That’s interesting I never saw that one personally. I was only familiar with the A1-3 and B1-3 3 day split. This thread has got me looking into your boy Scott’s fortitude training methods. Not the program as a whole but some of the intensity methods. You do the muscle rounds (I think what it’s called) some don’t you in your own training?
The guys on IM used to discourage people from doing it, as it was generally deemed for “advanced DC trainers” only (and DC itself was already supposed to be for advanced trainers according to them)And as such the info was kind of sparse.
That would make sense then. Honestly to me that looks more enjoyable. I enjoy being able to focus on a smaller group of muscles as opposed to upper days hitting several things. As in chest movement shoulder movement back movement triceps etc
I suppose the “downside” is that is reduces frequency a teeny tiny bit, which Dante thought was important enough to make the 2-way split the generally recommended one. But once you are pushing the limits of even your enhanced capacity you need to further stimulate beyond what the regular DC split allows.
Although in reality, and as we all know, every kind of training “works” so its not like one is going to work 100% and the other 0% … So if you enjoy one over the other thats probably enough to tip you into doing it versus the other one.
1 Like
The one I’m using doesn’t add volume like his ‘ advanced advanced’ split, it just uses the normal A B workouts just split over the 3 days (due to time constraints and I can do my rehab at the gym(due to time)). It is on his site.
Although it is already less volume than Paul’s training. Interesting again to note that CT, PC and DC training all focus on intensity techniques and lower volume.
I was once told if someone were to put biceps on the day with all the other upper body parts, it wouldn’t be DC. 
Anyway, as said, there are two splits.
I agree there I’d rather feel rested, uninjured, and make slightly slower progress than the contrary.
1 Like
Side note…I’m coaching Jordan Syatt, who has been Gary Vee’s coach the last three years. He was a competitive powerlifter for years and pulled a 4X bw deadlift. But he wanted to get jacked and reached out to me about working together. He’s documenting the training the next year on his Youtube if you guys wanna follow what we’ll be doing together.
He talks about the same mind shift that moving to low volume had for him as well.
4 Likes
Tnation should be documenting your training. A good production value vlog.
4 Likes
Yup - my exact thought process.
(And I don’t need a neurotype label to figure out why the 3-way split would be more enjoyable.)
Trying to optimize (frequency) is mental masturbation that I’ve been very guilty of - until I asked myself why the hell it should matter when I’m a recreational lifter.
2 Likes
THAT LAST SENTENCE!!!
OMG THAT SO MUCH!
If you’re not competing in something then WHY are you obsessing over all of these nuances guys?!?!
I legit want some of you to weigh in on that because my belief is that it’s about insecurity. And that’s fine. We all have insecurities and can openly talk about those things (which tends to make them NOT insecurities anymore at all).
But WHY do so many of you guys get so mind fucked in all of these little details when you’re just lifting for yourself???
Why so much pressure to find the perfect frequency and volume and movement and all of this stuff? Why???
You’re not competing in anything.
7 Likes
I think that, while insecurities play a role in this, I guess that if you’re actually putting in effort in your training and nutrition, you would be pretty ticked off knowing that you aren’t getting all your effort’s “worth” in gains. Don’t know if that makes sense.
I had this feeling when I developed sleep issues before I actually got on meds to fix that. I would only manage to get five hours of sleep when time would have allowed for 7+, had I managed to fall asleep in time, and would think to myself, “this is so unfair, I’m putting in effort and being on point with my nutrition just to see 70% of this undone by my bad sleep.” I guess that’s about the same reasoning for wanting to optimize one’s training.
Then why the calling out/bashing of the volume guys like Mike I? He has stated on many podcasts to start with he lowest volume needed to grow, that most of his recommendations are for those looking to compete or at the very least take bodybuilding serious enough to want to milk their training for everything they can. Even is terms of frequency he has said the it does not matter whether you train 2-3 x per body part or follow a bro split.
At the end of the day as long as you are progressively overloading through weight/reps and eating in a surplus you will reach your genetic limit in 3-5 years. Any gains after that will not be worth the time and effort.
So, why the 50% sets, rest-pause, drop sets, 100 rep sets, etc? Seems like over complicating training. I am with @isdatnutty in that a double progression model using sets in the 6-12 rep range maybe up to 15 reps for isolation work is the simplest solution.
1 Like
Great discussion! Thanks to all and especially thanks to Paul for sharing his knowledge and experience.
Back to the original topic, I have 2 specific questions;
-I get the picture of concept of training for muscle gain presented here by Paul and with the study, but what about bodyweight exercises, how to progress on them when hypertrophy is the goal? I am asking as with weights there is progressive loading and forced reps, but it has been said generaly to progress in bodyweight exercises (chins and dips, maybe inverted rows) forcing more reps is not the case. So, how to incorporate these exercises for max muscle?
-other question is related to calf training. We know that calfs respond diferently then majority of other muscle. So how to train them (for geneticaly not blessed calfs)? Do they specifically need more volume then presented here?
Thanks and sorry for my english, not my first language and I have never even been is some english only speaking country 
Interesting Borge opinion.
I don’t remember calling anyone out. Mike and I have different takes on training ideology. I haven’t called him out here, and wouldn’t because that serves no purpose.
As far as your genetic limit in the first 3-5 years…no. Maybe 7. But I got to my biggest in my 30’s, totally natural, doing DC style training.
If you want to ride Mike’s disco stick that’s fine. All good, but throw a fit somewhere else. I asked a legit question. Why fussing over so many nuances like whether 3 days is better than 4, or 4 is better than 3? That’s the kind of nuances that don’t make sense to me.
As far as the rest of what you wrote, it’s only true to an extent. Here’s how muscle growth works…you provide a stimulus…if you can recover from that stimulus then there will be adaptation. If there’s adaptation at the metabolic/cellular level then you will grow.
That means you can’t just do 6-12 forever without plateauing. That’s why there’s intensity techniques like drop sets, cluster sets, 50% sets, double rest/pause sets, etc. Because it creates a stimulus that is novel that your body must adapt to.
Does that make sense or should I type slower next time?
2 Likes
“The rate of gains might be higher in the short term, but a very common outcome is that fast gains lead to faster stagnation and in many cases, various connective tissue problems or other overreaching symptoms.”
From that article is SPOT ON. The faster the rate of gains, the faster you’re going to hit a wall. This is why it’s best to go with a low to moderate approach to volume rather than the “let me stack on tons of volume and ramp that shit up over weeks to overreach”.
That is NOT a sound modality for stacking brick on brick for muscle mass. I have no idea why these guys think that overreaching should be applied to hypertrophy. It’s a science based in strength peaking. Not gaining muscle mass. It’s dumb. There, I said it.
1 Like
For me, it’s simple. I don’t stress about how many days per week that I need to train. I frequently change my training splits to fit my life schedule.
I have been guilty of getting caught up in the search for the holy grail of training. The reason for this is self doubt and the peanut gallery.
I’ve trained hard for over a decade, but I’ve alternated between chasing size and strength. I don’t like getting fat so I’ll bulk for a bit, even slowly, and hate what I see in the mirror so I pump the brakes. I’ll decide to pursue strength while maintaining weight until one of my joints screams at me.
The result is that I’ve made zero progress for a decade. Maybe being the same from 21 to 34 is a good thing, but everything I read says I should be growing and increasing strength.
I think I’ve accepted everyone else’s opinion of what should be achieved if I would only eat and train right. I must be doing something wrong since I’m not getting these results.
I feel like my nutrition is good and I don’t miss a session, so there can only be a few reasons I’m not growing.
- my program sucks (unlikely)
- I’ve reached 85% of my genetic potential and I’m not willing to do what it takes to eek out the last 15%
- I’m not working hard enough
I’m still not sure what the answer is but I’ve changed my mindset. I’m going to do more in less time in the gym and I’m looking to gain a few pounds in a year compared to a few pounds a month.
The answer for most of us could be that we’re pursuing an enhanced physique with natural resources.
1 Like
Zero progress in lifts?
If you aren’t competing in something then why would you do more sets, have longer training sessions, and train more often? Seems totally backwards to me.
1 Like