Super-compensation:
1 or 2 weeks of
-Undereating
-Double volume (over-reaching)
Then
1 to 2 weeks of
-Overeating
-Maintenance work
=
Supercompensation (i.e. more muscle mass added than steady state bodybuilding)
I’m wondering why you would undereat for two weeks. Why not eat at a surplus the whole time?
I imagine that you can’t pick and choose exactly when supercompensation occurs in your body, so you could be shortchanging yourself in those first two week cycles. And then you have to factor in how difficult it can be to progress strength wise with limited calories.
I’m not an expert, but I’d rather “overeat” the whole time and deload once in a while, preferably right before I feel my strength stalling.
[quote]Bonechiro wrote:
I’m wondering why you would undereat for two weeks. Why not eat at a surplus the whole time?
I imagine that you can’t pick and choose exactly when supercompensation occurs in your body, so you could be shortchanging yourself in those first two week cycles. And then you have to factor in how difficult it can be to progress strength wise with limited calories.
I’m not an expert, but I’d rather “overeat” the whole time and deload once in a while, preferably right before I feel my strength stalling.[/quote]
Undereating for less than 2 weeks shouldn’t effect strength/muscle TOO much (if at all). The point is to prime your body so it’ll “soak it up” when you overeat in the supercompensation phase.
Er, there already is a currently active thread about supercompensation 
Build your base before worrying about all this stuff.
It depends on what level of trainee you are. Pushing yourself into over training at a calorie deficit is an excellent way to come back bigger and stronger after a week of recovery and calorie surplus.
Like others have said, if you’re a beginner or intermediate then don’t worry about it. If you’re closer to being an advanced trainee or have plateaued then it’s definitely worth a shot at it.
Sasha
[quote]SashaG wrote:
It depends on what level of trainee you are. Pushing yourself into over training at a calorie deficit is an excellent way to come back bigger and stronger after a week of recovery and calorie surplus.
Like others have said, if you’re a beginner or intermediate then don’t worry about it. If you’re closer to being an advanced trainee or have plateaued then it’s definitely worth a shot at it.
Sasha
[/quote]
There MAY be 10-15 “advanced trainees” on this whole web site.
That means most of these threads don’t even need to be in this forum.
Unless people are making your muscles the topic of nearly every conversation, short changing your own gains by not eating enough for two weeks is retarded.
It is like everyone here thinks they can fly before they can even crawl.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
SashaG wrote:
It depends on what level of trainee you are. Pushing yourself into over training at a calorie deficit is an excellent way to come back bigger and stronger after a week of recovery and calorie surplus.
Like others have said, if you’re a beginner or intermediate then don’t worry about it. If you’re closer to being an advanced trainee or have plateaued then it’s definitely worth a shot at it.
Sasha
There MAY be 10-15 “advanced trainees” on this whole web site.
That means most of these threads don’t even need to be in this forum.
Unless people are making your muscles the topic of nearly every conversation, short changing your own gains by not eating enough for two weeks is retarded.
It is like everyone here thinks they can fly before they can even crawl.[/quote]
Not to mention that the idea itself is sort of a “take two steps back to take three forward” type of approach. Maybe there are some people who that would be appropriate for (though honestly I don’t know anyone who got to an impressive size who used that approach on a regular basis, if ever}.
Unless you are at such a point, you’re better off just taking it one step at a time. Bodybuilding is about consistent progress. It’s adding 1+1+1+1+1+1, etc… for years, which eventually adds up to big time progress. Don’t make it into rocket science.
Eat a caloric surplus, progressively add weight to the bar whenever possible, and rest long enough to allow your body to repair and improve itself between sessions. If you’ve got the funds, throw some supplements in there if you want. Everything else is just not worth worrying about for the majority of trainees.
[quote]its_just_me wrote:
Super-compensation:
1 or 2 weeks of
-Undereating
-Double volume (over-reaching)
Then
1 to 2 weeks of
-Overeating
-Maintenance work
=
Supercompensation (i.e. more muscle mass added than steady state bodybuilding)[/quote]
It looks like you’ve based this on the recent Get Lean Quick Scheme article. There are a couple of problems with trying to adapt this into a long-term, lean mass building plan.
John Paul Catanzaro states towards the end of the article that “at some point (like at day 3 or 4) the supercompensation window starts to wane, and you’ll likely want to start curtailing your intake of simple sugars, starches, and enormous portions”.
I can’t see how you’ve come up with a minimum of one week’s overeating when the author advises against it.
You also need to go back and look at what this article is designed for and who it is aimed at: it is primarily a fat loss program, and if you read carefully, it makes no promise of mass gain.
“Get ripped quick schemes are a lot like get rich schemes; they rarely work and usually backfire. But combining a smart plan with a little hard work and dietary discipline can go a long way towards putting the finishing touches on a physique that deserves a second look”.
Clearly this is meant as a short-term finisher to an already conditioned physique. It is not for everybody and not the best basis for a long term mass gaining program, IMO. I can’t see how you can go from one to the other.
[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
Professor X wrote:
SashaG wrote:
It depends on what level of trainee you are. Pushing yourself into over training at a calorie deficit is an excellent way to come back bigger and stronger after a week of recovery and calorie surplus.
Like others have said, if you’re a beginner or intermediate then don’t worry about it. If you’re closer to being an advanced trainee or have plateaued then it’s definitely worth a shot at it.
Sasha
There MAY be 10-15 “advanced trainees” on this whole web site.
That means most of these threads don’t even need to be in this forum.
Unless people are making your muscles the topic of nearly every conversation, short changing your own gains by not eating enough for two weeks is retarded.
It is like everyone here thinks they can fly before they can even crawl.
Not to mention that the idea itself is sort of a “take two steps back to take three forward” type of approach. Maybe there are some people who that would be appropriate for (though honestly I don’t know anyone who got to an impressive size who used that approach on a regular basis, if ever}.
Unless you are at such a point, you’re better off just taking it one step at a time. Bodybuilding is about consistent progress. It’s adding 1+1+1+1+1+1, etc… for years, which eventually adds up to big time progress. Don’t make it into rocket science.
Eat a caloric surplus, progressively add weight to the bar whenever possible, and rest long enough to allow your body to repair and improve itself between sessions. If you’ve got the funds, throw some supplements in there if you want. Everything else is just not worth worrying about for the majority of trainees.[/quote]
Yup . . . I agree hence the qualification of being an intermediate-advanced trainee. I’ve been training for over 10 years and have recently been employing this technique with success. It tends to be a bi-product of the always needing to train obsession that a lot of us have.
On your point of consistency, yes, it’s relevant to beginner-intermediates but if it were true every consistent trainee would be 300+ pounds. Plateaus are a real thing and super-compensation is a great way to ‘slingshot’ (Abel shout out) past those.
Sasha
Sorry for making a repeat thread btw, got a bit overexcited there before searching LOL
Yeah the main reason why I’d be interested in ever doing the super-compensation thing is for muscle mass. As has been mentioned, I was wondering whether there was any point in someone doing it if they still has plenty strength to gain.
So far, I’m of the opinion (like has been said) that it’s like taking 2 steps backwards and 3 steps forwards…BUT, it’s only because of one popular and respectable author on here recommending it (to trainees of all levels) in his recent 12 week system, that I’ve raised the subject.
One other reason why I find it interesting is because in the past, I did far too much ONE week (about twice the normal workload)…and made good gains (while eating a lot as before)…but also, I made the same amount of gains on the week that I took it easy (did it only ONE set per exercise) and my appetite was still through the roof. This carried on for 9 days or so after the high volume week and slowly fizzled out. Although the 1 set per exercise was too little for hypertrophy (usually), because it was done after overtraining, I super-compensated…
The thing I’ve noticed is that if you over-reach (do more than you’re used to), you get great results…AS LONG as you “pull back” afterwards. Is that not better than just linear training? Any thoughts?
[quote]its_just_me wrote:
One other reason why I find it interesting is because in the past, I did far too much ONE week (about twice the normal workload)…and made good gains (while eating a lot as before)[/quote]
But what you’ve proposed in your original post is not what you did to make good gains; now you’ve added in the undereating phase. Focus on the section of your post I quoted. Ask yourself why you did twice the normal workload and stopped after the first week. Was it because you were physically or mentally fucked? Or did you stop because seven days were up? If you stopped because you planned to start on Monday, and quit on say, Saturday (as most people do) then that isn’t supercompensation : it’s just what you perceive it to be and that isn’t going to factor in to a long term plan, because sooner or later your body is going to adapt beyond what you throw at it over seven days. In other words, there is no progression.
Those two lines I quoted are not supercompensation, but they do involve lifting progressively and eating to support progression. It shouldn’t be ‘curious’ that you grew, because that’s what guys on this site tell you to do every day. When you stop progressing, you adjust one or the other (autoregulation - which is hey, hey! What the big guys do). It’s as simple as that.
P.S. Stop worrying about buzzwords. People put far too much faith in 'em.
[/quote]
Are you dankid’s alternate account?
[quote]roybot wrote:
But what you’ve proposed in your original post is not what you did to make good gains; now you’ve added in the undereating phase. Focus on the section of your post I quoted. Ask yourself why you did twice the normal workload and stopped after the first week. Was it because you were physically or mentally fucked? Or did you stop because seven days were up? If you stopped because you planned to start on Monday, and quit on say, Saturday (as most people do) then that isn’t supercompensation : it’s just what you perceive it to be and that isn’t going to factor in to a long term plan, because sooner or later your body is going to adapt beyond what you throw at it over seven days. In other words, there is no progression.
Those two lines I quoted are not supercompensation, but they do involve lifting progressively and eating to support progression. It shouldn’t be ‘curious’ that you grew, because that’s what guys on this site tell you to do every day. When you stop progressing, you adjust one or the other (autoregulation - which is hey, hey! What the big guys do). It’s as simple as that.
P.S. Stop worrying about buzzwords. People put far too much faith in 'em.
[/quote]
Yeah sorry, that is different to what I originally said (under-eating).
I need to look more into the auto-regulation thing - since I probably am crossing over on terms without knowing it.
On that week where I did double volume, I could not do it for longer than 7 days (or at least, it wouldn’t feel right at all). The low volume week was necessary for recovery - I guess that’s auto-regulation yeah? But what I’m saying is, the high volume (pretty intense over-reaching) allows pretty decent hypertrophy, but not for long (after that, a cruise period is needed, and then a repeat cycle can be made)…is this not better than slow progress with a more conservative approach (of steady volume) over weeks and weeks?
The thing that I’m talking about now (not under-eating) is something that I’ve read about before. I can’t remember what the book’s called, but it was based on African bodybuilders who have a different approach to training than the “West” (since they are more proponents of real-world-training rather than getting caught up in “scientific stuff”). They believe that basically, mainstream training is for “pussies” and that it does not teach that one needs to “pull back” (periodize properly, if you want to call it that). “They” teach that one needs to train intensely and frequently (over-reach), then follow it by a “cruise” period whereby the results of the over reaching manifest themselves. They believe that mainstream training teaches you to train in a way that makes the body simply adapt and not alter much. But, if you give your body more than it’s used to handling (via not just poundage progression, but volume), and then allow it to compensate (low volume cruise period)…you’ll get better results than just trying to do the “perfect” volume/intensity for weeks on end. In both phases, extremely high calories are used.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Are you dankid’s alternate account?
[/quote]
No…maybe we’ve just been reading the same crap
[quote]its_just_me wrote:
countingbeans wrote:
Are you dankid’s alternate account?
No…maybe we’ve just been reading the same crap[/quote]
That must be it
Seems like another great way to make a relatively simple task really really fuckin complicated.
Do you guys do this with a lot of other areas in life, like breakfast for example, do you hand make bread for toast and farm your own eggs before cooking them on an open fire?
[quote]stevo_ wrote:
Seems like another great way to make a relatively simple task really really fuckin complicated.
Do you guys do this with a lot of other areas in life, like breakfast for example, do you hand make bread for toast and farm your own eggs before cooking them on an open fire?[/quote]
Thanks for the idea!
No actually, I’m a very simple person
Maybe you should ask that to Christian T.?
On the one hand, when I suggested a progression method that at your twice-per-week schedule per bodypart would have had you taking only two weeks to move up from, for example, 4,4,4,4,5 on first establishing a new weight to 5,5,5,5,5 and thus be ready to move up in weight again, you said this wasn’t fast enough progression for you. That you were afraid that you were gaining faster than this.
Now if so, very good, but if so, then why not put that rate of progression into the bank rather than going for a scheme like this?
Even if you are mistaken and you only match this rate of progression rather than beat it, putting 10 lb (for example) more on the bar every 2 weeks WITHOUT your above scheme would add up to 250-260 lb more on the bar at the end of the year.
I’d understand your trying to think about tricky schemes if you were saying you had tried many things for an extended time, which on review were sensible, yet gains had slowed to a crawl. But from your previous posts that’s not the case.
[quote]its_just_me wrote:
stevo_ wrote:
Seems like another great way to make a relatively simple task really really fuckin complicated.
Do you guys do this with a lot of other areas in life, like breakfast for example, do you hand make bread for toast and farm your own eggs before cooking them on an open fire?
Thanks for the idea!
No actually, I’m a very simple person
Maybe you should ask that to Christian T.?[/quote]
Don’t think i haven’t considered it mate!
Kidding aside, i’m all for cutting edge methods etc, but i don’t think i would have ever go into lifting if i read the stuff thats around now days straight off the bat, would have just seemed way out of my my league in terms of complexity.
The last couple of years or so its just got out of control.
Good luck though.
[quote]its_just_me wrote:
if you give your body more than it’s used to handling (via not just poundage progression, but volume), and then allow it to compensate (low volume cruise period)…you’ll get better results than just trying to do the “perfect” volume/intensity for weeks on end. In both phases, extremely high calories are used.[/quote]
You need to stop thinking in these terms. Nobody can predict how fast they will progress unless they eat properly and train properly. Until you work that out, you’re not going anywhere.
You’re missing the point: the biggest guys got where they are because they focused on adjusting food intake and weight progression as and when required. They didn’t pre-plan supercompensation or whatever you want to call it, because if you are gaining muscular weight, you can be sure that ‘supercompensation’ has taken place. That’s about as simply as I can put it.
Why do you think that the big guys schedule rest days as and when required? It’s not because they fancy a day of chasing tail at the mall. Do you really believe that nutrition + rest + growth isn’t ‘supercompensation’?
Oh, and if you’ve read a book on gaining muscle, and somebody slags off somebody else in the same field, it’s pretty safe to say they don’t have your best interests at heart. More like they want you to buy their next book.
You seem like a sensible guy, so why don’t just train harder and eat more (which is what you’ve been doing), instead of worrying that you could be doing better. As long as you’re making consistent gains, that is all that matters.