Okay, so DFHT SUCKS

[Slyder190]

I've been trying out the DFHT program, as it seemed to be a cousin of the 5x5 madcow program. madcow's program is hands down one of the greates programs goin if you ask me. However, DFHT straight up sucks. It looked good on paper, and seemed to make sense from a scientific standpoint, but it just isn't a great program IMO. The principles behind the program, yes, I beleive in them and beleive they work. However, the way the DFHT Program is set up, doesn't seem to be a recipe for success. When i first looked at it, I wondered why deads and rows were done with reps of 5 when it's supposed to be a hypertrophy program. I also wondered why the hell deads and squats were done on the same day. (I know they are in 5x5, but it's set up with lower weights for the squats just to add volume and give overkill). I also wondered why the hell were so many low back exercises in this routine. I figured fuck it, if 5x5 worked so well, and they seem to be realted, I'll just do it and not try and tweek it or anything. Inhear a lot of feedback on the principles of loading and deloading, and with good reason, the system works. However, I never heard much feedback on the specific DFHT Program, and I think now I know why. So I am sure there are guys out there who loved 5x5 for the strength gains, but if you're looking for hypertrophy gains, this "related" program, DFHT, I'd recomend against it.

 

[Anthrax Invasion]

...What exactly went wrong with the routine? You ranted about quite a bit there. Is it mainly that it didn't produce the size gains you wanted? If so, that's a function of diet, not training.

 

[Jim Ouini]

Sorry to hear it didn't workout for ya. I'd planned on giving it a whirl after I finish my current deal.

 

[Slyder190]

...What exactly went wrong with the routine? You ranted about quite a bit there. Is it mainly that it didn't produce the size gains you wanted? If so, that's a function of diet, not training.

I know this. Maybe the scheme of the volume? Can't really put my finger on it. Even after coming off 2 weeks of deloading, and getting back into loading, lifts already seemed to stall out for the most part. Squats are the only lift that were really going up. I wasn't real fond of the set up to begin with, but I tried it anyway, as I figured of madcow recomended it, it had to be clutch. That was not the case however. And that's not to take anything away from Madcow, he's still the man IMO, but unfortunately, he himself did not design this program. Seems to really promote overtraining with myself, this program does. Just didn't seem to jack shit for the most part. I've done Needsize's 5x5, Madcow's 5x5, and DC Training. Right from the start each of these programs seemed to show results, either by strength or size or both, but DFHT, well, it just didn't happen.

 

[Anthrax Invasion]

How did you feel Needsize's 5x5 measure up to Madcow's 5x5? Which gave more gains in way of both strength and size? Any numbers to post up? Even averages in bodyweight or weight progressed in lifts?

 

[Madcow2]

I know this. Maybe the scheme of the volume? Can't really put my finger on it. Even after coming off 2 weeks of deloading, and getting back into loading, lifts already seemed to stall out for the most part. Squats are the only lift that were really going up. I wasn't real fond of the set up to begin with, but I tried it anyway, as I figured of madcow recomended it, it had to be clutch. That was not the case however. And that's not to take anything away from Madcow, he's still the man IMO, but unfortunately, he himself did not design this program. Seems to really promote overtraining with myself, this program does. Just didn't seem to jack shit for the most part. I've done Needsize's 5x5, Madcow's 5x5, and DC Training. Right from the start each of these programs seemed to show results, either by strength or size or both, but DFHT, well, it just didn't happen.

So one thing, if you used the periodized 5x5 and saw results right from the start...chances are you didn't really need a periodized program and were benefiting from increased frequency and workload on the core lifts (i.e. you might have gotten something from the rebound too but if you made linear progress during the first 4 weeks, this is the case). I have the periodized 5x5 set up for fairly low volume (i.e. like early periodization programs) so that people will still get results, not kill themselves, and can come from a bodybuilding background as long as they know the core exercises and have been training them for a while. This segways into DFHT.

DFHT, has gone through a few iterations and I think each one was to lower the volume and make it more accessible. Lots of guys have run it and done well and it was designed with feedback and input from some really sharp people. A number of people have also found it just too damn much and had to change it to suit their own tolerances - in contrast to the person who designed DFHT, those he consulted with, and the people who ran it, these people had a BBing background and hadn't been exposed to many programs like this before. Unfortunately, the issue is that workload and tolerance are very specific to experience and the individual. What is deloading for one person might be enough to kill another. Main issue was that the people using it were very experienced lifters with a lot of experience and some major capacity, as it trickled down it had to be scaled further and further back.

Takeaway, the base template you used is too much volume for you. Not sure if you have the word doc from my site but I think that was the original which means some people might find it a monster. This is sort of why 'cookie cutter' programs rarely get good results accross a broad range of people and why almost none of them vary any aspect of volume or workload other than weight lifted (i.e. frequency and volume are static for each person); that stuff makes it very individual and the hope is that the least common denominator will be good enough to work for most and the others deal with suboptimal results.

So anyway, this is why I always make the point of learning about your tolerances. You know the base 5x5 works okay and now you know DFHT is too much for you (believe me, I've been in the same boat before using a program from someone else and I was dead in a couple of weeks). So what you might do with a DFHT template is scale it back. The model is sound though, just too much loading for you to recover from and bounce back. The workouts Pendlay puts his more experienced lifters through would likely kill you also, nevertheless this doesn't mean the program is bad (he consistently gets excellent results) it's just inappropriate for you (a given individual at this point in time) based mainly on your past training experience and to a degree genetic makeup and psychology can play a part. Maybe see if the one posted at the online Core Magazine site is less volume for comparison.

 

[combat_action]

Yeah, I've been on it for over a month and it's perfect for me. I did scale back some volume on my own, and I've been steadily eating and gaining weight. I can handle a lot, and I still had to cut back some. I made a spreadsheet I'll pm you if you want. So far I love using it after the 5x5. The first week is killer going from 3x3 to 4x10 with a slew of exercises, but after the first week it ain't so bad.

BTW, I used the template from the Core magazine. I saw the original one somewhere else and there's no way I could ever do that. But, the core one is pretty open ended.

 

[Slyder190]

So one thing, if you used the periodized 5x5 and saw results right from the start...chances are you didn't really need a periodized program and were benefiting from increased frequency and workload on the core lifts (i.e. you might have gotten something from the rebound too but if you made linear progress during the first 4 weeks, this is the case). I have the periodized 5x5 set up for fairly low volume (i.e. like early periodization programs) so that people will still get results, not kill themselves, and can come from a bodybuilding background as long as they know the core exercises and have been training them for a while. This segways into DFHT.

DFHT, has gone through a few iterations and I think each one was to lower the volume and make it more accessible. Lots of guys have run it and done well and it was designed with feedback and input from some really sharp people. A number of people have also found it just too damn much and had to change it to suit their own tolerances - in contrast to the person who designed DFHT, those he consulted with, and the people who ran it, these people had a BBing background and hadn't been exposed to many programs like this before. Unfortunately, the issue is that workload and tolerance are very specific to experience and the individual. What is deloading for one person might be enough to kill another. Main issue was that the people using it were very experienced lifters with a lot of experience and some major capacity, as it trickled down it had to be scaled further and further back.

Takeaway, the base template you used is too much volume for you. Not sure if you have the word doc from my site but I think that was the original which means some people might find it a monster. This is sort of why 'cookie cutter' programs rarely get good results accross a broad range of people and why almost none of them vary any aspect of volume or workload other than weight lifted (i.e. frequency and volume are static for each person); that stuff makes it very individual and the hope is that the least common denominator will be good enough to work for most and the others deal with suboptimal results.

So anyway, this is why I always make the point of learning about your tolerances. You know the base 5x5 works okay and now you know DFHT is too much for you (believe me, I've been in the same boat before using a program from someone else and I was dead in a couple of weeks). So what you might do with a DFHT template is scale it back. The model is sound though, just too much loading for you to recover from and bounce back. The workouts Pendlay puts his more experienced lifters through would likely kill you also, nevertheless this doesn't mean the program is bad (he consistently gets excellent results) it's just inappropriate for you (a given individual at this point in time) based mainly on your past training experience and to a degree genetic makeup and psychology can play a part. Maybe see if the one posted at the online Core Magazine site is less volume for comparison.

I would have to really re-vamp a lot of it before I'd consider giving it another shot. Problem is, I'm set to start my cycle in a few weeks, so I really don't have enough to play around with the program now. I don't wanna be into my cycle and still playing with things, not knowing how I'll respond, and what I'm capable of naturally. What I've decided to do is once again run your 5x5 variation. With my cycle beginning and being clean for 9 months along with an increase in calories, hopefully I can put on size with the program this time and not just strength as was the case last time. BUT, last time I had wrapped up a cycle not too long before and I didn't want to shoot my calories up too high cuz I knew I was gonna have to start cutting for summer. I did keep every last pound I gained on my cycle though using this program and keeping calories the same as they were when my last cycle ended. I gained some SICK strength like I never had before naturally.

And it was the Core version of DFHT that I was using. Volume would have to be scaled back and I'd drop SOME of the low-back exercises, as well as change some sets from 3x5 and 5x5 to 4x10. Matt Reynolds mentioned using a lesser loading period and more of a deloading period depending on the individual, but I think he may have to let it be known, some of the overall volume may have to be scaled back for some individuals.

 

[Madcow2]

I would have to really re-vamp a lot of it before I'd consider giving it another shot. Problem is, I'm set to start my cycle in a few weeks, so I really don't have enough to play around with the program now. I don't wanna be into my cycle and still playing with things, not knowing how I'll respond, and what I'm capable of naturally. What I've decided to do is once again run your 5x5 variation. With my cycle beginning and being clean for 9 months along with an increase in calories, hopefully I can put on size with the program this time and not just strength as was the case last time. BUT, last time I had wrapped up a cycle not too long before and I didn't want to shoot my calories up too high cuz I knew I was gonna have to start cutting for summer. I did keep every last pound I gained on my cycle though using this program and keeping calories the same as they were when my last cycle ended. I gained some SICK strength like I never had before naturally.

And it was the Core version of DFHT that I was using. Volume would have to be scaled back and I'd drop SOME of the low-back exercises, as well as change some sets from 3x5 and 5x5 to 4x10. Matt Reynolds mentioned using a lesser loading period and more of a deloading period depending on the individual, but I think he may have to let it be known, some of the overall volume may have to be scaled back for some individuals.

You know my motto on gaining muscle. If you didn't gain any weight - fat or muscle caloric excess was not present. If there was bad training, you'd just have gotten fatter. If your strength shot up and you kept your gains post-cycle, that's a good sign it was really stimulative for you. Without calories in place to support growth though you're shooting blanks for hypertrophy.

Also, be careful about thinking 4x10 is making something easier all the time. Add up the workload to the body for the exercise. You are looking at 15 reps vs. 25 vs. 40. Depends on the weight you are using obviously but 4x10 is not always less taxing or fatiguing, just lower weight being used on each rep. Probably a very good read for you would be here, the calcs I did and the linked piece explain how workload is calculated and will give you a good framework to think about this stuff: http://www.elitefitness.com/forum/showpost.php?p=5017744&postcount=686

Sorry you got such bum results from all the work. It's actually a good experience though so you know what too much is like. I'll add some notes to that workout when I update the TOC.

 

[combat_action]

Hey Slyder, are you the same name at meso-rx.com? I ask because on those posts you were thinking way too much into what percentages to lift. Maybe something's off because it worked great for me and my buddies.

http://forum.mesomorphosis.com/showthread.php?t=134236977

http://elitefitness.com/forum/showthread.php?t=419102&page=1&pp=20

I reread your posts and maybe it's just somethings missing on your end?