5X5 Question for Madcow or anyone that can answer..

[swordfish151]

First off let me tell you..i love the 5X5...not currently running it but will soon..i just had a general question to the "creator" of the 5X5...why squats 3X a week? Why not Bench 3X a week or squats 2X a week like everything else...just a question i pondered this morning...

 

[silver_shadow]

i'm thinking maybe as simple as more hormones and more strength/hypertrophy

 

[Guinness5.0]

In reference to the dual factor program, it's a matter of load. Squatting 3x/week is not the only way to go about it, it's jsut the way it's done in 5x5.

Also, there's the issue of priority - squats are the backbone of this and many other programs, so it follows that you'd want to do them as often as is possible. Benching plays second fiddle to squats, so they can be done less. It doesn't necessarily have to be that way all the time, but for the sake of simplicty the program is set up with squats as the most important movement.

If one needed to change this for a specific reason/purpose, accomodations could be made.

 

[Madcow2]

A lot of Starr's basic programs have squat, bench, and power clean 3x per week M/W/F (i.e. the big 3). This is just a different layout and I don't think most in the BBing world would accept just 3 lifts even with the row substituted for the clean. The squat is probably the most productive exercise for the majority of lifters. The whole body supports a high capacity for weight and ROM is very considerable. Get better at the squat, eat, and grow the whole body. The squat will facilitate gains in other lifts.

 

[djeclipse]

I would assume that it's becasue the legs are the biggest muscle in the body and therefore can take/requires the extra light work on wednesday. Keep in mind that the main lift in the madcow2 version of the 5x5 is the squat.

 

[nelmsjer]

The amount of muscular recruitment in a squat dwarfs the amount in a bench press, assuming your body is balanced. This creates a highly favorable adaptation response, to include hormones, the amount of post-exercise oxygen consumption (and associated number of caloried burned), greater potential for overall hypertrophy, etc. In essence, the body has a greater response to the stimulus of a squat, compared to the bench press.

 

[silver_shadow]

this is insightful... he mentions exactly "why squats?"
http://readthecore.com/200507/trenches.htm

 

[Anthrax Invasion]

The amount of muscular recruitment in a squat dwarfs the amount in a bench press, assuming your body is balanced. This creates a highly favorable adaptation response, to include hormones, the amount of post-exercise oxygen consumption (and associated number of caloried burned), greater potential for overall hypertrophy, etc. In essence, the body has a greater response to the stimulus of a squat, compared to the bench press.

There is no hormonal benefit from squatting. That myth has been dispelled already.

Post-exercise oxygen consumption? Yes, that's a great arguement for squats.

What greater potential for overall hypertrophy? Squats will hypertrophy the lower body, not the upper.

The lower body will have a greater response to the stimulus of a squat, just as the upper would for a bench or overhead press.

 

[silver_shadow]

There is no hormonal benefit from squatting. That myth has been dispelled already.

Post-exercise oxygen consumption? Yes, that's a great arguement for squats.

What greater potential for overall hypertrophy? Squats will hypertrophy the lower body, not the upper.

The lower body will have a greater response to the stimulus of a squat, just as the upper would for a bench or overhead press.

i'm curious to see what you based this on... not tryin to flame ya... just would like to know more.

 

[silver_shadow]

where's madcow? keep hitting him with the red button till he posts up
j/k

 

[blut wump]

The 5x5 does involve pressing 3x per week. The squats are set up to be heavy, light medium in load while the pressing cycle runs as medium, light heavy. The OHP by it's nature will be a lighter press than flat bench. Some sub incline for OHP which makes this clearer.

A better question might be why you're not pulling 3x per week and that's easily rectified by subbing cleans back in for rows.

 

[Anthrax Invasion]

i'm curious to see what you based this on... not tryin to flame ya... just would like to know more.

There may be a miniscule hormonal response, but the effects will be nominal in regards to hypertrophy. I believe there were a few abstracts on PubMed, as well as some stuff on www.hypertrophy-research.com. Search around, you'll find it. Sorry, I just don't feel like looking right now.

 

[Anthrax Invasion]

The 5x5 does involve pressing 3x per week. The squats are set up to be heavy, light medium in load while the pressing cycle runs as medium, light heavy. The OHP by it's nature will be a lighter press than flat bench. Some sub incline for OHP which makes this clearer.

A better question might be why you're not pulling 3x per week and that's easily rectified by subbing cleans back in for rows.

Rowing is still pulling. Cleans would likely be better to switch to once someone was ready to aim more towards functionality and athleticism. Not that rows won't assist in this regard, but they're more geared towards hypertrophy.

I'd say it'd be a good idea to switch over to olympic lifts once your desired size is reached, if your next goal is power.

On the flip side, I wouldn't aim for power first, unless you want minimal hypertrophy. Most people would be best suited training for size, which is easily maintained through power training, then going into the fun stuff.

 

[nelmsjer]

There is no hormonal benefit from squatting. That myth has been dispelled already.

Post-exercise oxygen consumption? Yes, that's a great arguement for squats.

What greater potential for overall hypertrophy? Squats will hypertrophy the lower body, not the upper.

The lower body will have a greater response to the stimulus of a squat, just as the upper would for a bench or overhead press.

Alright, I'm open-minded, but I have yet to hear about anything disproving the hormonal response that heavy lifting creates. Again, assuming appropriate body musculature balance, you will get heavier lifting from the squat than from the bench press.

In terms of greater overall hypertrophy, my response is based on his literal question, which is why 3x squat vs. 3x bench. Simply, greater overall muscle mass in the legs vs. upper body equals the "greater overall hypertrophy" I mentioned.

Going back to the squats and hormone issue... I completely recognize that this is anecdotal (albeit, heavily agreed upon across a wide coaching spectrum), but it seems that every high-end coach has suggested greater overall hypertrophy when squats are included in a program. You know... the proverbial "What is the best bicep exercise? Squats." paradigm. Is it due to a hormonal response to heavy lifting? The research seems to say so. Is it due to feedback mechanisms in the body that prevent any one muscular system from growing so large or powerful to create gross imbalances? Could be. I don't know what those mechanisms would be, but it seems possible.

Not excited. Open-minded. Curious, and looking forward to your response.

 

[Madcow2]

I could care less about the hormonal response. It may or may not be significant but it certainly has nothing to do with the reasoning (mine at least) and I've never been wedded to the post-workout hormonal theory but I tend not to give a shit about that stuff too much. The squat's effects are not limited to the lower body. It is a full body lift even if some of the muscles are used primarily for support and are not in full ROM. You take an untrained individual and have him only squat and watch what happens. I guarantee he doesn't wind up with big legs and no torso development. This is the whole reason why this lift is so good. I'm not saying that direct upper body work can be ignored, but I am saying that it stresses the overwhelming amount of muscle in the body as a unit and the body will adapt as such. It will facilitate progress in other lifts, not just because the legs are stronger but because the whole unit is fundementally stronger.

 

[silver_shadow]

I could care less about the hormonal response. It may or may not be significant but it certainly has nothing to do with the reasoning (mine at least) and I've never been wedded to the post-workout hormonal theory but I tend not to give a shit about that stuff too much. The squat's effects are not limited to the lower body. It is a full body lift even if some of the muscles are used primarily for support and are not in full ROM. You take an untrained individual and have him only squat and watch what happens. I guarantee he doesn't wind up with big legs and no torso development. This is the whole reason why this lift is so good. I'm not saying that direct upper body work can be ignored, but I am saying that it stresses the overwhelming amount of muscle in the body as a unit and the body will adapt as such. It will facilitate progress in other lifts, not just because the legs are stronger but because the whole unit is fundementally stronger.

hmmm.... i guess i won't have to press the red button now

sorry, but what is that theory u referred to?

 

[djeclipse]

hmmm.... i guess i won't have to press the red button now

sorry, but what is that theory u referred to?

Where is this red button and how do I go about getting one?

 

[silver_shadow]

Where is this red button and how do I go about getting one?

lol... i was referring to negative karma

 

[Anthrax Invasion]

Most growth is really from local factors. Isometrics, like the arms would receive in squats, wouldn't produce any growth in the upper body unless you were training a newbie, in which case, yes, squats will cause upper body hypertrophy. After you've passed the novice level, or even stepped a bit into it, you're not going to see anything from strictly isometrics.

That's not to say I don't love the squat. Still my favorite lift. I just think it's overrated at times.

 

[nelmsjer]

That's not to say I don't love the squat. Still my favorite lift. I just think it's overrated at times.

Fair enough. I appreciate the response.

 

[djeclipse]

lol... i was referring to negative karma

Oh, I thought it was a big red button in your room somewhere that when you push it, it signals madcow to come and answer your most dificult questions about training.

Kind of like the bat signal...

 

[silver_shadow]

Oh, I thought it was a big red button that whenyou push it, it signals madcow to come and answer your most dificult questions about training.

Kind of like the bat signal...

well it is the closest thing to that

 

[Madcow2]

hmmm.... i guess i won't have to press the red button now

sorry, but what is that theory u referred to?

All the typical crap you see about keeping workouts 45 minutes and all the rest of that. This is long term adaptation (at least beyond the novice level), your immediate post workout profile will mean jack shit. It's a feedback system anyway so there is autoregulation going on. People take these single very isolated points and extrapolate the hell out of them and think they can do 1000 and 1 things that will all matter. Maybe a few of them will make better than incidental impacts but nothing is going to change the primary relationship or alter things much - increase big lifts and eat. All the rest is small stuff and so many people are screwing up the big block so badly (or don't even know they should be working at it) that they have no business even thinking about minutia.

 

[Protobuilder]

Preach it brother. Great way to put it. Guys are scrambling left and right to find the trick exercise or time their pre-post workout nutrition just right, etc., and most of them just stare blankly if you ask them about cycling their %1RM or varying workload etc.

 

[Madcow2]

Most growth is really from local factors. Isometrics, like the arms would receive in squats, wouldn't produce any growth in the upper body unless you were training a newbie, in which case, yes, squats will cause upper body hypertrophy. After you've passed the novice level, or even stepped a bit into it, you're not going to see anything from strictly isometrics.

That's not to say I don't love the squat. Still my favorite lift. I just think it's overrated at times.

I really thinik you are thinking too much about the nature of the involvement of a single muscle in any single session of squats. It's the long term effect of increased load. You take a guy who squats 315x5 at 180, you make him only squat and get that lift up to 500 and increase his bodyweight by 40lbs over the span of a year or so (so 220lbs). There is absolutely zero chance of that muscle settling only on the legs. I'm not saying he's going to be maximally developed everywhere and have perfect symmetry and flowing lines but you can bet there will be significant muscle added to torso, core, and back. I imagine it will have a lesser impact on the chest, delts, and arms but some muscle growth will occure. The body has a knack for staying in some kind of relative balance and localized growth/isolation doesn't happen over the long term. You need the whole body to squat and the whole body will respond over time.