Meltdown vs. GBC

Alright, so both are supposed to increase blood lactate levels through the roof increasing (supposedly…) GH levels, resulting in fat loss and mitochondrial proliferation/density.

However, the workouts are very different.

GBC for example, has longer rest periods, more exercises, and longer sets (including slower reps). As a result, workouts are longer, less cardiovascularly taxing, and yet provide more of the “lactic acid” burn.

Meltdown is basically a large superset, with very short workouts, and you usually have to stop because you’re so winded. The lactic acid burn isn’t really present at all.

Based on the common goal of these programs (increase in blood lactate), doesn’t it seem like GBC is a much better choice?

I’m sure they’re both good for fat loss, but could this be for different reasons?

This question has been asked before, but never received a good answer beyond: “Do your reps slower and use more weight.” This is in reference to Meltdown, and making it more lactic acid based training.

bump

I personally, and some people who I recommended it to, have done well with meltdown.

I tried the GBC but could never get the last set of each triple in with the rx’d weight. The muscle fatigue sets in to quick. Also I found having to go from machine to machine w/ GBC was a pain. It was easier to monopolize 2 bars and a rack with meltdown. But Im sure GBC will work.

Another that i find super similar is AC Afterburn trianing. The barbell complexes are like meltdown but better IMHO. Try one and then the other. I feel that the GBC will work better for slow twitchers whereas the MD worked better for fast twitchers like me.

-chris