The Five Biggest Contradictions in Fitness
Latest Article

The Five Biggest Contradictions in Fitness

It’s no secret that when people contradict themselves, it has the effect of making the flaws in their actions or statements seem glaringly obvious. But what about when WE ourselves get caught contradicting ourselves by someone else?

By: Nick Tumminello Added: January 6th, 2014
More Recent Articles
Contrast Training for Size
By: Lee Boyce
An Interview with Marianne Kane of Girls Gone Strong
By: Jordan Syatt
What Supplements Should I be Taking? By: Jay Wainwright
Bench Like a Girl By: Julia Ladewski
Some Thoughts on Building a Big Pull By: Christopher Mason

Facebook Join Facebook Group       Twitter Follow on Twitter       rss Subscribe via RSS
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 26
  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    15

    How much excercise is enough?

    Here is another chapter from my free journal. drmarkp

    Chapter 13
    Your exercise thermostat, how much is enough?


    How much exercise is enough? The answers to this question are elusive, and attempts to find them are intangible without first considering proper applications of volume, intensity, frequency and the momentum (impetus) of exercise.
    Establishing the ideal “dose” of exercise is first determined by finding the most effective portal possible for bringing the target muscle to its full “saturation point”. By this I am referring to the point where the target muscle attains its maximum possible state of congestion (pump) while subsequently losing its ability to further respond to additional properly applied exercise. Having achieved this “state”, additional exercise is no longer necessary nor will it even be desired. The actual numbers of sets are secondary to the fashion by which they should be performed.
    There is a delicate balance to consider between the above four variables (volume, intensity, frequency and momentum) stated in the first paragraph. While collectively they bring the muscles to a point of complete saturation, they are also the keys to answering the question of “how much”.
    The issue of volume like frequency; is straightforward from the onset and should be provided little leverage in the way of deviation. You can whittle away at these two variables only so much before going too far in the other direction. The new system advocates giant sets utilizing two to four exercises per grouping and performing no more than two clusters per muscle group. From a volume of exercise standpoint, never under any circumstances should a total of more than eight total working sets be performed for any individual muscle group; in some cases with more advanced individuals, even less total sets are probably better.
    From my experience, the muscles and their surrounding structures do not reach their point of full saturation after having performed only one single giant set. Even with extremely high intensity, it is not until the second “round” that you experience the deeper effects of complete muscle stimulation and congestion. During the first giant set the involved muscles and structures are still gaining momentum, building up to full strength in preparation for an even more explosive subsequent effort yet to come.
    To complete only one cycle of exercises would be stopping short of both the volume and accumulative intensity necessary to bring the muscle to complete threshold, thus preventing it from reaching its full saturation point. In most cases with a well conditioned individual, consistently high levels of intensity can be sustained for the entire duration of two complete “clusters” of exercises, each cluster containing giant sets for multiple muscle groups.
    Conversely, it is intensity itself that ultimately determines the ceiling of volume that is actually required, necessary, or even possible for achieving maximum growth stimulation. It is not a coincidence that in fact once having been achieved, this “ceiling” translates into all the volume that a trainee can even stand. For both volume and intensity there is a point of diminishing returns, both predicated on the other.
    Time is also a consideration for the enhancement of intensity; therefore a certain element of brevity must also be brought into the equation for best results. With high intensity training, only a small window of time is available to yield the greatest possible value of exercise. Actual workouts therefore must be short and brief. It is a quickened pace or momentum generated by the new system that enhances and literally enables levels of intensity beyond that which is normally attainable with conventional training methods; this intensity being best achieved by the application of “cluster training”.
    Intensity itself imposes limitations in workout brevity-brevity being a necessity when training with truly high intensity. Even as an increase in volume compromises intensity, intensity is also diminished when it is spread out over longer periods of time. In addition, as stated in earlier chapters, an increase in volume will also adversely affect overall recovery ability.
    But even an increase in workout momentum can become self-limiting. Decreasing elapsed workout time does not mean to suggest that an increase in workout speed be in order to the point of simply racing through the exercises. As discussed in earlier chapters, not only should all individual movements be performed with extreme intensity, but also strictly, methodically and deliberately. In addition, there should be rest period of about thirty seconds between regular sets. Rest between groups of exercises should be no more than the time required for a training partner to complete theirs. Following of these guidelines will provide everything in the way of the requirement for training brevity.
    While it is this very momentum that enables the target muscle to quickly achieve its saturation point, the “down side” afterward is equally as important an indicator that the exercise session was successful. After a properly performed workout, the subject should experience a tremendous degree of muscle “pumping”. This will soon be followed by a noticeably rapid loss of neuromuscular efficiency, as neurological pathways to the muscle become no longer able to fire at full threshold. Saturation point is reached when the highest possible percentage of muscle fibers have been affected to the point where these nerve pathways become irresponsive, and momentarily unable to generate the contractions necessary to further achieve high levels of intensity with additional sets. In other words, the muscles are shot! Even as the pump begins to rapidly dissipate, at this point you’ll know you’ve had enough.
    Longer workouts as with conventional systems, fail to send such discernable “signals” to indicate when a muscle has had enough exercise. Single sets initiate only a partial affect to exercise response, because the signal gets lost again before proceeding on to the next one. This happens because intensity becomes dispersed due to the inordinately long rest periods between sets that are usually associated with straight set systems. These on again/off again responses fail to permit the muscles neither to achieve maximum intensity nor reach saturation threshold, thus leaving the subject craving more exercise.
    The perceived signal instead, is to continue with more sets in order to produce a desired effect that can never be accomplished by training in this fashion. As a result, the subject is never quite sure whether or not they have performed enough volume of work. I call this “chasing the genie”; the resulting excessive volume leading to over training that taxes the overall systems recovery reserves.
    In regards to the question “how much is enough”; we must first ask the question “how much can you stand”? Brief and intense training as outlined by the new system, requires high levels of conditioning and muscular endurance. A trainee must first acquire the conditioning necessary to generate and sustain the high levels of intensity necessary for maximum growth stimulation. Until a high level of conditioning is acquired, it will be difficult if not impossible to properly perform “enough” exercise (whether it is too much or too little) without the proper physical conditioning to do so.
    By training in the fashion outlined by the new system, a healthy individual will quickly improve their levels of muscular conditioning and endurance. As a subjects conditioning improves, so will their potential for increased intensity as well as their ability to recover between sets; giant and cluster sets opening the floodgates to intensity.
    The ability of each individual muscle group to adequately recover from exercise is contingent upon the ability of the entire system to recover as a unit from the accumulative effects of exercise. The body requires adequate recovery time between individual workouts for the sake of the systems overall recovery as well as between the individual muscle groups themselves-for the sake of their own. We have already established that for best results, each muscle group should be trained about once a week almost without exception-using a three-way split routine. A complete layoff may be indicated from time to time however; for example, taking a week or so off once every five or six months. Occasionally the most important consideration for the recovery from exercise is the complete abstinence from exercise.
    For reasons stated above, the addition of weekly training days such as that, which occurs by splitting the body into more than four workouts per week, is always a mistake. This forces the body to do two things, first; it increases the overall volume of exercise creating inroads into systems recovery reserves, and second; causes overlapping indirect effects of exercise that cut into the recovery time for the individual muscle groups themselves. Increases in frequency and volume never compensate for a lack of intensity and always result in over training.
    In chapter 12 I outlined two leg workouts, versions A and B using the new system. On the “heavy” day after having performed two cycles of leg presses and hack squats, I finish up with two straight sets of Smith machine full squats, the last set being followed by a drop set. Having been thoroughly primed by the preceding two cycles of exercises, the brutality of these sets of squats are now enhanced considerably.
    This means that two sets of full squats are being performed every other leg workout totaling up to only four sets of squats per month! The maximum possible benefits that can be derived from squats will be yielded by rotating them in this fashion, and poundage’s utilized will increase steadily as will those for all other associated exercises.
    To claim that the performance of four total sets of back squats per month is adequate under any other circumstances would be ludicrous, but in fact when properly integrated with the new system-they are. In any case, to perform more would only compromise intensity, and contribute little to nothing to enhance the value of full squats.
    Yet four sets of full squats per month, per week or even per day, will accomplish little on their own merit without combining them with other leg exercises as applied by the principles outlined with the new system. Combined, they’re synergistic effects facilitate the tremendous growth promoting effects of squats; the forthcoming results certainly qualifying four sets of full squats per month as being -enough.
    Lacking training knowledge during my early training days, I became a slave to squats. If I wasn’t full squatting I was front squatting with maximum poundage’s every single leg workout, twice a week. While I became a fairly strong squatter, I was never able to develop the desired fullness or sweep to my thighs that I wanted. I now realize that although I had always trained my legs till failure, I came nowhere near reaching a degree of true intensity that is the benchmark for achieving outstanding results. Even if I had understood then, how to effectively apply true intensity in the first place, it could never have been achieved while training each muscle group twice a week anyway.
    The information in this chapter is not meant to imply that the value of quality training lies merely on the merit of low volume. On the contrary, as much volume as possible should be performed with extremely high intensity. It just so happens that under these conditions, the volume of exercise that is possible happens not to be that much.
    While it is not easy to determine a definitive number of sets ideally required stimulate growth, it is clear that some muscle groups are able to stand a greater volume of exercise and intensity than others. For example, it seems that the calves require a greater number of high intensity sets in order to reach their “saturation point”. Forearms too seem to be able to withstand a greater number of sets. So both forearms and calves seem to respond particularly well to a higher that usual number of sets. I’ve noticed that triceps and deltoids seem to be able to stand a little more work as well. Perhaps it depends on individual responsiveness to these areas and how they are combined with other muscle groups.
    In the overall scheme of things, there seems to be little danger of over training smaller muscle groups by performing a higher than usual number of sets for them; being smaller, they do not impose such high demands as to adversely affect overall systems recovery.
    This theory is contrary to what is preached by some proponents who claim that larger muscle groups can actually stand, and therefore respond better to higher volume. Well if that’s the case, then I’d like to drive them through two brutal giant sets for legs, using the new system and then ask the question; “which muscle groups do you think can stand the most exercise now, the larger ones or smaller ones?”
    Regardless, the most definitive assessment of the proper volume of exercise can only be determined after having applied the highest possible degrees of intensity while incorporating the many principles outlined in this journal. The muscle having reached its “saturation” point will ultimately determine its ceiling of volume, intensity, and therefore limitation of individual tolerance and responsiveness to exercise.
    In summary, in order to determine the quantity of exercise that is required for maximum growth stimulation; there are three factors that must be in place, first; that the highest possible levels of intensity must be attained, second; that volume must not compromise intensity, and third; that a level of conditioning must be attained to sustain both the desired momentum and intensity of exercise. Frequency of exercise becomes more of an established variable. Even as a subject becomes more advanced, frequency can only be extended so far within certain limitations before the amount of time elapsed between muscle groups becomes counterproductive.

  2.    Support Wannabebig and use AtLarge Nutrition Supplements!


  3. #2
    HomeYield WillKuenzel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    7,770
    This is the internet and the wonderful age of instant gratification. Without some shiny pictures of cute girls and a few more reliable sources, you're just sprouting **** that very few are going to read. You're rehashing very old information without much, if anything, new. Very few here are impressed with long posts and many of us just don't have time to read it. Unless you've recently trained Chuck Vogelpohl, Ronnie Coleman, or one of the World's Strongest Men, you have nothing insightful to offer.
    What is elite?
    "Those who work the hardest often complain the least." -anonymous
    Pain is inevitable. Suffering is optional.

  4. #3
    Grammar Nazi BG5150's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    3,979
    Big....wall....of....text....Mind....shutting....down....
    There are no stupid questions, just stupid people.
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three rights make a left.
    Are you eating while you are reading this? You should be... --hrdgain81
    Remember, kids, if you type well the Grammar Fairy will leave a quarter under your pillow. The Blue Book of Grammar and Punctuation

    Well, the Blog's (finally) back (again!): Love and Hope and Sex and Dreams Feel free to stop by and comment.
    Here is my newly-created World of Warcraft Blog: BG's WoW Blog. Once again, feel free to stop by and comment.

  5. #4
    Grammar Nazi BG5150's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    3,979
    If you are going to post such long, dense missives, please add some white space in there...jeez!
    Last edited by BG5150; 04-22-2008 at 10:58 AM.
    There are no stupid questions, just stupid people.
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three rights make a left.
    Are you eating while you are reading this? You should be... --hrdgain81
    Remember, kids, if you type well the Grammar Fairy will leave a quarter under your pillow. The Blue Book of Grammar and Punctuation

    Well, the Blog's (finally) back (again!): Love and Hope and Sex and Dreams Feel free to stop by and comment.
    Here is my newly-created World of Warcraft Blog: BG's WoW Blog. Once again, feel free to stop by and comment.

  6. #5
    As I Am Paul Stagg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Baltimore, MD, USA
    Posts
    8,669
    I started laughing right about here
    the momentum (impetus) of exercise.
    Continued here:
    Establishing the ideal “dose” of exercise is first determined by finding the most effective portal possible for bringing the target muscle to its full “saturation point”. By this I am referring to the point where the target muscle attains its maximum possible state of congestion (pump) while subsequently losing its ability to further respond to additional properly applied exercise. Having achieved this “state”, additional exercise is no longer necessary nor will it even be desired.
    Mostly because those two passages show remarkable physiological ignorance. Then I saw the suggestion to use Smith Machine Full Squats (quite an oxymoron) after leg presses and hack squats, and I just decided to try to sell YOU a book.

    I suggest you pick up Practical Programming by Mark Rippetoe, an actual strength coach, someone with actual credentials, and tangible results training hundreds, if not thousands, of athletes.

    You might find a more receptive audience for gurudom posting this over at getbig.com, where bro science is really appreciated.
    Squats work better than supplements.
    "You know, if I thought like that, I'd never put more than one plate on the bar for anything, I'd never use bands or chains, I'd never squat to parallel or below, and I'd never let out the slightest grunt when I lift. At some point in your lifting career (assuming you're planning on getting reasonably strong and big), you're going to have to accept that most people think you are some kind of freak." -Sensei
    "You're wrong, and I have a completely irrelevant pubmed abstract that may or may not say so." - Belial
    I has a blog.
    I has a facebook.

  7. #6
    YaRgHHhH~ Stray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Tampa, Florida
    Posts
    124
    If you squint the original post kinda looks like a big wall.
    -Stray-

    "When you are not practicing, remember, someone somewhere is practicing, and when you meet him he will win." - Ed Macauley

    I work out because I have two daughters.....and one day they'll be teenagers.

  8. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    4,548
    I would have liked to think this was trolling, but then I found your website. You wrote 21 chapters of that ****? Why aren't there any pictures of you to show for your 30 years competing in regional physique contests?

    Honestly, why do you think anyone would pay for any of this when it is all available for free on the internet? Some books, like Starting Strength and Practical Programming, are worth the money, but your book is nothing than a bunch of old T-Nation articles pasted together.

  9. #8
    Couldn't find IAMBUFF.COM
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    638
    On the “heavy” day after having performed two cycles of leg presses and hack squats, I finish up with two straight sets of Smith machine full squats, the last set being followed by a drop set. Having been thoroughly primed by the preceding two cycles of exercises, the brutality of these sets of squats are now enhanced considerably
    There are a lot of things wrong with this! A LOT!


    I read the whole thing...
    I have been studying for several days straight for an anatomy final and a clinicals test, at least 4 hours a night....and it was this thread that made my brain hurt!

  10. #9
    Bodybuilding Mythbuster
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Yeongsan. South Korea
    Posts
    5,907
    Quote Originally Posted by drmarkp View Post
    Here is another chapter from my free journal. drmarkp

    Chapter 13
    Your exercise thermostat, how much is enough?


    How much exercise is enough? The answers to this question are elusive, and attempts to find them are intangible without first considering proper applications of volume, intensity, frequency and the momentum (impetus) of exercise.
    Establishing the ideal “dose” of exercise is first determined by finding the most effective portal possible for bringing the target muscle to its full “saturation point”. By this I am referring to the point where the target muscle attains its maximum possible state of congestion (pump) while
    subsequently losing its ability to further respond to additional properly applied exercise. Having achieved this “state”, additional exercise is no longer necessary nor will it even be desired. The actual numbers of sets are secondary to the fashion by which they should be performed.

    Yet below you give a exact number of sets


    There is a delicate balance to consider between the above four variables (volume, intensity, frequency and momentum)

    Define "momentum". I take it you are not using it in the ordinary everyday sense?

    stated in the first paragraph. While collectively they bring the muscles to a point of complete saturation, they are also the keys to answering the question of “how much”.
    The issue of volume like frequency; is straightforward from the onset and should be provided little leverage in the way of deviation. You can whittle away at these two variables only so much before going too far in the other direction. The new system advocates giant sets utilizing two to four exercises per grouping and performing no more than two clusters per muscle group. From a volume of exercise standpoint, never under any circumstances should a total of more than eight total working sets be performed for any individual muscle group; in some cases with more advanced individuals, even less total sets are probably better.

    How did you arrive at this number?


    From my experience, the muscles and their surrounding structures do not reach their point of full saturation after having performed only one single giant set.

    What if the "giant set" consists of eight sets? Or the trainee is an advanced individual?

    Even with extremely high intensity, it is not until the second “round” that you experience the deeper effects of complete muscle stimulation and congestion.

    Proof? Anything to back up this claim?

    During the first giant set the involved muscles and structures are still gaining momentum, building up to full strength in preparation for an even more explosive subsequent effort yet to come.

    You are strongest when you are fresh. You don't get stronger throughout the workout...unless you are holding back.

    To complete only one cycle of exercises would be stopping short of both the volume and accumulative intensity necessary to bring the muscle to complete threshold, thus preventing it from reaching its full saturation point.

    Again, how do you know this?

    In most cases with a well conditioned individual, consistently high levels of intensity can be sustained for the entire duration of two complete “clusters” of exercises, each cluster containing giant sets for multiple muscle groups.
    Conversely, it is intensity itself that ultimately determines the ceiling of volume that is actually required, necessary, or even possible for achieving maximum growth stimulation. It is not a coincidence that in fact once having been achieved, this “ceiling” translates into all the volume that a trainee can even stand. For both volume and intensity there is a point of diminishing returns, both predicated on the other.
    Time is also a consideration for the enhancement of intensity; therefore a certain element of brevity must also be brought into the equation for best results. With high intensity training, only a small window of time is available to yield the greatest possible value of exercise. Actual workouts therefore must be short and brief. It is a quickened pace or momentum generated by the new system that enhances and literally enables levels of intensity beyond that which is normally attainable with conventional training methods; this intensity being best achieved by the application of “cluster training”.
    Intensity itself imposes limitations in workout brevity-brevity being a necessity when training with truly high intensity. Even as an increase in volume compromises intensity, intensity is also diminished when it is spread out over longer periods of time. In addition, as stated in earlier chapters, an increase in volume will also adversely affect overall recovery ability.
    But even an increase in workout momentum can become self-limiting. Decreasing elapsed workout time does not mean to suggest that an increase in workout speed be in order to the point of simply racing through the exercises. As discussed in earlier chapters, not only should all individual movements be performed with extreme intensity, but also strictly, methodically and deliberately. In addition, there should be rest period of about thirty seconds between regular sets.

    If you are training heavy (and I mean heavy relative to the individual) with squats or deadlifts you are very likely to need more than 30 seconds. If your goal is to build strength most certainly you will need more rest time.

    Rest between groups of exercises should be no more than the time required for a training partner to complete theirs. Following of these guidelines will provide everything in the way of the requirement for training brevity.
    While it is this very momentum that enables the target muscle to quickly achieve its saturation point, the “down side” afterward is equally as important an indicator that the exercise session was successful. After a properly performed workout, the subject should experience a tremendous degree of muscle “pumping”. This will soon be followed by a noticeably rapid loss of neuromuscular efficiency, as neurological pathways to the muscle become no longer able to fire at full threshold. Saturation point is reached when the highest possible percentage of muscle fibers have been affected to the point where these nerve pathways become irresponsive, and momentarily unable to generate the contractions necessary to further achieve high levels of intensity with additional sets. In other words, the muscles are shot! Even as the pump begins to rapidly dissipate, at this point you’ll know you’ve had enough.

    My goal is not to get a pump but to lift more weight than I did the last time.

    Longer workouts as with conventional systems, fail to send such discernable “signals” to indicate when a muscle has had enough exercise. Single sets initiate only a partial affect to exercise response, because the signal gets lost again before proceeding on to the next one. This happens because intensity becomes dispersed due to the inordinately long rest periods between sets that are usually associated with straight set systems.

    Incorrect. Intensity can increase with a longer rest set, because the muscles have had more time to prepare. And what signals are you talking about? I've never noticed my muscles doing semaphores.

    These on again/off again responses fail to permit the muscles neither to achieve maximum intensity nor reach saturation threshold, thus leaving the subject craving more exercise.
    The perceived signal instead, is to continue with more sets in order to produce a desired effect that can never be accomplished by training in this fashion. As a result, the subject is never quite sure whether or not they have performed enough volume of work. I call this “chasing the genie”; the resulting excessive volume leading to over training that taxes the overall systems recovery reserves.
    In regards to the question “how much is enough”; we must first ask the question “how much can you stand”? Brief and intense training as outlined by the new system, requires high levels of conditioning and muscular endurance. A trainee must first acquire the conditioning necessary to generate and sustain the high levels of intensity necessary for maximum growth stimulation. Until a high level of conditioning is acquired, it will be difficult if not impossible to properly perform “enough” exercise (whether it is too much or too little) without the proper physical conditioning to do so.
    By training in the fashion outlined by the new system, a healthy individual will quickly improve their levels of muscular conditioning and endurance. As a subjects conditioning improves, so will their potential for increased intensity as well as their ability to recover between sets; giant and cluster sets opening the floodgates to intensity.
    The ability of each individual muscle group to adequately recover from exercise is contingent upon the ability of the entire system to recover as a unit from the accumulative effects of exercise. The body requires adequate recovery time between individual workouts for the sake of the systems overall recovery as well as between the individual muscle groups themselves-for the sake of their own. We have already established that for best results, each muscle group should be trained about once a week almost without exception-using a three-way split routine.

    We haven't established anything of the sort.

    A complete layoff may be indicated from time to time however; for example, taking a week or so off once every five or six months. Occasionally the most important consideration for the recovery from exercise is the complete abstinence from exercise.
    For reasons stated above, the addition of weekly training days such as that, which occurs by splitting the body into more than four workouts per week, is always a mistake. This forces the body to do two things, first; it increases the overall volume of exercise

    Not necessarily. You could simply take the amount of volume that you did in three days and divide it up among 4 days.

    creating inroads into systems recovery reserves, and second; causes overlapping indirect effects of exercise that cut into the recovery time for the individual muscle groups themselves. Increases in frequency and volume never compensate for a lack of intensity and always result in over training.
    In chapter 12 I outlined two leg workouts, versions A and B using the new system. On the “heavy” day after having performed two cycles of leg presses and hack squats, I finish up with two straight sets of Smith machine full squats, the last set being followed by a drop set. Having been thoroughly primed by the preceding two cycles of exercises, the brutality of these sets of squats are now enhanced considerably.
    This means that two sets of full squats are being performed every other leg workout totaling up to only four sets of squats per month! The maximum possible benefits that can be derived from squats will be yielded by rotating them in this fashion, and poundage’s utilized will increase steadily as will those for all other associated exercises.
    To claim that the performance of four total sets of back squats per month is adequate under any other circumstances would be ludicrous,

    As would be a claim asserting that someone trains harder than anyone else when he only does 4 sets of SMITH MACHINE squats (not proper barbell squats) per month.

    but in fact when properly integrated with the new system-they are. In any case, to perform more would only compromise intensity, and contribute little to nothing to enhance the value of full squats.
    Yet four sets of full squats per month, per week or even per day, will accomplish little on their own merit without combining them with other leg exercises as applied by the principles outlined with the new system.

    Really? If by other "leg exercises" you mean deadlifts, then you are correct. Squats and deadlifts will give you the most bang for your buck in terms of leg size and strength. If they don't, then you're not doing them right.

    Combined, they’re synergistic effects facilitate the tremendous growth promoting effects of squats; the forthcoming results certainly qualifying four sets of full squats per month as being -enough.
    Lacking training knowledge during my early training days, I became a slave to squats. If I wasn’t full squatting I was front squatting with maximum poundage’s every single leg workout, twice a week. While I became a fairly strong squatter, I was never able to develop the desired fullness or sweep to my thighs that I wanted.

    Maybe it was the Smith machine that was holding you back?

    I now realize that although I had always trained my legs till failure,

    Or failure...if we are using the classic definition

    I came nowhere near reaching a degree of true intensity that is the benchmark for achieving outstanding results. Even if I had understood then, how to effectively apply true intensity in the first place, it could never have been achieved while training each muscle group twice a week anyway.

    First of all you shouldn't be training muscle groups. The body is a unit and should be trained as such. And secondly doing heavy compounds on separate days allows you to train your upper and lower body each twice a week with full intensity (provided you eat and rest right)


    The information in this chapter is not meant to imply that the value of quality training lies merely on the merit of low volume. On the contrary, as much volume as possible should be performed with extremely high intensity. It just so happens that under these conditions, the volume of exercise that is possible happens not to be that much.
    While it is not easy to determine a definitive number of sets ideally required stimulate growth,

    Yet you've managed to deduce that eight or so is the absolute standard

    it is clear that some muscle groups are able to stand a greater volume of exercise and intensity than others. For example, it seems that the calves require a greater number of high intensity sets in order to reach their “saturation point”. Forearms too seem to be able to withstand a greater number of sets. So both forearms and calves seem to respond particularly well to a higher that usual number of sets. I’ve noticed that triceps and deltoids seem to be able to stand a little more work as well. Perhaps it depends on individual responsiveness to these areas and how they are combined with other muscle groups.
    In the overall scheme of things, there seems to be little danger of over training smaller muscle groups by performing a higher than usual number of sets for them; being smaller, they do not impose such high demands as to adversely affect overall systems recovery.
    This theory is contrary to what is preached by some proponents who claim that larger muscle groups can actually stand, and therefore respond better to higher volume. Well if that’s the case, then I’d like to drive them through two brutal giant sets for legs, using the new system and then ask the question; “which muscle groups do you think can stand the most exercise now, the larger ones or smaller ones?”
    Regardless, the most definitive assessment of the proper volume of exercise can only be determined after having applied the highest possible degrees of intensity while incorporating the many principles outlined in this journal. The muscle having reached its “saturation” point will ultimately determine its ceiling of volume, intensity, and therefore limitation of individual tolerance and responsiveness to exercise.
    In summary, in order to determine the quantity of exercise that is required for maximum growth stimulation; there are three factors that must be in place, first; that the highest possible levels of intensity must be attained, second; that volume must not compromise intensity, and third; that a level of conditioning must be attained to sustain both the desired momentum and intensity of exercise. Frequency of exercise becomes more of an established variable. Even as a subject becomes more advanced, frequency can only be extended so far within certain limitations before the amount of time elapsed between muscle groups becomes counterproductive.
    It's at times like these that I become nostalgic for the days of PowerManDL
    Last edited by Songsangnim; 04-22-2008 at 11:54 PM.

  11. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    15

    Now what?

    Quote Originally Posted by HomeYield View Post
    This is the internet and the wonderful age of instant gratification. Without some shiny pictures of cute girls and a few more reliable sources, you're just sprouting **** that very few are going to read. You're rehashing very old information without much, if anything, new. Very few here are impressed with long posts and many of us just don't have time to read it. Unless you've recently trained Chuck Vogelpohl, Ronnie Coleman, or one of the World's Strongest Men, you have nothing insightful to offer.
    speak for yourself. no one asked you to read anything. did anyone ask for the Beatles credentials before they appeared on the Ed Sullivan show? why do you haters always have to throw **** in the game, and who the f**k are these so called trainers who trained all these so and sos anyway? there no better than you and me are. If i'm just re-hashing old information, then they ought to just shut down all these silly ass boards right now my prickly participant. I suggest you read on though, you might learn something.

    dr mark p

  12. #11
    student of the game Runty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Posts
    1,153
    Exactly what sort of doctor are you? You seem very mature for somebody with such a high level of education. Also, those "so called trainers" that were named above, are some of the best in the biz. They are quite better at what they do than you or me. At least your spelling and punctuation improved, well a little, from your last humongous post. Oh, and I'm pretty sure the people in charge of booking musical talent for the Ed Sullivan show probably checked up on them before booking them.
    "Fine, if I'm not allowed to light it on fire, can my imaginary friend?"

  13. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    15

    You don't know me!

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Stagg View Post
    I started laughing right about here


    Continued here:


    Mostly because those two passages show remarkable physiological ignorance. Then I saw the suggestion to use Smith Machine Full Squats (quite an oxymoron) after leg presses and hack squats, and I just decided to try to sell YOU a book.

    I suggest you pick up Practical Programming by Mark Rippetoe, an actual strength coach, someone with actual credentials, and tangible results training hundreds, if not thousands, of athletes.

    You might find a more receptive audience for gurudom posting this over at getbig.com, where bro science is really appreciated.
    Unless you had an opportunity to follow me through an actual workout, its no wonder that what i have to say is beyond your grasp. if being an armchair fan of your cookie cutter idols makes you comfortable, thats your choice. i obviously take you out of your comfort zone so you find me offensive.

    do you think i give a f**k who "approves" of what i write? a few months ago i never even knew that these internet bodybuilding boards existed, yet the thoughts that ive laid down represent years of work and experience. i'm not trying to win a popularity contest. yeah, i'm a nobody, so what! does that make me a lame? then i guess all the rest of you poster boys out there are lame too. so why the f**k have a board then? so haters like you can put us down for having an opinion? f**k that!

    Dont be a barking pussy chihauha. have enough humility to let a man say what he has to say. i'm not out to hurt or mislead anybody. i'm just trying to express myself, contribute and participate. this is the only opportunity ive had to share my knowledge. I'm only going to say this one time and one time only--trust me when i tell you that i am the real thing and that i know what the f**k i'm talking about. as far as credentials go in this business, all they're good for is to wipe your ass as far as i'm concerned.

    drmarkp

  14. #13
    Senior Member deeder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,258
    Quote Originally Posted by drmarkp View Post
    Unless you had an opportunity to follow me through an actual workout, its no wonder that what i have to say is beyond your grasp. if being an armchair fan of your cookie cutter idols makes you comfortable, thats your choice. i obviously take you out of your comfort zone so you find me offensive.

    do you think i give a f**k who "approves" of what i write? a few months ago i never even knew that these internet bodybuilding boards existed, yet the thoughts that ive laid down represent years of work and experience. i'm not trying to win a popularity contest. yeah, i'm a nobody, so what! does that make me a lame? then i guess all the rest of you poster boys out there are lame too. so why the f**k have a board then? so haters like you can put us down for having an opinion? f**k that!

    Dont be a barking pussy chihauha. have enough humility to let a man say what he has to say. i'm not out to hurt or mislead anybody. i'm just trying to express myself, contribute and participate. this is the only opportunity ive had to share my knowledge. I'm only going to say this one time and one time only--trust me when i tell you that i am the real thing and that i know what the f**k i'm talking about. as far as credentials go in this business, all they're good for is to wipe your ass as far as i'm concerned.

    drmarkp
    Lets see some pics?
    Full Powerlifting
    Squat - 595lbs -- 270kg -- Dec. 31, '09 (Provincial Record @100kg class)
    Bench - 374lbs -- 170kg -- Dec 20, '08 (@100kg class)
    Dead - 589lbs -- 267.5kg -- Dec 20, '08 (Provincial Record @100kg class)
    Total: 1537lbs -- 697.5kg -- Dec 20, '08 (Provincial Record @ 100kg class)
    Bench Only -- 358lbs -- 162.5kg -- Nov. 25, '07 (Provincial Record @ 90kg class)
    Bench Only -- 376lbs -- 171kg -- Jan. 26, '08 (Provincial Record @ 100kg class)

  15. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Runty View Post
    Exactly what sort of doctor are you? You seem very mature for somebody with such a high level of education. Also, those "so called trainers" that were named above, are some of the best in the biz. They are quite better at what they do than you or me. At least your spelling and punctuation improved, well a little, from your last humongous post. Oh, and I'm pretty sure the people in charge of booking musical talent for the Ed Sullivan show probably checked up on them before booking them.
    I'm a D.C.

    At 22 years old, you dont know your a** from a hole in the ground so why are you raggin' on me? Hey, did i ever say i was comparing myself to this trainer guy or that trainer guy? i'm not trying to be a trainer, i'm just having fun sharing the thoughts i believe in based on the observations and evidence that i have found.

    The reason why the posts are so long is because they are actually chapters. I did the best i could with punctuation, i'm not a writer and i know i'm weak in this area. hopefully the message still gets across.

    drmarkp

  16. #15
    Senior Member deeder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,258
    No pics drmarkp?

    What exactly are you supposed to be a doctor of? Outdated and over-rated training methods?
    Full Powerlifting
    Squat - 595lbs -- 270kg -- Dec. 31, '09 (Provincial Record @100kg class)
    Bench - 374lbs -- 170kg -- Dec 20, '08 (@100kg class)
    Dead - 589lbs -- 267.5kg -- Dec 20, '08 (Provincial Record @100kg class)
    Total: 1537lbs -- 697.5kg -- Dec 20, '08 (Provincial Record @ 100kg class)
    Bench Only -- 358lbs -- 162.5kg -- Nov. 25, '07 (Provincial Record @ 90kg class)
    Bench Only -- 376lbs -- 171kg -- Jan. 26, '08 (Provincial Record @ 100kg class)

  17. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    15

    Read on

    Quote Originally Posted by deeder View Post
    No pics drmarkp?

    What exactly are you supposed to be a doctor of? Outdated and over-rated training methods?
    I'm a D.C. Read on and you might learn of something you know nothing about. I have just posted chapter 17 of my free journal.

  18. #17
    Senior Member deeder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,258
    Quote Originally Posted by drmarkp View Post
    I'm a D.C. Read on and you might learn of something you know nothing about. I have just posted chapter 17 of my free journal.
    I don't know what D.C is supposed to stand for...

    Still no pictures?
    Full Powerlifting
    Squat - 595lbs -- 270kg -- Dec. 31, '09 (Provincial Record @100kg class)
    Bench - 374lbs -- 170kg -- Dec 20, '08 (@100kg class)
    Dead - 589lbs -- 267.5kg -- Dec 20, '08 (Provincial Record @100kg class)
    Total: 1537lbs -- 697.5kg -- Dec 20, '08 (Provincial Record @ 100kg class)
    Bench Only -- 358lbs -- 162.5kg -- Nov. 25, '07 (Provincial Record @ 90kg class)
    Bench Only -- 376lbs -- 171kg -- Jan. 26, '08 (Provincial Record @ 100kg class)

  19. #18
    THUNDER THIGHS! Fuzzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Adelaide, South Australia
    Posts
    2,794
    Can we just ban this idiot and be done with it/

    Waste of space
    Being a strong teenager means nothing.

    My wrists hurt, but some people don't have wrists to be sore. My knees have tendinitis, but some people don't have legs to get tendinitis in. I seem to be going backwards with training, yet some people can't even walk let alone lift 400 pounds on a daily basis.

    Dust out the vagina, and keep on lifting.

  20. #19
    Grammar Nazi BG5150's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    3,979
    Quote Originally Posted by Songsangnim View Post
    It's at times like these that I become nostalgic for the days of PowerManDL
    This made me laugh out loud.
    There are no stupid questions, just stupid people.
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three rights make a left.
    Are you eating while you are reading this? You should be... --hrdgain81
    Remember, kids, if you type well the Grammar Fairy will leave a quarter under your pillow. The Blue Book of Grammar and Punctuation

    Well, the Blog's (finally) back (again!): Love and Hope and Sex and Dreams Feel free to stop by and comment.
    Here is my newly-created World of Warcraft Blog: BG's WoW Blog. Once again, feel free to stop by and comment.

  21. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    4,548
    So how many copies of this book have you sold?

  22. #21
    Cardio bunny Alex.V's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Duke
    Posts
    49
    It's free.


    ...You get what you pay for.
    "Except Belial. He knows everything. This isn't a sarcastic attack, either. He really knows everything." -----Organichu
    "Alex is all knowing and perfect"-----Jane (loosely paraphrased)
    -515/745/700 bench/deadlift/squat
    Current mile time: 4:23
    Marathons: 3
    Century races: 3
    Ironmans: 1
    Ultramarathons: 1
    Current supps: http://www.atlargenutrition.com/prod...covery/results

  23. #22
    shot a man in reno Mik's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Neil's Garage
    Posts
    6,665
    Quote Originally Posted by Belial View Post
    It's free.
    Damnit!!!!! I just paid $19.99. At least I got a set of nevrdull steak knives since I was one of the first 20 callers.

  24. #23
    Couldn't find IAMBUFF.COM
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    638
    I would like to point out that at no time did Sangsonnim or I ever insult you.
    Also, I would like to continue discussing several things with you about your process of finding your outcomes.

  25. #24
    Moderator joey54's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Palmyra, PA
    Posts
    5,722
    Quote Originally Posted by nddillon View Post
    I would like to point out that at no time did Sangsonnim or I ever insult you.
    Also, I would like to continue discussing several things with you about your process of finding your outcomes.
    I would second that. And I wanna see some pics like Deeder asked for.


    AtLarge Nutrition Supplements – Get the best supplements and help support Wannabebig!

    Just get under the bar!

  26. #25
    Couldn't find IAMBUFF.COM
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    638
    “The issue of volume like frequency; is straightforward from the onset and should be provided little leverage in the way of deviation.”
    --Straightforward? The issue of volume and frequency relies on entirely too many variables to be considered straight forward: experience, previous injuries, diet, rest, age, sex, cardiovascular level, adipose level, metabolism, genetics, hematocrit level, …I can go on.

    “The new system advocates giant sets utilizing two to four exercises per grouping and performing no more than two clusters per muscle group”
    --What do you consider a muscle group? Do you train muscles or movements that enhance muscles?

    “From a volume of exercise standpoint, never under any circumstances should a total of more than eight total working sets be performed for any individual muscle group; in some cases with more advanced individuals, even less total sets are probably better.”
    -- So you are advocating the more advanced the individual the less the workload?

    “From my experience, the muscles and their surrounding structures do not reach their point of full saturation after having performed only one single giant set.”
    --You have never explained what muscle group you are referring to. Wouldn’t it be fair to say that if there was a saturation point threshold that it would be different in relevance to the muscle, further more the movement the muscle is experiencing.

    “Even with extremely high intensity, it is not until the second “round” that you experience the deeper effects of complete muscle stimulation and congestion.”
    --What are you using as an indicator for “complete muscle stimulation and congestion?” Where did this come from? Was this your experience? Does this differ from your “patients”?

    “During the first giant set the involved muscles and structures are still gaining momentum, building up to full strength in preparation for an even more explosive subsequent effort yet to come.”
    --Are you talking about a warm up set? Otherwise, as sangsing said “You are strongest when you are fresh. You don't get stronger throughout the workout” Nor would you be able to compare due to you advocating changing exercises to “peak your momentum”

    “To complete only one cycle of exercises would be stopping short of both the volume and accumulative intensity necessary to bring the muscle to complete threshold, thus preventing it from reaching its full saturation point.”
    --You cannot use such a blanket statement, you have to specify a particular exercise and muscle. One cycle of Bohemian wrist curls (negative only of course)…ok maybe you need more work. One “cycle” of Rack pulls and/or weighted back extensions and your erector spinae is not going to benefit from more work to bring it to “saturation point.”





    So with this knowledge you obtain could you deliver a sample routine for us to discuss?

Similar Threads

  1. Aerobic vs. Anaerobic Excercise (Cardio)
    By Workhorse in forum Powerlifting and Strength Training
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 01-12-2007, 01:50 AM
  2. Step-ups a good excercise for quads?
    By JConrad in forum Bodybuilding & Weight Training
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-04-2006, 08:42 AM
  3. Best Single Excercise
    By BigNic in forum Bodybuilding & Weight Training
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 08-02-2004, 02:16 PM
  4. Aerobic excercise with weight training?
    By kingkong888 in forum Bodybuilding & Weight Training
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-14-2003, 07:56 AM
  5. MD2000's Excercise and Dieting Routine!! Peep and Critique Please!
    By MD2000 in forum Bodybuilding & Weight Training
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-22-2003, 02:12 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •