Charles, with the concept of EDT being based on increasing workload/density, what would you suggest as far as the maximally efficacious limits on frequency for hypertrophy? For example, would 3 10 minute PR zones be superior to 2 15 minute PR zones? CW focuses on a weekly workload and extracts his volume requirements over a lowered per session workload in favor of spreading the stimulus out over more workouts.
What would be the cutoff for benefit on EDT PR zone times for hypertrophy in your estimation? Chad often suggests a range of 25-50 reps done 2-4x per week. It seems that one could perform 3 PR zones (averaging less than 50 reps per session) and really get the best of both philosophies. Thoughts?
you are a smart thinker! I look forwards to seeing both coaches points of view on this hybrid approach you’ve come up with![/quote]
Hopefully both of them notice your post because I am very Interested in this as well. The other option is every 3 days of 2 15 min PR zones as opposed to MWF alittle more rest. Use 2 upper body and 2 lower body exercises. I want to know Coach Staley’s view on why step up of each leg is consider 1 PR zone.Calling Coach Staley!!!..
I guess we can some up your question with how dense is too dense.
I think I first read Charles through DR Squat home page. His ideas on using time instead numbers has propelled me to the best physical condition my life at the age of 39. I push my self to do more and not just finish.
The way I use EDT is I train 5 days a week. Mon-FRI and use a different compound lift through the five days.
Mon ? dead lifts
Tue ? jerk press
Wed ? box squats
Thru ? high snatch
Fri ? front squats
(All done with a barbell)
Each are done after 20 min. warm the includes bands, yoga, 10 min. on the elliptical machine.
I do each lift for 15 min. 80 % of my Max. and count how many I do. If I hit 30. or 2 Per Min. I move the weight up 5%.
I going to guess that Charles will say that work is work and doing and doing 3 session of 10 or two of 15 has the same density as long as you hitting the same muscle groups. The greatness of EDT is that you can test your theory so easy. If your numbers are going up its working if numbers go down change it.
Well there is a missing element to consider other than just workload/density. This is a major component of growth to be sure, but there is also the fact that there exists a window of increased protein synthesis that peaks in about 36-48 hours after a session. If you can maximize the anabolic hormonal effects as well as work on increasing density, then you can have a better stimulus.
For example, the energetic theory of muscle growth simply put is EDT in action. But it’s better to get the minimal threshold of volume over multiple sessions for many reasons such as the hormonal benefits, increased chances to signal the synthesis of protein, the lack of carry-over fatigue, and shortening the duration of individual workouts. All a move in the right direction for growth. Zatsiorsky says it best, “train as heavy as possible, as often as possible, while staying as fresh as possible”.
The one “missing” element in the ultimate anabolic stew is to capitalize on the fact that multiple frequent sessions are superior to cramming your volume into fewer sessions. When you hit a muscle the common way, say 10 x 10 per Charles Poliquin, then you must take 5-7 days to be able to move again. This is counterproductive and unnecessary. Better to get 10x3, then 3x10, then 2x20 for a weekly total of 100 reps. Both systems give you the same weekly workload, but CW’s conjugated periodization allows for triple the anabolic stimulus. The muscles are ready to be trained again within 48 hours.
Zatsiorsky and Tudor Bompa are just two examples of experts supporting this. When you kill yourself by dumping all your volume in one session, you must all the the CNS (central nervous system) 5-7 days to be able to perform the same workload again. It is, if I can coin a term, “micro-overtraining”, and creates wasted down time.
I’m hoping Staley or Waterbury will chime in on this to finalize the ultimate anabolic framework. I’m hoping their empirical experience can give me an idea on a minimal threshold to use in each PR zone so as to maximize frequency.
[quote]Disc Hoss wrote:
Charles, with the concept of EDT being based on increasing workload/density, what would you suggest as far as the maximally efficacious limits on frequency for hypertrophy? For example, would 3 10 minute PR zones be superior to 2 15 minute PR zones? CW focuses on a weekly workload and extracts his volume requirements over a lowered per session workload in favor of spreading the stimulus out over more workouts.
What would be the cutoff for benefit on EDT PR zone times for hypertrophy in your estimation? Chad often suggests a range of 25-50 reps done 2-4x per week. It seems that one could perform 3 PR zones (averaging less than 50 reps per session) and really get the best of both philosophies. Thoughts?
thanks,
DH[/quote]
I won’t comment on EDT - that’s Staley’s creation.
You’re right, I favor multiple sessions/week over larger volumes. I’m not really sure what question was posed to me? Do I think training more frequently is superior? Yes. Do I prescribe 2-4 sessions/week with most of my programs? Yes. How many sessions/week do I think a trainee can withstand or progress up to? That’s confidential since the answer would probably scare all of you. But I’m working on quantifying such parameters. Stay tuned!
I’ll stick with 15-minute PR Zones…experience has taught me that 15 minutes is a perfect window
I also favor spreading the work out over multiple sessions. There’s no perfect equation? we’re all different. However, 4 training days, each with (2) 15-minute PR Zones is a nice way to go. Example of a waterbury Method/EDT Hybrid:
Monday:
First PR Zone (10x3)
A-1) Squat
A-2) Pullups
Second PR Zone (Standard EDT)
B-1) Push Press
B-2) Hammer Curls
Tuesday:
First PR Zone (10x3)
A-1) Low Row
A-2) Bench Press
Second PR Zone (Standard EDT)
B-1) Dumbbell Thrusters
B-2) Back Extensions
Thursday:
First PR Zone (10x3)
A-1) Front Squat
A-2) Chins
Second PR Zone (Standard EDT)
B-1) Seated Press
B-2) Barbell Curl
Friday:
First PR Zone (10x3)
A-1) Pistols (Left Leg)
A-2) Pistols (Right Leg)
Second PR Zone (Standard EDT)
B-1) Dumbbell Thrusters
B-2) Leg Curls
Now THAT"S a wicked program kids!
[quote]Disc Hoss wrote:
Charles, with the concept of EDT being based on increasing workload/density, what would you suggest as far as the maximally efficacious limits on frequency for hypertrophy? For example, would 3 10 minute PR zones be superior to 2 15 minute PR zones? CW focuses on a weekly workload and extracts his volume requirements over a lowered per session workload in favor of spreading the stimulus out over more workouts.
What would be the cutoff for benefit on EDT PR zone times for hypertrophy in your estimation? Chad often suggests a range of 25-50 reps done 2-4x per week. It seems that one could perform 3 PR zones (averaging less than 50 reps per session) and really get the best of both philosophies. Thoughts?
[quote]Chad Waterbury wrote:
How many sessions/week do I think a trainee can withstand or progress up to? That’s confidential since the answer would probably scare all of you. But I’m working on quantifying such parameters. Stay tuned!
Thanks for the ideas I was thinking the same Idea of a Modified Waterbury ideas with EDT.
Still Charles or maybe even Chad what is the thery behind saying each leg is a PR zone(ie step ups or pistols)?
Again Thank You
You had gone over all the other stuff previously, but yes, you hit the money question here. Max number of sessions and minimal volume threshold per session is the issue. Can’t wait to see where this one leads you. Will “stay tuned”.
DH
[quote]Chad Waterbury wrote:
Disc Hoss wrote:
Charles, with the concept of EDT being based on increasing workload/density, what would you suggest as far as the maximally efficacious limits on frequency for hypertrophy? For example, would 3 10 minute PR zones be superior to 2 15 minute PR zones? CW focuses on a weekly workload and extracts his volume requirements over a lowered per session workload in favor of spreading the stimulus out over more workouts.
What would be the cutoff for benefit on EDT PR zone times for hypertrophy in your estimation? Chad often suggests a range of 25-50 reps done 2-4x per week. It seems that one could perform 3 PR zones (averaging less than 50 reps per session) and really get the best of both philosophies. Thoughts?
thanks,
DH
I won’t comment on EDT - that’s Staley’s creation.
You’re right, I favor multiple sessions/week over larger volumes. I’m not really sure what question was posed to me? Do I think training more frequently is superior? Yes. Do I prescribe 2-4 sessions/week with most of my programs? Yes. How many sessions/week do I think a trainee can withstand or progress up to? That’s confidential since the answer would probably scare all of you. But I’m working on quantifying such parameters. Stay tuned!
It’s just the most logical way to incorporate unilateral exercises into EDT. Otherwise, you’d actually be doing 3 exercises per PR Zone (left, right, and whatever the antagonistic exercise is). Not that there’s anything wrong with that…
[quote]Bearhawk wrote:
Thanks for the ideas I was thinking the same Idea of a Modified Waterbury ideas with EDT.
Still Charles or maybe even Chad what is the thery behind saying each leg is a PR zone(ie step ups or pistols)?
Again Thank You[/quote]