As a general rule of thumb, I’d say you need at the VERY LEAST 12-15 total reps at a decent intensity/amount of fatigue per exercise
[/quote] Uh, why per exercise? If I do 5 exercises for 4-10 reps each, will I not grow? If I hit the bodypart 3 times a week via 2 exercises each time for less than 12-15 total under work-load per individual exercise, will I not grow?
What if I do 10 reps per exercise under work-load but use slower negatives than you do?
Thinking of volume requirements that way makes no sense to me.
If that were true, doing 20 singles with a 2-3 RM load ala Waterbury would be the best method for size, ever.
[quote]
for growth (which usually translates to at least 2 “working” sets - 1st set close to failure, 2nd set at or very near failure).
Much of all this confusion often lies in the definition of “working set”. Some would only class the last set as the working set, whereas the sets leading up to that one may have been growth inducing.[/quote]
You do realize that people using this method do more than just one exercise per bodypart, right?
-Flat Bench
135x12
225x8
315x5
355x3
405xwork set
+Paused Bench
365xwork set
+Incline Bench
255x3
325xwork set
(plus maybe DB or hammerstrength)
For example…
I call that ramping because you ramp up the weight (and nervous system if you will), same as with a regular flat pyramid, you just drop the reps to conserve energy for the last all-out set.
Some guys like to do more heavy sets per exercise and may end up with (this is closer to what you describe):
135x12
225x8
315x5
355x3
405x, say, 8
425x, say, 5
435x, say, 4
Others like to do the same reps on all sets
135x12
225x12
315x12
365x8
But that does not allow for the same max poundagexreps combination as the first method.
Some do stuff like
135x12
225x12
255x12
275x12
295x12
315x12
325x12
But I don’t think that’s useful as a primary method at all. Better for exercises done at after the big movements just to get a pump or add volume…
, or mix everything together or whatever… The concept is still the same… You add weight each set usually.
We brought the various flat pyramids/ramping methods up years ago on here when everyone thought that Ronnie doing 4x8-12 according to muscle and fitness meant 4 sets of 8-12 with 500 on the bench press, followed by another 4 sets of 405x8-12 on the incline and the same on the decline and people all thought that bodybuilding routines were really that crazy in volume and could never work for a natty… When in fact the majority of pros simply start light and add weight each set.
Most guys on here were doing stuff like
1-2 warm-ups at half working weight, then 3-20 sets at the same weight (depending on whether they were doing Waterbury stuff or everyone else’s… Authors were just writing down “3x12” either actually meaning same weight sets or simply not specifying if they meant ramped sets, such as Thibs).
Or even worse, no warm-ups haha.