Poliquin vs. King

I just received my copy of Get Buffed by Ian King this week, and I have to say it is a great book. I also have the Poliquin Principles which is a great book but not near as detailed. The main difference between King and Poliquin seems to be that Poliquin reccomends much higher volume and frequency.
My question is which one have you guys had more success with, King or Poliquin type of workouts?

Poliquin’s workouts were fun and challenging, but honestly, I don’t think they work that great for the non-juicer, which I am, most of the time :-). King’s have worked much better. He’s right on with his recovery theories.

I really, really like the King book. Lots of very useful stuff. I just got it for Christmas (thanks sis!) and am learning more and more. Poliquin’s book is good but I have to say all the cheesey photos and lack of editing somehow really started to bug me, still a good book though. I would also agree with TEK.

Yeah, King’s book is awesome. The only thing I would’ve liked to see more of is diet info. Poliquin has some good diet recommendations but they aren’t in the books, you really have to dig to find them (either a seminar or various places on the net). I’ve really taken a liking to (lord help me) the German Body Comp. I’ve been doing the 3x/week approach and it’s worked stunningly well combined with my CKD approach (actually it’s not mine-I do Fat Fast Sunday-Friday afternoon and then a 24 hr. carb-up). I did Poliquin’s version of German Volume Training and I didn’t get much out of it. Arms responded pretty well and strength improved but not much in the mass dept. I agree that a lot of Poliquin’s programs are more geared to the genetically elite, and I think that he’s so used to working with them all the time that he forgets the average population doesn’t have that kind of recovery ability not to mention that most of his athletes do what they do for a living and many have their training as their sole focus in life. In my opinion, Ian King is the best. I liked his idea on how to load creatine too. I haven’t tried any of his 12 week programs yet but they look very interesting. I probably won’t do the leg workouts since I am genetically gifted in that dept, but I have puny arms/chest and am definitely going to give them a go.

I think there is a time and a place for both styles. Variety is the key to continued growth, so both could be incorporated successfully.

I haven’t tried any of Ian’s 12 weeks programs and such actually. I’ve used some of his principles and such tough.

But for me, poliquin is GOD :). The one day arm cure (1/2" in 3 days), the GVT (4" after 3 months (1 month only with gvt from most gains came from)), and his best of exersizes. His calf workout added 1" to my calves in like… no time. Im just as amazed every time.

I ended up overtrained with most of CP’s programs. I still like the 1-6 program a lot, but I stick to King most of the time now. His new “Bring the Pain” series should be awesome.

Just a reminder Poliquins book was less of a book and more of a ripoff of his own previously printed material in MM2K. I am still weighting and hoping for a book by him similar to Ian Kings. So remeber the original MM2K was geared towards juicers so this might explain the type of workouts in the book.

for lower body work and for improving relative strength I found that Poliquin’s stuff has worked better for me. Also If I have more time to rest and pay attention to recovery I prefer Poliquin’s stuff. But if I’m more occupied with other things, I like King’s approach.

One reason I prefer King’s programs is his emphasis on balance and injury prevention. I just finished his 12 week upper and lower body programs with phenomenal results. I have also had success with Poliquin’s GBC (3X/wk) and various training methods from his book. However, Poliquin’s one day arm cure yielded no lasting results for me. I see that TC has used some of King’s principles in his version of Poliquin’s GVT. I’m going to give that program a shot and later try Poliquin’s 1-6 program with some Ian King modifications.

I like to switch back and forth between Poliquin’s methods and King’s methods. I have found that Poliquin’s do require much better recovery abilities, which I do not have.

I recently did two weeks of GBC, and now I’ll follow his accumulation and intensification workouts for a few weeks.

I do prefer King’s methods because he understands the recovery abilities of the non-drug taking athlete. His recovery weeks have helped me, and many of his techniques are great. I think he has made the most improvement in my training.

I personally feel that Pliquins would probably be better for gaining mass and building muscle endurance, and I think King is better at building strength.
I think Poliquin needs to write another book with more details like King’s book. I learned a lot more reading Poliquin’s articles than I did his book. King said he thought some strength coaches write books and intentionally leave out the details, I think he was probably referring to Poliquin.
Has anyone gotten any Mass gains using King’s workouts or just strength?

Personally, I HATE Ian King and his silly programs but thats mostly because they hurt me. Who am I kidding! Bring the pain!

I think Ian King’s ideas about recovery and injury prevention are right on. I haven’t tried any of Poliquin’s programs, but he seems to make a lot more too-good-to-be-true claims. An inch of arm growth on the One Day Arm Cure? It sounds like the gains can’t be permanent. I can’t wait to see Ian’s new program. I’ve got a little pup tent on the crotch of my pants, waiting for it. I just thought I’d plant that disturbing image in your minds.

I would like to know if anyone has made ay gains on King’s programs. If so, how much. I am just thinking that te volume and frequency might be too low.

I think that it is possible to gain mass with Ian’s programs but I think that it’s important to realize that he shifts the phases. He places a lot of emphasis on balance, between muscle groups AND between types of strength. I think that you could use some of his ideas and focus more on the hypertrophy but his 12 week programs are not purely for that purpose.

Oh, J.man as Ian says -It’s not how much you can do, but doing what’s optimal. For me his programs are giving me plenty of soreness and truth is when I take the work sets to the limit, I wouldn’t want any more volume. That’s just me though. I think the best way to find out what exactly it will do for you is to try a 12 week program. You’ll know for sure then and either way it won’t be a waste of time.

Poliquins a self-obsessed, ego feeding celebrity status wannabe.
King is…well, he’s King!
A smart, sometimes harsh, technically advanced, living in the real world where people dont just train eat and sleep, kind of strength coach that prefers to teach people how to design programmes rather than making definitive statments about the high effectiveness of his routines.
Hec, hes a Mentzer in every sense of the person, just with more spice and two less balls.


No, Deniz, it is not just you. I am also plenty sore after Ian’s workouts (even during “neural training”) and it is sort of a “deep rooted” soreness, something that does not completely go away after one or two days. I found that even though I do not spend as much time on the workout, I have to take longer brakes in training than before. Well, maybe it is because I try to up the intensity every workout.

I agree that charles is a bit too full of hype and alot of his programs need modification to work, e.g. 1-6. As for not being able to gain mass on Ian’s programs, I’ve gained over half an inch on my arms despite essentially ignoring his volume recommendations on how to train my legs whilst on the program. give it a shot.