Yeah, I think this kind of training can work for just about anyone who isn’t a super-weakling.
[quote]SkyNett wrote:
6 - 8 on pretty much everything. Training each bodypart once a week on the following split -
Day 1 Chest/Back
Day 2 - Legs/calves/lower back
Day 3 - Shoulders
Day 4 - Biceps/tris/forearms[/quote]
hows that working? generally i see people who like training each bodypart once a week doing more sets
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
I am of the low volume school. I recently made the switch from 2 main sets per exercise and now it is 1 set per exercise.
Chest: 4
Bis: 3
Quads: 3
Hamstrings: 3
Calves: 2
Shoulders: 3
Traps: 1
Triceps: 3
Lats and upper back: 4
Rear delts: 2
Abs: 2
These are main sets. Big exercises may need 4 to 5 warmup sets while small ones done later in a workout may need as little as 1. EVERY exercise gets at least 1. Despite what people think, even though warmups are not strenuous, they are still WORK and groom neural pathways, leading to more strength, even if not terribly demanding.
Up until last month, I used to do twice the volume - obviously - since I cut the sets in half, from 2 to 1. I cannot remember the last time I did 3 work sets with straight weight except for my early days. Those 3rd sets were really a waste of time for me, personally. Good for a beginner, but not for a more advanced person.
But keep in mind, I have been heavily influenced by Ellington Darden, Dorian Yates, Mike Mentzer, Mark Dugdale, Dave Palumbo, Ian King, Jason Ferrugia, and other like minded people who feel that more than 2 sets per exercise with straight weight is a waste of time and energy. [/quote]
not a bad method IMO. i assume those sets are taken to failure right? any past failure?
how often do you work the same muscle?
[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
I’m with mr. popular here, guys…
I only care about the last “all-out” set of each exercise… I’ve done the previous sets a dozen times (or even a hundred times) before, I doubt they add anything to my growth…
Didn’t we have a discussion about that stuff in the t-cell, i.e. people saying that pros do 12 sets per bodypart while in truth 8-9 of those are really progressively heavier non-failure warm-ups…
[/quote]
that follows something like DC right? basically working upto 1 heavy set? i’ve heard of a lot of people who actually do the 12 sets for example though…as in straight sets with different exercises. or maybe different rep ranges but not with weights they’ve done before as a warm up
its interesting how some of you do as much as 12+ heavy sets while others really only work up to 1 heavy set on maybe 3 exercises.
i would like to see professor X’s thoughts on this too
[quote]pumped340 wrote:
SkyNett wrote:
6 - 8 on pretty much everything. Training each bodypart once a week on the following split -
Day 1 Chest/Back
Day 2 - Legs/calves/lower back
Day 3 - Shoulders
Day 4 - Biceps/tris/forearms
hows that working? generally i see people who like training each bodypart once a week doing more sets
Bricknyce wrote:
I am of the low volume school. I recently made the switch from 2 main sets per exercise and now it is 1 set per exercise.
Chest: 4
Bis: 3
Quads: 3
Hamstrings: 3
Calves: 2
Shoulders: 3
Traps: 1
Triceps: 3
Lats and upper back: 4
Rear delts: 2
Abs: 2
These are main sets. Big exercises may need 4 to 5 warmup sets while small ones done later in a workout may need as little as 1. EVERY exercise gets at least 1. Despite what people think, even though warmups are not strenuous, they are still WORK and groom neural pathways, leading to more strength, even if not terribly demanding.
Up until last month, I used to do twice the volume - obviously - since I cut the sets in half, from 2 to 1. I cannot remember the last time I did 3 work sets with straight weight except for my early days. Those 3rd sets were really a waste of time for me, personally. Good for a beginner, but not for a more advanced person.
But keep in mind, I have been heavily influenced by Ellington Darden, Dorian Yates, Mike Mentzer, Mark Dugdale, Dave Palumbo, Ian King, Jason Ferrugia, and other like minded people who feel that more than 2 sets per exercise with straight weight is a waste of time and energy.
not a bad method IMO. i assume those sets are taken to failure right? any past failure?
how often do you work the same muscle?
Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
I’m with mr. popular here, guys…
I only care about the last “all-out” set of each exercise… I’ve done the previous sets a dozen times (or even a hundred times) before, I doubt they add anything to my growth…
Didn’t we have a discussion about that stuff in the t-cell, i.e. people saying that pros do 12 sets per bodypart while in truth 8-9 of those are really progressively heavier non-failure warm-ups…
that follows something like DC right? basically working upto 1 heavy set? i’ve heard of a lot of people who actually do the 12 sets for example though…as in straight sets with different exercises. or maybe different rep ranges but not with weights they’ve done before as a warm up
its interesting how some of you do as much as 12+ heavy sets while others really only work up to 1 heavy set on maybe 3 exercises.
i would like to see professor X’s thoughts on this too[/quote]
Look at the “Professor-X: A request” thread. He ramps up the weight the same way all of us do.
The twelve straight sets with different exercises go like this:
say, you train triceps:
Close-Grip Bench
(some may do: Bar20 or so)
13512
2258
3158
405*as many as you get
Now this formula applies to the two other exercises you’d do as well,
say EZ Skullcrushers and Pushdowns. Same thing, 4 progressively heavier sets, last one all-out.
Some call this “12 sets”, because well, they did 12 sets, but You can also count that as 3 work sets (if you only count the all-out sets at the end).
Get it now?
This is regular bb training, DC is a little different in some ways, but there is a whole thread about it where you can check it out.
[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
Look at the “Professor-X: A request” thread. He ramps up the weight the same way all of us do.
The twelve straight sets with different exercises go like this:
say, you train triceps:
Close-Grip Bench
(some may do: Bar20 or so)
13512
2258
3158
405*as many as you get
Now this formula applies to the two other exercises you’d do as well,
say EZ Skullcrushers and Pushdowns. Same thing, 4 progressively heavier sets, last one all-out.
Some call this “12 sets”, because well, they did 12 sets, but You can also count that as 3 work sets (if you only count the all-out sets at the end).
Get it now?
This is regular bb training, DC is a little different in some ways, but there is a whole thread about it where you can check it out.[/quote]
oh yea i knew what you meant, but im saying i’ve actually heard of people doing the 12 straight sets. I used to lol, guess not too many people actually do. right now i still do multiple sets per muscle but not as high volume. generally about 3-7 sets working the muscle every 5 days or so but that changes sometimes. I want to try DC in the future but not now.
also adding to what you said, i noticed when watching jay cutlers video on his exercises (for machine bench for example) he started with like 2 plates and kept adding until he had 5 on each set. it was kind of funny because he made it look so hard with 2 plates even though he was only doing half reps the whole time so i wasn’t expecting him to get all the way to 5.
[quote]pumped340 wrote:
Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
Look at the “Professor-X: A request” thread. He ramps up the weight the same way all of us do.
The twelve straight sets with different exercises go like this:
say, you train triceps:
Close-Grip Bench
(some may do: Bar20 or so)
13512
2258
3158
405*as many as you get
Now this formula applies to the two other exercises you’d do as well,
say EZ Skullcrushers and Pushdowns. Same thing, 4 progressively heavier sets, last one all-out.
Some call this “12 sets”, because well, they did 12 sets, but You can also count that as 3 work sets (if you only count the all-out sets at the end).
Get it now?
This is regular bb training, DC is a little different in some ways, but there is a whole thread about it where you can check it out.
oh yea i knew what you meant, but im saying i’ve actually heard of people doing the 12 straight sets. I used to lol, guess not too many people actually do. right now i still do multiple sets per muscle but not as high volume. generally about 3-7 sets working the muscle every 5 days or so but that changes sometimes. I want to try DC in the future but not now.
also adding to what you said, i noticed when watching jay cutlers video on his exercises (for machine bench for example) he started with like 2 plates and kept adding until he had 5 on each set. it was kind of funny because he made it look so hard with 2 plates even though he was only doing half reps the whole time so i wasn’t expecting him to get all the way to 5.[/quote]
There is a good reason for why he does half-reps.
Same for cheating on the positive and such.
What you see in jay’s dvd is regular bodybuilding…
Also, a straight set simply means that you grab the weight, rep out but don’t go past failure by rest-pausing or drop-setting or anything like that…
[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
Close-Grip Bench
(some may do: Bar20 or so)
13512
2258
3158
405*as many as you get
Now this formula applies to the two other exercises you’d do as well,
say EZ Skullcrushers and Pushdowns. Same thing, 4 progressively heavier sets, last one all-out.
Some call this “12 sets”, because well, they did 12 sets, but You can also count that as 3 work sets (if you only count the all-out sets at the end).
Get it now?
This is regular bb training, DC is a little different in some ways, but there is a whole thread about it where you can check it out.[/quote]
Yeah, makes sense.
I’m seeing a common thread between all successful bodybuilders.
I’ve noticed some will do pyramid sets, others will do only one exercise with a shit ton of advanced techniques (RP, forced reps, eccentrics only, partials, etc. . .), others one difficult breathing set on 3 exercises per muscle group, etc. . …
So what exactly is volume? It’s a confusing thing because we talk about how Arnold would do very high volume and grow well, but how many of those sets were really that strenuous? Seems like the fact that slow twitch muscle fibers can take on more work than fast twitch muscle fibers would bias what volume truly is.
Essentially, maybe all of the extra pumping sets weren’t the primary source of the size gained by high-volume proponents. Is this an unfair statement?
Chances are one or more of the statements I’ve made have been misplaced or ignorant. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Arnold was a big proponent of pyramidding up in weight. His early developmental years in bodybuilding were also focused completely on moving up in weight and getting intense pumps. It was pretty basic.
I would say that for 95% of the people I’ve noticed who are big or getting big, the focus is on using more weight to reach failure in the rep rage they personally found to work best.
Moving up in weight on the exercises that work best for your body is priority #1 for gaining mass in the target muscle group, everything on top of that has its place in working on other aspects or qualities of a muscle, including pumping exercises which also have merits of their own, but often these focus on progressive overload coupled with muscle stretching or muscle tie-ins.
Like everybody keeps saying, progressive overload is the only infinite variable, and it has the most dramatic effect.
In my opinion it doesn’t matter how many sets or reps or stuff you do. As long as you are progressing by adding weight to the bar or an extra rep each workout keep doing what you have been doing.
CC is right in the fact that a large majority of huge BBer’s are basically “warming up” when they workout until they reach one final all out set. For instance Levrone on chest day would hit,
135x15
225x12
315x10
405x8-10
500x5
All the sets except the last one were not taken to failure. The last set was all out and where he was stressing the muscle enough to grow.
He would do straight sets of 405 on inclines so there was variety, but the common trend I see is that the core exercises are pyramided until that last work(growth) set and isolation or submovements (not sure what to call them) are straight sets.
[quote]pumped340 wrote:
Some swear by as much as 16+ sets per muscle while others have gotten much better results with only 4-7 sets. frequency is of course important when dealing with this but thats not why im asking so you dont need to put that part in. So whats worked best for you/what do you like best? (im sure there will be some differences in bigger/smaller muscles)[/quote]
As many as it takes to reach total exhaustion. Which is usually about 4, with maximum intensity.
3-4 x 3-4 = 9-16 maybe more maybe less.
4-6 exercises per muscle group, 4-6 sets a peice, plus 2-3 warmup sets for the first exercise. averages out to about 20+ sets
back
chest
shoulders
legs
bis
tris
repeat
IMO you shouldn’t look at it in terms of a static number (i.e. always 7 sets, etc). Progression in volume is a great approach to make muscle gains. So started with a certain load with 5 sets, then adding a set every two weeks until you reach 10 would be a good approach. You would then add weight and start back at 5 again.
This is just an example, but there are a million ways to progress and volume is a great way to do that for BB.
I don’t understand how people are getting any results from a predetermined amount of sets in the first place. Keep doing sets until the muscle feels like it has been worked enough. If it is 1 set so be it, if it is 16 so be it. I am only so blunt on the subject because ever since I stopped following some stupid set/rep scheme I have been feeling a lot more confident that what I am doing is better.
[quote]DanErickson wrote:
I don’t understand how people are getting any results from a predetermined amount of sets in the first place. Keep doing sets until the muscle feels like it has been worked enough.
If it is 1 set so be it, if it is 16 so be it. I am only so blunt on the subject because ever since I stopped following some stupid set/rep scheme I have been feeling a lot more confident that what I am doing is better.[/quote]
not buying this, maybe a little exaggerated? to each his own i guess. but, one set?
[quote]esk221 wrote:
1.[/quote]
please elaborate if possible.
[quote]Dylanj wrote:
not buying this, maybe a little exaggerated? to each his own i guess. but, one set?[/quote]
Why not?
[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
Dylanj wrote:
not buying this, maybe a little exaggerated? to each his own i guess. but, one set?
Why not?
[/quote]
One set period? I agree, probably too little. One “working” set? Then it’s certainly possible.
[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
Dylanj wrote:
not buying this, maybe a little exaggerated? to each his own i guess. but, one set?
Why not?
One set period? I agree, probably too little. One “working” set? Then it’s certainly possible.[/quote]
That’s what I was thinking as well.
[quote]Dylanj wrote:
DanErickson wrote:
I don’t understand how people are getting any results from a predetermined amount of sets in the first place. Keep doing sets until the muscle feels like it has been worked enough.
If it is 1 set so be it, if it is 16 so be it. I am only so blunt on the subject because ever since I stopped following some stupid set/rep scheme I have been feeling a lot more confident that what I am doing is better.
not buying this, maybe a little exaggerated? to each his own i guess. but, one set?[/quote]
Agreed. Even of this haphazard way of training worked, how would you measure your progress?