I don’t see where you are coming from with that! ( apart from: Why are you are so uptight about it, hitting on me? )
I simply refer to the total volume definition of loading for muscle gainz!
I just don’t like seeing a person post the same question repeatedly in a thread with the hopes of getting a different answer.
1 Like
I think that’s one of the toughest things to learn as a trainer,… to a certain degree, everyone is different. That’s not saying not to learn as much as you can, but, there’s a reason why you often hear the “walk the walk” analogy. And as I’ve pointed out repeatedly over the years,… what took me a long time to figure out for myself, I soon found that many others came to the same realizations themselves. Now that’s not saying we all found some magical training protocol. merely that we found similarities in what works, what doesn’t, and always not to over complicate things or get distracted (suckered?) by the latest, greatest, or most shiny thing you hear or read.
With the volume issue, I made gains starting out doing the most basic stuff, and I improved to a point, but it’s when I focused on how all the other variables played their synergistic role that I found out that not only was Bill Pearl right in his theory that an advanced trainer can tolerate and will grow better from a higher volume, but that none of the latest studies, or discoveries by guys with unenviable physiques could change that fact.
S
1 Like
Tada,
here comes an answer with, least to say, personally different views!
Will have a look at Bill Pearl…
Thanx Stu!
1 Like
No worries. But don’t run off, do 100 working sets every session, eat a total crap diet, stay out all night, and then whine online how “that Stu guy doesn’t know sh-t!” -lol
S
Stu,
Here goes a 49 year old ex- national beach volleyball player, a European Diploma with the German Sports University of Cologne, with a professional sports related working experience of about 25 years!
At 45, after divorce, kids, housebuilding, work excelling and all I promised myself to be the best possible me body and mindwise- I ain’t fluffing around!
As a 46 year old guy myself, I wish ya the best, and offer the advice to remember that you’re not 25 anymore.
I’m still pretty focused and intense in the gym, but I do on occasion watch old training videos of myself and usually comment to the wife “geez, I was nuts!” -lol
S
1 Like
hi, @Paul_Carter,
first of all, sorry for my english, i am not from an english speaking country.
what the difference between concentrate all the sets in one work out (9 sets for the chest on monday) and separete them in two or tree different work outs (for example 3 sets on monday, 3 on thuesday and 3 on saturday)?
separate the sets in two or tree day allows for more intensity.
thank you!
Hey man, sorry I’ve bowed out of this one. I’m letting Stu answer everything. He has the golden keys to the kingdom.
1 Like
Sorry, but this is childish!
Wish this would be an unemotional exchange!
1 Like
No, I have to determine where I’m going to give my energy to. I’ve given a shit ton of information in this thread. You guys need to figure out what to do with it. But I’m not in the business of going back and forth all day with someone who doesn’t agree with me (nor do I need to read his resume one more time).
If you guys want to pick Stu’s brain, it looks like he believes he has all the answers. So there you go.
1 Like
Ok,
Can anyone bring forth any scientific research on higher / high volume for gainz?!
This is an article
Posted 3,4,500 posts back, maybe more. It’s from CT and he easily outlines how to program low volume high intensity training. He shows how to progress it with set extending methods, shows a rough periodization for each. Shows splits, ex selection options rep ranges. Literally everything you can imagine to program this exact type of training to your own personal preference.
This wasn’t done by Paul but if you’ve followed along you can see this is the exact principles Paul laid out and honestly it’s very similair to how he said to progress it.
1 Like
I recently read something (cant remember where) that said that extremely high rep sets actually cause more CNS fatigue than heavy low rep sets. If you actually go to failure on a set of 30-something squats then Im pretty sure it would be more draining than a max single.
1 Like
i understand.
thank you anyway!
could you post a link where i can read your opinion about different frequency with the same amount of volume?
if it isn’t posible, no problem.
really thank you for your time and all the informations that you share in this tread and in all your articles.
High rep sets are better on less draining exercises. Lat pulldowns for example instead of squats.
Well, there’s no chance of me doing that any time soon.
1 Like
Read through this thread, he discussed that. He said he had a training group where he gave people the option to train 6 days a week with the same volume split up, the lower frequency group (3 or 4 days per week) had better results and was less fatigued.
After experimenting with some stuff and looking at the facts and opinions, I think that once you are within 1-2 reps of failure you are going to get a similar response to pushing to failure, but less fatigue per set. So doing 2 sets to failure is about equal to 3-4 sets with a rep or two in the tank. In the end, both approaches are going to give similar results. The problem is where you have people doing sets 4+ reps short of failure, they aren’t accomplishing much if anything, and then you have crazy high volume stuff like 10x10 which can be counterproductive. To be effective, training needs to be hard, and with moderate volumes.
1 Like
Brad Schoenfeld, Mike Israetel, James Krieger, and so on. But the point here is that less volume might actually better, and Krieger has even said that 8-10 sets per muscle per workout is pretty much the maximum that you can benefit from.
2 Likes
Little point stopping 4 reps short of failure on a working set. Working sets should be 0-2 reps from failure. If 3 sets first 2 short, 2nd 1 short, 3rd failure. That’s going to build muscle.