Are you asking what I mean by rate limiting step?
MPS is not the driver. I thought you were being funny.
If you wanted to go that route I’d say that mTOR would be the driver because it’s the one that actually signals cellular growth.
MPS is the PART of the remodeling process, but it doesn’t kick the process off itself. mTOR can be stimulated from an excess of nutrients but if there’s no need for the remodel process itself then muscle isn’t grown there either.
The driver means what it is that sets the process in motion. MPS is part of that motion after the catalyst has happened.
1 Like
I think I literally answered that in the quote you used.
1 Like
I built a good squat, good deadlift and okay bench and still looked like a twig. I have not done either of them in years and have grown a significant amount.
There are much better ways if the goal is muscle building.
1 Like
Yeah right, I figured I’d ask that because I remember reading as one of the arguments as to why the Deadlift would be a poor mass builder the fact that it’s usually done for low reps, so I was wondering if maybe high rep dl’s were different for that reason.
I know!
The two types of actions that have the greater impact on mTor activation are accentuated eccentrics and loaded stretching.
Following your 8-10 sets per muscle per week( with the above types) how does that fit into Serge Nubret training ( high rep, high pump), for example?
It has nothing to do with the number of reps done, per say. It’s about the movement itself.
Nothing in the back gets into a lengthened or shortened position during the deadlift. Everything in the back is working isometrically. And not that isometrics can’t build muscle, but they pale in comparison to the stimulus you get from movements where the muscle is lengthened and shortened.
This is why people who say to deadlift for growth don’t know what they are talking about. It’s a sub-standard movement for back building.
2 Likes
I don’t even know how to answer that. You’re comparing two completely different ideologies.
1 Like
I think this is the whole picture!
Ideologies should be explainable, else it’s not answering the question of this thread, imho.
Why does pump training bring about massive ( Strebl and Nubret) gains?
I think the answer to the original question of this thread has in fact been answered. So I’m not sure what you mean.
The pump CAN induce growth by the way of increased satellite signalling and a chemical chance within the muscle. Although most people don’t realize this, metabolic stress (which is what we’re talking about here) isn’t a conclusive driver for growth. It’s only hypothesized. Anecdotally I think we know it causes growth, but scientifically they aren’t exactly sure of the mechanisms. So no one can REALLY answer that question with certainty.
Paul, I’m wondering what you think about this routine, with the goal being hypertrophy while maintaining a strength component via the 5/3/1 system. I made this starting from a template on Wendler’s website and following your recent volume and effort guidelines.
Day 1: Shoulders and Biceps
- Press – 5/3/1 (pr set, so last set to failure)
- Press FSL x AMRAP (so the weight of the first set to failure)
- Side Laterals – 1 warm up set, then 2 sets to failure
- Barbell Curls – 1 warm up set, then 2 sets to failure
- Db Incline curl – 1 all out set + rest/Pause
Day 2: Back
- Deadlift – 5/3/1 (pr set)
- Chin ups – 2 sets bodyweight, then 3x8 weighted to failure or just shy of it
- Cable row – 2 easier sets, then 1 all out set of 8 + rest/pause
- Face pulls 3 x 15
Day 3: Chest and Triceps
- Bench Press – 5/3/1 (pr set)
- Bench Press FSL 3x5
- Weighted Dips – 2 lighter sets, then 2 all out sets
- Triceps Pushdowns – 1 x 20, then 2 all out sets
Day 4: Legs
- Squat – 5/3/1 (pr set)
- Squat – FSL 3x5
- Leg Press – 3 x 12
This would lead to:
Enhanced vs natural, both drive on progressive overload within 8-12 sets!
The difference is in their recovery rate…basically leading to…more intensity/resistance within the sets!
According to the above “metabolic stress CAN” statement, there is no point increasing volume by more sets since you say: if in need to exceed 8-12 sets, the intensity/load/ weight was not sufficient?!
„Derek Charlebois for hardgainer“ basically is for everybody.
I don’t know if you’ve read this entire thread but that is exactly what has been said repeatedly here.
If you’re asking why other successful people do more than that then you need to ask them specifically. Just because they do something different and have success doesn’t mean that it’s the best way.
In this thread we’ve been trying to discuss what’s the best approach for hypertrophy. Paul has stated repeatedly that 8-12 sets per week is all that’s necessary. These are legitimate working sets; not fluff or junk volume. A non-scientific review of multiple programs shows that the bulk of them actually have 8-12 working sets per week, whether that was the goal or not. It seems to be a very consistent thing amongst successful people and their programs.
To address your concerns about other people’s training and why they do it, here’s an example that supports what Paul has been telling us in this thread:
If 10 sets gets me X amount of growth, but 15 sets gets me X + 5% more growth, then the question becomes “Is it worth it?”
50% more work for 5% more growth? Most of us would agree that we have a life outside of the gym and that tiny 5% isn’t worth it. Adding 50% more sets to every workout can really drag things out and at the end of the week it wouldn’t be worth it. It would take more energy. It would increase recovery times. And most importantly, it would take away from the rest of life in general. None of that is worth the extra effort.
Those are just the basic observations of the example. It doesn’t even consider the overall impact on the body. Perhaps 50% more work over time would actually be detrimental due to the increased energy expenditure and decreased recovery time between sessions? Maybe I’d need to add an extra rest day. Well, now we’re extending the program over a longer period of time so that extra 5% might take longer to achieve and ultimately make that approach less effective.
We agree.
I don’t think that’s how PED’s work. They recover differently, but it’s over days, not sets.
1 Like
There’s the ol “natural vs enhanced” bullshit again.
It’s a fallacy. The “recovery” part people speak of here is localized muscle recovery and an elevated degree of MPS for longer periods at a time (with enhanced).
Systemic recovery is far more important and anabolics do not improve systemic recovery at all.
I’ve had this convo with TONS of coaches. That all say the same - it’s individualistic. They have some guys on gear that cannot recover from high loads of volume, and yet have natty guys that can do more volume and grow. Far more than the enhanced guy could tolerate.
Metabolic stress is related to the increase in metabolites within the muscle due to an increase in the byproducts from the glycolytic system and increased muscle hypoxia. IT has nothing to do with “volume”.
1 Like
And this all leads to the fact of there being a load of bullshit on training information out there, in addition to conflicting research!
Many thanks for your efforts!!!
Paul I really like what I’ve read from this thread, 17 year old myself here I think i have fallen victim to paralysis by analysis
just gonna lift hard, put some effort in and eat…not worried about my 6.3RPE or whatever jargon they use these days
increase weight or reps across compound movements and I’m pretty sure I’ll adapt. Volume is individual anyways cause it depends on the person’s genetics, sleep, diet…its hard to prescribe a general rule for everyone.
Personaly I’m doing something like this:
A
Squat 5/3/1 + 5x5 @65-75%
Bench 5/3/1 + 5x10@50-60%
Pullups 50-100 total reps
Dips 50-100 total reps
Chest/Triceps/Shoulders (Pick 2 of each, do for 5x10-12 reps)
Abs 50-100 reps
B
Deadlift 5/3/1 + 5x5@65-75%
OHP 5/3/1 + 5x10@50-60%
Pullups 50-100 total reps
Dips 50-100 total reps
Back/Biceps (Pick 2 of each, do for 5x10-12)
Abs 50-100 reps
Seems really basic but that’s all i have access to with my equipment. Not “optimal” for hypertrophy but I really don’t care because I enjoy training this way.
by the way, this is a 4 day a week split. Done Monday, Wednesday, Friday/Saturday.
Some might scream overtraining idk but I listen to my body if im putting weight on the bar and adding reps then i guess its working
I am not calling any individual out at all here, but is a very interesting social experiment how we can all read the same messages here but a lot of us walk away “hearing” confirmation of what we wanted the “answer” to be
2 Likes
are you talking to me…cause if you are i’d appreciate criticism we’re all here to help each other
So that’s…minimum 5 sets of pull-ups (back) on A day, then 5 sets of deads (back) on B day, then another minimum 5 sets of pull-ups (back) on B day, meaning you’re at 15 sets, and do it twice a week, so you’re at 30 sets for back, and like 40 for biceps. Paul has been hammering home 8-12 work sets. You cannot have possibly read anything here because this post was literally like “hey! I read your posts and I’m glad you agree with this program that directly contradicts every point you’ve made.”
2 Likes