high volume - high frequency

[heavy_duty]

any of you guys get big arms, legs or chest from working that body part often and lots of sets?

I have been seeing some dudes at the gym workin the shit out of their arms and the bastards have big ass arms. (seems like they work bi's 3x a week)

I have always subscribed to the "dont over train the arms" theory. (same said for abs)

thanks

 

[ninesecz]

here is my theory on that . they say only train each body part once a week. but have you ever seen for instance a guy who does roofing for a living? I know a couple guys that are pretty fukin big and they dont train just carrying bundles of shingles up a ladder all day have huge arms big legs and and good sized shoulders. I dont think it is bad to do arms 3 x a week as long as you dont kill your arms everytime you do them

 

[heavy_duty]

true that.

I forget not everybody trains to failure every work out.

 

[gettnlarge01]

If you recover quick enough to do it go ahead.At one time I was training legs twice a week with great results!!

 

[blut wump]

It's all a balance between intensity (% of 1-rep-max), volume (sets and reps) and frequency (#days per week). Olympic lifters, for example, often squat six days per week and often with morning and evening sessions but they'll do most of their work with relatively light weights.

My own rule on arm work is that it doesn't interfere with the large, compound exercises. It's not worth it to me to work biceps in isolation if it'll interfere with rowing or pullups, for example. Arms get a lot of stimulation just by being used in pressing and pulling exercises.

 

[OMEGA]

I am a fan of High intensity, Hi volume workouts AMD frequently.......

so many are friggen pussies in their training..........

I also believe that lifting TOO heavy is idiotic as well if you say your a bodybuilder

 

[theprofessor]

I am a fan of High intensity, Hi volume workouts AMD frequently.......

so many are friggen pussies in their training..........

I also believe that lifting TOO heavy is idiotic as well if you say your a bodybuilder

im not so sure if im buying that.... look at ronnie coleman for example...

 

[OMEGA]

im not so sure if im buying that.... look at ronnie coleman for example...

I meant to heavy relative to what you can actually do

 

[theprofessor]

I meant to heavy relative to what you can actually do

but you should always be trying to increase your weights... im sure ronnie didnt start of anywhere near what he's at now...
...i dont think there is such thing as working out too heavy... either you make the lift or you fail... if you make the lift... you get stronger and progress... if you dont... you try again...

 

[blut wump]

I meant to heavy relative to what you can actually do

Just so that we're all on the same page with terms...
That's what we call "high intensity"; a high percentage of your one-rep-max, ie heavy to what you can do.

If you push volume, intensity and frequency to high levels then you run into over-reaching then overtraining. Your body will call a halt to your workouts. As I mentioned in my earlier post, any workout program needs to find a balance in the ways that it manipulates those variables.

Of course, you then meld in the extra variables of food, rest, gear each of which helps to control your tolerances to the overall workload built from intensity, volume and frequency.

The majority of people who consider themselves to be bodybuilders tend to run low intensity, high volume workouts with many visits per week but low frequency on any given bodypart, often just once per week.

Strength athletes tend to work high frequency (on a lift rather than a muscle group) along with moderate to high intensity and moderate to low volume.