just wondering, during gvt would it be alright to have one leg day with lets say 10 sets of squats and then have the other with ten sets of deadlifts?
Ask the author of GVT, not someone who didn’t write it.
ye well id like to hear his opinion…
He’s not gonna give one. I can guarantee it.
Do programs as they’re written otherwise write your own.
Forbes is right, if you have questions on how to tailor it they should be directed at the author.
While it’s best do a program as written or ask the author. 10 sets of squats and 10 deadlifts per week mite suck for recovery and progression.
New article (2 months old or so) on GVT by Poliquin. No longer 10 reps
http://charlespoliquin.com/ArticlesMultimedia/Articles/Article.aspx?ID=261
[quote]Lunarisx718 wrote:
New article (2 months old or so) on GVT by Poliquin. No longer 10 reps
He says in the article:
[quote]With that background, now Iâ??d like to show you how to modify the GVT program for an advanced trainee â?? someone with five years of training experience. But before getting into the specific protocols, I need to go on a rant for a bit. A lot of individuals have claimed to have improved the German Volume Training â?? and have failed miserably because they didnâ??t understand the physiology behind it. Let me give you an example.
Rather than following the protocol of 10 sets of 10 of a single exercise with the last set performed to failure, a writer might suggest doing five sets of two exercises, adjusting the weight so that every set is performed to failure.[/quote]
He might be alluding to GVT 2000, a program which TC Luoma put in an article, after getting advice from Ian King.
He goes on to slam people for not doing 10x10 of the same exercise, in the program as he wrote it. So Poliquin isn’t going on record as changing his recommendation of 10x10 except for people who have been training for 5 years (-- we assume 5 years of training hard, like maybe 75% as hard as GVT).
He might of course be trying to slyly backtrack on his 10x10 recommendation, by for the first time giving an alternative GVT program for a cohort of trainees who have never done 10x10 and saying 10x10 won’t be effective for them.
I’ll take him on his word, though.
BTW, on his site, Poliquin has a new article about training types, with categories like “fire” and “water” and “wood,” which alludes to certain groups who will suck at 10x10. Though it’s hard to tell whether he’s talking psychologically or physiologically.
[quote]Brian Smith wrote:
He might of course be trying to slyly backtrack on his 10x10 recommendation, by for the first time giving an alternative GVT program for a cohort of trainees who have never done 10x10 and saying 10x10 won’t be effective for them.
[/quote]
No, the program with 10x5, 10x4, 10x3 is not for those who’ve never tried 10x10; it’s for advanced athletes, that adapt more quickly to a given stimulus (in this case 10 sets of 10 reps on the same exercise).
Poliquin here changes a fews elements: intensity (going from 75% to roughly 90% in a cycle), frequency and exercises (he has the trainee rotate between two exercises for the same muscle group). He keeps the basic idea of a lot of volume on the same movement pattern (10 sets of the same exercise in a session).
OP, even in the advanced version, there’s no such an overkill as 10 sets of both squat and deadlift in the same week…does it make you wonder that yours is not a great idea, after all?
Sorry if it sounds harsh…not my intention!
It’s not new. It was published 5 years ago on T-Nation:
When I started reading that article I checked to see if it was posted on april the 1st. Still can’t believe this is seriously an article from a top coach.
[quote]Thy. wrote:
When I started reading that article I checked to see if it was posted on april the 1st. Still can’t believe this is seriously an article from a top coach.[/quote]
Technically the article provides an interesting message: different psychological types will prefer certain type of programs. And one of the most important thing for a program to be successful is that you trust it. So adapting a program according to our psychological profile could indeed have some merit.
Now, whether you believe the “five elements” aspect of the article is up to you, but in the grand scheme of things it doesn’t really matter if you call someone a “fire type” or a “type A personality”.
[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
It’s not new. It was published 5 years ago on T-Nation:
COMMUNITY - T NATION - The World's Trusted Community for Elite Fitness [/quote]
Oops, didn’t notice that.
[quote]fabiop wrote:
[quote]Brian Smith wrote:
He might of course be trying to slyly backtrack on his 10x10 recommendation, by for the first time giving an alternative GVT program for a cohort of trainees who have never done 10x10 and saying 10x10 won’t be effective for them.
[/quote]
No, the program with 10x5, 10x4, 10x3 is not for those who’ve never tried 10x10; it’s for advanced athletes, that adapt more quickly to a given stimulus (in this case 10 sets of 10 reps on the same exercise).
Poliquin here changes a fews elements: intensity (going from 75% to roughly 90% in a cycle), frequency and exercises (he has the trainee rotate between two exercises for the same muscle group). He keeps the basic idea of a lot of volume on the same movement pattern (10 sets of the same exercise in a session).
OP, even in the advanced version, there’s no such an overkill as 10 sets of both squat and deadlift in the same week…does it make you wonder that yours is not a great idea, after all?
Sorry if it sounds harsh…not my intention![/quote]
No, it’s not harsh, but I’m not making any training suggestion at all.
…
Even years ago, way before this new GVT article, Poliquin had a phase 2 of GVT, after the 10x10 cycle was over, which basically cut the reps to 6 and upped the intensity. There’s a copy of the older article, with the Phase 2, here:
Poliquin used to regularly recommend – irrespective of training age – 10x10 before doing a modified GVT with lower reps and higher intensity.
It is true that as a general principle, Poliquin has recommended lower rep ranges for advanced trainees, since they are more neurally efficient. But I haven’t read anything by him until now that stipulated only 5 years would qualify as “advanced,” in the sense of achieving a very high level of neural efficiency.
The Advanced GVT is a fantastic routine. I had tremendous success with it.
BTW - having experimented with this system quite a bit I would say that in using a 5 day split you’d be better served not incorporating deadlifts or instead using RDLs or OL DB RDLs.
It gets even more confusing:
In this article, he does say 5 years would qualify as Advanced, and actually skips the “phase 2” GVT to use the “phase 3” in the previous article I linked to.