Doggcrapp and WS4SB Discussion

Bigger Stronger Leaner Competitive Bodybuilding
1

I do not intend for this thread to turn into a debate about which style is better (because they both have proven track records). Instead, I hope this will be a lively discussion about the differences and similarities of the two styles. Personally, I’ve been doing WS4SB for several months with a slight personal modification to fit my goals.

I.E. I am not longer an athlete. I do not want to train like an athlete. I want to look like a bodybuilder, so I’ve adapted it to fit more into that role.

However, the reason for this post is because I believe that the two styles are strikingly similar and have way more in common than they do contradiction.

For example, 1) both are basically upper/lower splits that use the same type body part breakdown. 2) Both focus the big lifts around one max effort set 3) both focus on progression or “beating the logbook” 4) both allow you to hit each muscle with low volume, high intensity every 8 days or so.

In contadiction, Doggcrapp uses rest-pause. No advanced intensity tecniques (to my knowledge) with WS4SB. And Doggcrapp uses extreme stretching.

I’m sure I am missing some for both sides of the coin, and ultimately that is the point of this post. Just for the hell of it is my modified WS4SB template that I’ve been doing for almost 5 months with excellent strength gains.

Day 1 – Deads – work up of max set of 3-5
Walking barbell lunges 3 x 8-12
Leg Curls 3 x 8-12
Weights hanging knee raises 3 x 12-15

Day 2 – OFF

Day 3 – Barbell Bench – work up to max set of 3-5
Incline DB Press 3 x 15-20
T-Bar Rows 3 x 10-12
Face Pulls 3 x 8-12
Barbell Curls 3 x 8-15
Reverse Curls 3 x 8

Day 4 – OFF

Day 5 – Power Clean - ramp weight till failure
Squat 3 x 8

Day 6 – OFF

Day 7 – Flat DB Press 3 x 8-12
Chins (25 reps)
DB Military or Push Press 3 x 8-12
DB PWR Cleans 3 x 8-12
Weighted Dips 3 x Fail
Close-Grip Bench 3 x 8-12

Day 8 – OFF

Repeat. Pease discuss.

2

How exactly are you only hitting chest/back/tris/shoulders once every 8 days when you’re training them 2x week with WSFSB?

Also, in DC training you do a lot of smaller movements first in the session, and then go all out on the main lift of the day. It’s completely opposite in WSFSB.

A lot of training programs have some similiarites (main heavy lift, balance assistance lifts), but I’m really not seeing how these two programs are more intimately intertwined.

3

Finally, a discussion we can use.

4

I don’t think it should be any surprise to people here that if you put a hard training individual on a low(ish) volume, semi frequent split focused on progression of very few exercises per bodypart that people will flourish with them.

5

DC and Westside are on opposite sides of the spectrum when it comes to training styles and goals.

WS is about strength and power and DC is all about gaining size.

dont compare the two because you cant.

and just for arguement sake, you could combine the styles.

.FOR EXAMPLE

6

Just my 2 cents,

WS4SB or Defranco; look at Defranco log(group meat)at elitefts.com and you see he utilized dc training for arms sometimes.

Not sure i agree on the fact one is size and one is strenght…diet will be a big factor keys about the gain you can make on both.

Even for a bodybuilder ws4sb can be a good training split. Mayve something like 2 months on ws4sb,then 2 months on a regular split(chest,bis etc).

Anyway 2 of the most effective routine im pretty sure by judging the results. There one point about dc i dont like is the mentality about some points but that is me personnaly…

Here a Zach Even Esh variation that i really like…

http://www.elitefts.com/documents/complication.htm

And remembered nothing work forever!!

7

[quote]Doug Adams wrote:
How exactly are you only hitting chest/back/tris/shoulders once every 8 days when you’re training them 2x week with WSFSB?

Also, in DC training you do a lot of smaller movements first in the session, and then go all out on the main lift of the day. It’s completely opposite in WSFSB.

A lot of training programs have some similiarites (main heavy lift, balance assistance lifts), but I’m really not seeing how these two programs are more intimately intertwined.[/quote]

Just a typo. Should’ve read 2x every 8 days or so. Yeah, I thought about the order of the movements as a difference, but couldn’t get back to the computer to edit that part after it occurred to me.

My argument for the way they are intertwined is posted above, but it is pretty basic. Same basic frequency. Same basic intensity. Same basic movements. Same focus on progression.

8

[quote]All2ez wrote:
DC and Westside are on opposite sides of the spectrum when it comes to training styles and goals.

WS is about strength and power and DC is all about gaining size.

dont compare the two because you cant.

and just for arguement sake, you could combine the styles.

.FOR EXAMPLE

[/quote]

Completely disagree about them being different focusses. Remember we’re talking specifically about WS4SB not Westside in general. Both routines are (to quote Dante) I believe to be “powerbuilding” routines.

For example, Doggcrapp IS about gaining size, but Dante always preaches that the biggest guys are the stongest guys. I think WS4SB is built on those same principles. You’re free to disagree, however. In fact, I think that is the point of this thread to get different points of view.

9

[quote]Scott M wrote:
I don’t think it should be any surprise to people here that if you put a hard training individual on a low(ish) volume, semi frequent split focused on progression of very few exercises per bodypart that people will flourish with them.[/quote]

Indeed. I think that is why both are considered two of the top programs. Scott, as the resident DC guru I’m particularly interested in your take on this, do you view these programs as being very similar? I think from your post above that you at least see where I am coming from here.

10

I suppose that WS4SB and DC are alike in that they are some of the few non-beginner routines that stress pure weight progression over all other factors.

The main difference I see is the number of indicator lifts for measuring this progression. WS4SB primarily targets the maximum effort lifts (as well as VJ, 40 time, etc), using the repetition lifts to work the weak points and add a little extra mass.

While progressing on the accessory lifts is important, it’s secondary to increasing the maximum effort lifts.

In DC, all lifts are indicator lifts and must be consistently increased or else scrapped for a while. Now, you can use the three lifts per muscle group in a similar style as Westside: start with the back squat as your main quads builder, then use the front squat and leg press because they not only add mass but bring up the back squat, and so on.

I just see that progressing on every single lift is a little more important with DC than it is with WS4SB.

And, of course, WS4SB is targeted toward athletes, while DC would not, in my opinion, be a very good athletic template.

I disagree with whoever stated that WS4SB is more about strength, however (the second “S” stands for “skinny”, meaning the program is meant to remedy that).

11

The programs in goal and philosophy may be similar. But, the structures of the programs are not.

12

[quote]leon79 wrote:
I suppose that WS4SB and DC are alike in that they are some of the few non-beginner routines that stress pure weight progression over all other factors.

The main difference I see is the number of indicator lifts for measuring this progression. WS4SB primarily targets the maximum effort lifts (as well as VJ, 40 time, etc), using the repetition lifts to work the weak points and add a little extra mass.

While progressing on the accessory lifts is important, it’s secondary to increasing the maximum effort lifts.

In DC, all lifts are indicator lifts and must be consistently increased or else scrapped for a while. Now, you can use the three lifts per muscle group in a similar style as Westside: start with the back squat as your main quads builder, then use the front squat and leg press because they not only add mass but bring up the back squat, and so on.

I just see that progressing on every single lift is a little more important with DC than it is with WS4SB.

And, of course, WS4SB is targeted toward athletes, while DC would not, in my opinion, be a very good athletic template.

I disagree with whoever stated that WS4SB is more about strength, however (the second “S” stands for “skinny”, meaning the program is meant to remedy that).[/quote]

See this is a different impression than I’ve ever had of WS4SB. I may have totally been doing it wrong all along, but I’ve always made sure I was progressing on ALL of the lifts and not just the max effort lifts. I will continue to do this and if they stall I will switch them out.

Certainly, there are variances in the programs. I’m not suggesting that they are identicial, but rather they are simply philosophically similar and even that the implementation of those philosophies follow patterns that are not too dissimilar.

13

Calling me a DC guru… lol no way man. That can reserved for Dante and a handful of guys who have been training that way for 8+ years. Honestly I’m not really sure of the purpose of this thread… both systems work for their respective audiences and can work wonderfully for a very long time. Which brings me to…

[quote]Rampage74 wrote:
And remembered nothing work forever!![/quote]

I’m a little curious why things like this and “what works for you might not work for me” get passed around as catch phrases that people like to say. If you can recover from your training and it is set up to work long term, why would you ever need to change it?

Why would a person blasting and cruising DC style correctly ever stagnate until they were at their upper limit genetics wise? I’m not talking life gets in the way, they have kids, they can’t workout as much anymore etc.

If their ability to focus on training didn’t change for a decade and they were motivated… why would it ever need to change?

14

[quote]Scott M wrote:
Calling me a DC guru… lol no way man. That can reserved for Dante and a handful of guys who have been training that way for 8+ years.

Honestly I’m not really sure of the purpose of this thread… both systems work for their respective audiences and can work wonderfully for a very long time. Which brings me to…
[/quote]

Can’t say that there’s really a purpose to it. I’m not looking for advice on what to do or anything. I’m very happy with the way things have been going in my training recently.

Anyways, most of the threads that have a “purpose” are typically the same old shit. I guess, I just wanted to have a discussion on the differences and similarities of these two programs just for the sake of having a discussion on it.

Don’t take this the wrong way, but if I only wanted to read and discuss things that have a specific purpose on here I would’ve left after about a month.

15

[quote]Scott M wrote:
Calling me a DC guru… lol no way man. That can reserved for Dante and a handful of guys who have been training that way for 8+ years.

Honestly I’m not really sure of the purpose of this thread… both systems work for their respective audiences and can work wonderfully for a very long time. Which brings me to…

Rampage74 wrote:
And remembered nothing work forever!!

I’m a little curious why things like this and “what works for you might not work for me” get passed around as catch phrases that people like to say. If you can recover from your training and it is set up to work long term, why would you ever need to change it?

Why would a person blasting and cruising DC style correctly ever stagnate until they were at their upper limit genetics wise? I’m not talking life gets in the way, they have kids, they can’t workout as much anymore etc.

If their ability to focus on training didn’t change for a decade and they were motivated… why would it ever need to change? [/quote]

Traditional thinking states that the body adapts to a workout in as little as 6 exposures. In actuality - the body adapts to the rep range the fastest, and the exercise selection the slowest.

So we need to change the rep bracket more often than we change the exercises. Typically a trainee will change the exercises first - not the most effective training system.

With traditional Periodization, this means that a workout routine will ‘work’ for at most 3-6 weeks. This is when we change the routine to prevent staleness, introduce a new stimulus and keep the body adapting positively.

This is not from me but from Alwyn Cosgrove.

I knew that was coming when i posted it !!

16

[quote]Rampage74 wrote:
Scott M wrote:
Calling me a DC guru… lol no way man. That can reserved for Dante and a handful of guys who have been training that way for 8+ years.

Honestly I’m not really sure of the purpose of this thread… both systems work for their respective audiences and can work wonderfully for a very long time. Which brings me to…

Rampage74 wrote:
And remembered nothing work forever!!

I’m a little curious why things like this and “what works for you might not work for me” get passed around as catch phrases that people like to say. If you can recover from your training and it is set up to work long term, why would you ever need to change it?

Why would a person blasting and cruising DC style correctly ever stagnate until they were at their upper limit genetics wise? I’m not talking life gets in the way, they have kids, they can’t workout as much anymore etc.

If their ability to focus on training didn’t change for a decade and they were motivated… why would it ever need to change?

Traditional thinking states that the body adapts to a workout in as little as 6 exposures. In actuality - the body adapts to the rep range the fastest, and the exercise selection the slowest.

So we need to change the rep bracket more often than we change the exercises. Typically a trainee will change the exercises first - not the most effective training system.

With traditional Periodization, this means that a workout routine will ‘work’ for at most 3-6 weeks. This is when we change the routine to prevent staleness, introduce a new stimulus and keep the body adapting positively.

This is not from me but from Alwyn Cosgrove.

I knew that was coming when i posted it !!

[/quote]

Sure. Okay. But if I’m constantly doing more work (i.e. weight) within that rep-range on a given excercise the body will not be able to adapt to that routine because it always being put through more stress than the previous session, no?

17

DC also has you deloading or “cruising” for two weeks every 6-10 weeks and switching out exercises as you plateau along with rotating exercises during the blast itself. This is how you are able to progress continuously with DC. There is much much more to DC than just rest pause and a lot of people dont seem to get that.

18

Ok…

Which makes me wonder how a system that rotates lifts, has wide enough rep ranges, and allows you to swap out lifts you’ve gone stall with them after a period of time will ever stop working… still.

19

[quote]Scott M wrote:
Ok…

Which makes me wonder how a system that rotates lifts, has wide enough rep ranges, and allows you to swap out lifts you’ve gone stall with them after a period of time will ever stop working… still. [/quote]

Yes i know a little about your blasting and cruising but still …there is somy way to workout…classic bodybuilding,fullbody,regular split,powerlifter(westside and others)push/pulls, upper/lower …so why just limited yourself to one system…

And not to sound rude but i knew right away when i said something against dc that someguru will step up to defend the system.

Anyway just a quick read on intensemuscle.com to see that all the beginner are told to not go DC…and for a beginner(i think that the case here) i suggest ws4sb anytime before DC.

But no matter what…here the original poster is all over the forum looking for the optimal workout.STICK TO ONE,BELIEVE IN IT,TRAIN,EAT,SLEEP and REPEAT!!

Still friendly

Rampage!

20

[quote]Rampage74 wrote:
Scott M wrote:
Ok…

Which makes me wonder how a system that rotates lifts, has wide enough rep ranges, and allows you to swap out lifts you’ve gone stall with them after a period of time will ever stop working… still.

Yes i know a little about your blasting and cruising but still …there is somy way to workout…classic bodybuilding,fullbody,regular split,powerlifter(westside and others)push/pulls, upper/lower …so why just limited yourself to one system…

And not to sound rude but i knew right away when i said something against dc that someguru will step up to defend the system.

Anyway just a quick read on intensemuscle.com to see that all the beginner are told to not go DC…and for a beginner(i think that the case here) i suggest ws4sb anytime before DC.

But no matter what…here the original poster is all over the forum looking for the optimal workout.STICK TO ONE,BELIEVE IN IT,TRAIN,EAT,SLEEP and REPEAT!!

Still friendly

Rampage!
[/quote]

Of course it is friendly here. We’re just having a discussion. But, where am I at all over the forum looking for the optimal workout? I started a discussion about two training systems.

One of them I have been doing for several months. I am not even considering switching at this point and time. In an above post, I even mentioned that I am not looking for advice on what to do. I’m happy with where I am at.

So, I think you might be a bit confused because I simply looking to have a discussion about two very well thought of programs.