Thib's Q&A

Training
141

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
delux0 wrote:
Coach Thibs.-

I’m curious now, being that OVT requires the heaviest weight possible for all first super set exercises, doesnt it have a VARY big impact on the CNS?
Is this one of the reasons you said its different then what you would make today?
Along with that, is there anything you can do to help with CNS recovery or does it just take time?

BTW: Great article, brownie points for you, like you said, a good coach need to take complex info and spit it back in a simpler form and you did it. Vary easy read, nice job!!!

I wrote OVT 6 years ago. It is not in line with my current level of knowledge which is why I have stopped recommending it for at least 3 years now.[/quote]

hu, thats lot of years. Ill look for somthing better but idk where to start.
Thanks

142

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
steelerfan wrote:
I think I read where you said you have started golfing again. Was just wondering if training to good naked has inhibited your swing to any large extent ?

I always had a short swing, even when I was playing competitive golf and was around 165lbs I had something of a 3/4 swing. So honestly my technique has not been hurt too much.

And just because someone has muscles, doesn’t mean that they lack flexibility!

steelerfan wrote:
“And I wont even be there in August since I’m getting married on the 9th and will be on my honeymoon up to September 4th.” WOW will need to be doing a lot of work capacity training, thats one long honeymoon!! Best Wishes

Actually I’m leaving on the 21st, so that’s 2 weeks.

[/quote]

Was thinking more about the bulk being a hinder not the flexibility… I know a lot of competitive golfers that lift for strength but not many that do it for ascetic purposes.

143

[quote]David1991 wrote:
Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
delux0 wrote:
Coach Thibs.-

I’m curious now, being that OVT requires the heaviest weight possible for all first super set exercises, doesnt it have a VARY big impact on the CNS?
Is this one of the reasons you said its different then what you would make today?
Along with that, is there anything you can do to help with CNS recovery or does it just take time?

BTW: Great article, brownie points for you, like you said, a good coach need to take complex info and spit it back in a simpler form and you did it. Vary easy read, nice job!!!

I wrote OVT 6 years ago. It is not in line with my current level of knowledge which is why I have stopped recommending it for at least 3 years now.

this isnt a jab towards you or anything, but it’s interesting to see how much a trainers methodology towards something can change in a few years. i remember reading something like “OVT is the best routine for muscle growth that i have encountered” or something like that from an old article and now you wouldn’t even recommend it. i’ve seen the same with others too. just something i noticed.

[/quote]

The day a coach stops looking for ways to become better, is the day he dies!

144

[quote]Kana wrote:
Coach, where can I find your fees for online clients?[/quote]

Nowhere since I’m not taking new clients.

145

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

The day a coach stops looking for ways to become better, is the day he dies!

[/quote]

lol true and it’s great to see that you and others are constantly looking for ways to improve training results. about OVT in general though, although you do not currently recommend it, do you believe it can give good results (maybe just not as good as possible)? I mean i’m sure you thought it was great at one point for a reason.

146

[quote]David1991 wrote:
Hey coach quick question on frequency…

i notice that your a big advocate of splits and training a muscle on 1, maybe 2, times per week. However i’ve also seen a lot of convincing arguments by Waterbury and cosgrove saying that for most people full body routines ARE the way to go (basically putting it down as fact) [/quote]

Wait for part 3 of my new series. As I mentioned in part 1, nobody really ‘‘get me’’. This is a good example of it. I’m often categorized as a ‘‘body part split’’ guy, which is not the case at all. A lot of my programs are either upper/lower body or whole body. It depends on the client and the goal of the program.

Understand that the articles I publish cover maybe 5% of what I do, you can’t form a complete opinion on my beliefs by looking a those articles only.

However, as I mentioned, this new 4 part series will go a long way is giving people a clearer idea of my beliefs.

[quote]David1991 wrote:
i remember one study shown by cosgrove that working a muscle with 1 set 3x a week resulted in 62% more hypertrophy than 3 sets 1x a week. [/quote]

And how exactly is that relevant to ‘‘real training’’? Who actually performs only 3 sets per week for a muscle group? Very few peoples indeed!

Frequency is volume and damage dependent (this will be covered in part 3 of my current series). The less stressful a training session is for a muscle, the more often you can and should train a muscle group.

Obviously 3 total sets per week represent a very feeble training stimulus and as such it is not surprising that better results would be achieved from a higher frequency of training. But then again… who really train like that?

147

[quote]David1991 wrote:
Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

The day a coach stops looking for ways to become better, is the day he dies!

lol true and it’s great to see that you and others are constantly looking for ways to improve training results. about OVT in general though, although you do not currently recommend it, do you believe it can give good results (maybe just not as good as possible)? I mean i’m sure you thought it was great at one point for a reason.
[/quote]

I did personally get good results from it and so did those who tried it.

However the problem as I now see it is that while OVT will provide a very powerful short-term stimulation, it could hinder long-term progress by overexerting the CNS.

I can still see it as a viable option to use as a shock block to be used prior to a 1-2 weeks vacation. The off week(s) would allow the CNS to fully recover and so the downside of the program would be avoided. In fact, an individual would probably continue growing during the first vacation week even by not training.

But if you use OVT then switch to another ‘‘regular’’ program, chances are that you will enter a downward spiral.

The ‘‘funny’’ thing is that you would hit the wall probably 3-6 weeks after you switched away from OVT, thus never suspect that it was actually the source of the problem in the first place.

148

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
David1991 wrote:
Hey coach quick question on frequency…

i notice that your a big advocate of splits and training a muscle on 1, maybe 2, times per week. However i’ve also seen a lot of convincing arguments by Waterbury and cosgrove saying that for most people full body routines ARE the way to go (basically putting it down as fact)

Wait for part 3 of my new series. As I mentioned in part 1, nobody really ‘‘get me’’. This is a good example of it. I’m often categorized as a ‘‘body part split’’ guy, which is not the case at all. A lot of my programs are either upper/lower body or whole body. It depends on the client and the goal of the program.

Understand that the articles I publish cover maybe 5% of what I do, you can’t form a complete opinion on my beliefs by looking a those articles only.

However, as I mentioned, this new 4 part series will go a long way is giving people a clearer idea of my beliefs.

[/quote]

ok i’m looking forward to those. im about to read part 1 now actually

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

David1991 wrote:
i remember one study shown by cosgrove that working a muscle with 1 set 3x a week resulted in 62% more hypertrophy than 3 sets 1x a week.

And how exactly is that relevant to ‘‘real training’’? Who actually performs only 3 sets per week for a muscle group? Very few peoples indeed!

Frequency is volume and damage dependent (this will be covered in part 3 of my current series). The less stressful a training session is for a muscle, the more often you can and should train a muscle group.

Obviously 3 total sets per week represent a very feeble training stimulus and as such it is not surprising that better results would be achieved from a higher frequency of training. But then again… who really train like that?

[/quote]
i agree that no one trains like that, but it seems like at least the principles could be applied (ie. the chest either gets worked with 9 sets monday or 3 sets monday, Wednesday, Friday. that study seems to show that the latter option would result in greater hypertrophy). I agree with your point that frequency of course must be dependent on how much intensity and volume is done during the particular training sessions

149

[quote]David1991 wrote:

i agree that no one trains like that, but it seems like at least the principles could be applied (ie. the chest either gets worked with 9 sets monday or 3 sets monday, Wednesday, Friday. that study seems to show that the latter option would result in greater hypertrophy). I agree with your point that frequency of course must be dependent on how much intensity and volume is done during the particular training sessions

[/quote]

There is a difference between doing 9 sets for a muscle and doing 3 sets (as in the experiment) and you cannot use the result from the 3 sets protocol to extrapolate what would happen with a higher volume of work.

3 total sets for a muscle in one day would actually cause fairly little tissue disruption/damage (unless one would go beyond failure with rest/pause, forced reps, negatives, etc. which are never used in a study… in fact chances are that the 3 sets where not even close to being ‘‘limit sets’’).

So one would probably recover from that ‘‘workout’’ in less than 24 hours. Surcompensation (if it even occurs) would probably peak at 36 hours. Then since there is no further stimulation, involution (loss of hypertrophy gains which are now seen as an unnecessary burden to the body, which is built first and foremost for survival) and by day 5-6 the gains stimulated would be all but lost.

On the other hand, doing 9 sets in a workout would require a longer recovery period and after 6-7 days involution would not have started yet.

So when you do a very low amount of work you NEED a high frequency per muscle otherwise you will lose a large portion of the stimulated gains before the next session.

Plus, one needs to be careful with stats. a 62% difference might sound huge, but what if in an 8 weeks study protocol A led to a muscle gain of 0.7lbs of tissue and protocol B to a gain of 1.13lbs … while the difference is 62% the actual progress is insignificant

150

[quote]Kaylak wrote:

I was going to ask a question about tendon strength, but google is a wonderful tool and I’ve already found some avenues to explore. Anyway, once again - I greatly appreciate the knowledge and effort you put into this site.[/quote]

That’s refreshing to say the least!

151

all good points. Do you feel that splits (or at least higher volume/intensity, less frequency) are more effective for most beginners (those around 2 years of training) as well?

for me i did the opposite of typical lifters just from lack of knowledge for the most part. i started my first bulk with a chest/back, legs, arms split with supersets for each muscle. now i’m doing an upper/lower split (from NROL by Alwyn Cosgrove) and prior to that i was doing full body for awhile. the more the routines are split the more fun they are IMO, i haven’t done an isolation exericise in so long :frowning: ! lol.

i think i may use your “how to design a good program” article once i’m finished with NROL. any recommendations on which of those hypertrophy splits would suit my level best?

152

[quote]David1991 wrote:
all good points. Do you feel that splits (or at least higher volume/intensity, less frequency) are more effective for most beginners (those around 2 years of training) as well?

for me i did the opposite of typical lifters just from lack of knowledge for the most part. i started my first bulk with a chest/back, legs, arms split with supersets for each muscle. now i’m doing an upper/lower split (from NROL by Alwyn Cosgrove) and prior to that i was doing full body for awhile. the more the routines are split the more fun they are IMO, i haven’t done an isolation exericise in so long :frowning: ! lol.
i think i may use your “how to design a good program” article once i’m finished with NROL. any recommendations on which of those hypertrophy splits would suit my level best?[/quote]

I feel that beginners who are/were not active will benefit more from starting with a higher frequency of work, to ‘‘learn’’ to use their body.

However if someone has a good athletic background, either way will be effective.

153

CT,

I’ve used the search and tried to search for an answer. I’m trying to gain LBM now that I’ve leaned out, but I’m wondering about one of my meals PWO. I’m following your carb cycling theory, and I get a big bowl of oatmeal (around 40g) for breakfast, about 40g dextrose immediately following a workout with my whey protein, but my PPWO MEAL is what I’m stuck with.

According your plan, my meal (around 1 hour after working out) should also contain some carbohydrates. Is there any reason I should really avoid white pasta during this meal? There is a nice little spaghetti joint that makes pasta really quick so I can get a meal in quickly not to long after my workout, it’s 2 chicken breasts and maybe around a cup, cup and 1/2 of white rigatoni. Other than that, I stay away from refined white carbs.

I was actually skipping the carbs during this meal, but it really has helped with my recovery and with my MMA sessions in the late evening. These 3 meals are really the only meals where I ingest carbs. Thanks a lot!

154

[quote]David1991 wrote:
all good points. Do you feel that splits (or at least higher volume/intensity, less frequency) are more effective for most beginners (those around 2 years of training) as well?

for me i did the opposite of typical lifters just from lack of knowledge for the most part. i started my first bulk with a chest/back, legs, arms split with supersets for each muscle. now i’m doing an upper/lower split (from NROL by Alwyn Cosgrove) and prior to that i was doing full body for awhile. the more the routines are split the more fun they are IMO, i haven’t done an isolation exericise in so long :frowning: ! lol.
i think i may use your “how to design a good program” article once i’m finished with NROL. any recommendations on which of those hypertrophy splits would suit my level best?[/quote]

Again, this will be covered in part 3 of my newest series. :wink:

155

coach,

when it comes to frequcency, intensity and volume, would you be able to share a brief synopsis on how we as trainers should be aware of the gender differences in respect to the freq, intens and volume?

thanks for your time in advance!

156

Mr. Thibaudeau,
I’m not sure if this is the correct place to ask my question, perhaps you’ll direct me to the appropriate forum should I be mistaken. I am on the 14th week of your hypermetabolic program following the 6 or 8 sets of the lower/upper body splits as per your suggestions.

I’ve continously made progress either by increasing weights, shortening rest intervals, getting in more work out of the lactate-iducing exercises. Needless to say, the sessions are brutal(I can’t seem to finish any sooner than 1-1.5 hours, each session, however!).

I’m also following your carb cycling for fat loss suggestions (with 2 high carb days, 2 mod carbs day, and 3 low carbs days), making consistent progress here a well with a 1-2 lbs loss each week. I’m not interested in competing any more (BB/figure), but if I were, I’d be 8-14 days out right now.

I’d like to continue this type of training on a body part split, but I’m not sure how to proceed as to how to incorporate the 15 and 30 min cardio sessions, as well as number of exercises to include per body part, etc. Can you please offer any guidance in this matter.

Thank you.

157

I have a couple of questions regarding HIIT that I can’t seem to find anywhere else.

I know you are not an advocate of HIIT while lo-carb dieting: what amount of carbs/day do you think is appropriate in order to get the most out of HIIT?

I assume PWO would be a Surge shake + BCAAs, is that right?

Finally, regarding intensity, is it more important to go all out for the prescribed amount of time, or is it more important to pace oneself so that he is covering about the same distance in the same time in each sprint (i.e., running at a 9/10 level of intensity).

158

I suspect that, from now, all that we ask you “will be covered in part X of my articles” haha!.

159

lol sorry i just felt an urge to post this based on our previous conversation

from one of CW’s articles that i found surprisingly one-dimensional/absolute: “Infrequent training regimens are a good marketing strategy, but the results suck. Those who believe that infrequent training plans are best should have a fountain dropped on their head.”

(again not looking for any arguments, i just found this humorous since its rare to see a good trainer [which i know he is] talk about there being only 1 way)

160

Thib,

For “general” fish oil recommendations, I’ve seen things such as 3-9 grams of combined EPA and DHA or 1 fish oil cap(with 4 Flameout approximating 10 “regular” caps) for every percentage point of a body fat percent measurement suggested.

Considering that those training for relative strength might need more DHA and others on a high volume block or with certain health issues might need more EPA to help modulate inflammation and improve insulin sensitivity, is there an effective way to customize and optimize total daily fish oil intake as well as the ratio of DHA to EPA that accounts for a person’s current health status and training goals/programming?