Super Sets. How Do You Prefer To Do Them?

[Atomic Punk]

For example: I prefer to always start with a isolation movement, then super set that with a compound lift, in order to make the muscle you are isolating work harder, as you are adding muscle groups to assist the isolated one, as you switch to the compound lift. I have done supersetting routines for the last 2 days since I am on DNP, and am kinda worn out, so I wanted to get out of the gym asap. So anyhow here is what I did yesterday for Quads.

1st Super Set:

Isolator: Leg Extensions. Slow w/ pause at the top.

SS'ed With

Compound: Hack Squats: I prefer to not lock out at the top. Most importantly with these, I never pause at the top either. Rep up, then right back down in the hole without any pause. That makes it possible to go lighter(easier on the knees) and still remain at a lower rep range.

2nd Super Set:

Isolator: Extensions Again. Done with heavier weight this time, but no pause.

SS'ed With

Compound: Leg Presses: Same pausing principles as with hacks. No pause at the top. Very important.

Then I just finished up with 2 sets of Lunges. 10 sets total.


TODAY: Chest.

1st Super Set:

Dumbell Flies: Pause at the top. Stretch.

SS'ed With

Flat Bench Straightbar.

2nd Super Set:

Cable Incline Flies.

SS'ed With

Straight Bar Incline Bench:

2 Sets of heavy Dips: 10 sets total.

So anyhow, what do you think? And do you prefer to do them the same way as myself, or do you like to do your compound heavies first, then rep out with an iso second? Thanks for any imput.

 

[Texas Ranger]

Your routines look good to me, but I must ask what rep range do you use? Also, what are your goals with your routine?

 

[casualbb]

Uh...I always thought that superset meant to perform antagonistic movements, back-to-back, such as alternating bench press with barbell rows.

I think you're referring to prefatiguing a muscle, which...quite frankly... has zero actual muscle-building value. You're only preventing yourself from moving the weight that you could in a rested state.

 

[Atomic Punk]

Uh...I always thought that superset meant to perform antagonistic movements, back-to-back, such as alternating bench press with barbell rows.

I think you're referring to prefatiguing a muscle, which...quite frankly... has zero actual muscle-building value. You're only preventing yourself from moving the weight that you could in a rested state.

Push/Pull is what you are referring to in your first paragraph. I don't super set all the time. Just switiching it up for the week, as I stated clearly. And pre-fatiguing is exactly what I am doing bro. Why do you say that is has zero muscle building value? Your reasons for why that is aren't exacly crystal clear. "Because you are preventing yourself from doing what you would normally be able to in a rested state"?? I guess that disqualifies short rest periods, super/giant sets, 10 sets of 10, push/pulls, and pretty much anything BUT straight sets by your own reasoning. Not sure about your logic.

 

[casualbb]

Because muscle growth isn't at all related to fatigue. Pre-fatiguing a muscle just poops it out and makes it weaker for your compound set. You could be pushing more weight on the compounds if you didn't tire out beforehand. Weight is the the true stimulus of growth, not fatigue. Otherwise doing 100 bicep curls with 20 lb. to failure would cause growth. We know that it doesn't.

 

[Atomic Punk]

Because muscle growth isn't at all related to fatigue. Pre-fatiguing a muscle just poops it out and makes it weaker for your compound set. You could be pushing more weight on the compounds if you didn't tire out beforehand. Weight is the the true stimulus of growth, not fatigue. Otherwise doing 100 bicep curls with 20 lb. to failure would cause growth. We know that it doesn't.

So now what I've got, is that straight sets with heavy weight are the only way to grow. That's totally wrong brother. Variety is just as key as going heavy on basic exersises. Your body needs a switch every now & then, and if you are sticking to that theory of your way being the only way, you are definitely cheating yourself out of additional muscle stimuli. Heavy basics, or heavy only is NOT the only way.

 

[erowana]

If you use an exercise to isolate a muscle, then it would get fatigued and you will tend to use supporting muscles in the compound lifts, instead of the intended isolated muscle. you should do the compound first and then do a high rep isolation exercise which sounds more beneficial to me.

 

[Atomic Punk]

If you use an exercise to isolate a muscle, then it would get fatigued and you will tend to use supporting muscles in the compound lifts, instead of the intended isolated muscle. you should do the compound first and then do a high rep isolation exercise which sounds more beneficial to me.

The supporting muscles are added as you switch to the compound lift, yes. The theory being, that adding them will aid the targetted muscle group in additional work. I have done them the other way too though.

 

[casualbb]

That theory is bogus dude. Studies have shown that a fatigued muscle experiences experiences less EMG activation during a lift. Meaning: it's working less hard. Perceived load does not equal actual load.

 

[Atomic Punk]

That theory is bogus dude. Studies have shown that a fatigued muscle experiences experiences less EMG activation during a lift. Meaning: it's working less hard. Perceived load does not equal actual load.

You know what? Ok bro. Tell that to Mike Mentzer. His whole routine was based around these theories. I only use them only as a switch. I base my opinions about on practice. You're just quoting me theories. Plus, there's Mentzer as a prime example of their effectiveness, if you don't (or won't) take my word for it.

 

[casualbb]

Wow. Okay. Mentzer was plumb wrong most of his major assumptions. I thought most people nowadays knew that.

Mentzer was big into logic. Well guess what, logic doesn't make one correct. Logic gave Mentzer the ability to be wrong with authority.

 

[Atomic Punk]

Wow. Okay. Mentzer was plumb wrong most of his major assumptions. I thought most people nowadays knew that.

Mentzer was big into logic. Well guess what, logic doesn't make one correct. Logic gave Mentzer the ability to be wrong with authority.

Mentzer was wrong. O, wait I'm sorry..."plumb wrong". I guess "plumb" adds to the wrongness or something? 2nd place in the '80 Olympia(arguably should have won according to some people), but he was wrong. Because you say so. Whatever bro. You just took a giant verbal shit with this post.

 

[casualbb]

There's a difference between being uninformed and ignorant. The first means you don't know, but you're willing to listen. The second means that you don't know, and you think you're correct. Now listen for a second.

Here are some of Mentzers big and incorrect beliefs:

1. The body had some finite amount of recuperative ability that was exhausted at each bout:

No. All I can say is, the single-factor theory of fatigue has been long discounted.

2. You have to recover before you grow: No. They both happen simultaneously.

3. You only need one set: No, in many cases, especially strength training, one set is not sufficient to elicit desired adaptation.

4. Fatigue is the growth stimulus. Exercises must be taken to absolute failure. Obviously not; the biggest people here are generally doing subfailure routines such as WSB or DFHT.

Just take my word on those bro.

 

[bignate73]

heres a little cut and paste terminology from Weider:

Supersets (I & A) - Working opposing muscle groups in back-to-back fashion, taking as little rest as possible in between sets. Alternating sets between opposing muscle groups - such as biceps and triceps/chest and back - greatly increases intensity. When you train one muscle group, the other is recovering (sometimes even being stretched) as you complete the set. With two muscles or muscle groups being worked, more blood is pumped into the area.


Compound Sets (I & A) - Alternating two exercises for the same muscle group, taking as little rest as possible between each set. Each same-bodypart exercise fatigues the muscle involved in slightly different ways, so doing two exercises in a row with little rest inbetween achieves a deeper level of stimulation and muscle pump. Keep in mind that I do not personally agree with the rest aspect of this principle. That is just how Mr. Weider presented it.

Giant Sets (A) - Doing 4-6 exercises for the same body-part with as little rest between sets. Giant sets are used to create overwhelming stimulation to a body-part and totally exhaust the muscles involved. This technique should only be used occasionally as your body needs time to recover from this level of effort. This type of training is used more for muscular endurance and calorie burning then for putting on muscle size.

so basically, endurance and "pump" are the benefits to the last 2.

 

[AgainstAllOdds]

There's a difference between being uninformed and ignorant. The first means you don't know, but you're willing to listen. The second means that you don't know, and you think you're correct. Now listen for a second.

Here are some of Mentzers big and incorrect beliefs:

1. The body had some finite amount of recuperative ability that was exhausted at each bout:

No. All I can say is, the single-factor theory of fatigue has been long discounted.

2. You have to recover before you grow: No. They both happen simultaneously.

3. You only need one set: No, in many cases, especially strength training, one set is not sufficient to elicit desired adaptation.

4. Fatigue is the growth stimulus. Exercises must be taken to absolute failure. Obviously not; the biggest people here are generally doing subfailure routines such as WSB or DFHT.

Just take my word on those bro.

I'm not arguing with you, I'm just curious about your facts.

Post evidence that proves recovery and growth happen simultaneously. Also if you know of any real studies that prove how long normal recovery takes for a bodybuilding workout, please post that also.

You know what he meant by doing an isolation then doing a compoud, it's often called a superset even if it's not the correct term. And yes it does work to increase mitochondria density.

I don't see why saying the biggest people on here use subfailure routines proves him wrong. He was bigger than anyone here ever will be. There are other people who have done the same who are bigger than anyone here.

 

[bignate73]

He was bigger than anyone here ever will be. There are other people who have done the same who are bigger than anyone here.

you dont get over to the powerlifting board much do you?

 

[casualbb]

Post evidence that proves recovery and growth happen simultaneously. Also if you know of any real studies that prove how long normal recovery takes for a bodybuilding workout, please post that also.

Okay. Here are some:
MacDougall JD, Gibala MJ, Tarnopolsky MA, MacDonald JR, Interisano SA, Yarasheski KE. The time course for elevated muscle protein synthesis following heavy resistance exercise.
Can J Appl Physiol. 1995 Dec;20(4):480-6.

Phillips, S. M., K. D. Tipton, A. Aarsland, S. E. Wolf, and R. R. Wolfe. Mixed muscle protein synthesis and breakdown after resistance exercise in humans. Am. J. Physiol. 273 (Endocrinol. Metab. 36): E99-E107, 1997

You know what he meant by doing an isolation then doing a compoud, it's often called a superset even if it's not the correct term. And yes it does work to increase mitochondria density.

But so does anything with high reps. Still no need to superset isolations and compounds.

 

[Atomic Punk]

Why is it, that on every board there is that one guy who has to try to sound smarter than everyone else? So far what I have out of "casualbb" is that "Mike Mentzer didn't know what he was doing". "The only way to grow is by doing heavy basics with straight sets". And a basic overall condesending attitude towards anyone who questions his genuis. Whatever.

Bro, if you are such a genius, then why do you have a certification that an ape could've passed? Why not go with acsm? You too smart for them?

 

[AgainstAllOdds]

Why is it, that on every board, there is that one guy who has to try to sound smarter than everyone else? So far what I have out of "casualbb" is that "Mike Mentzer didn't know what he was doing". "The only way to grow is by doing heavy basics with straight sets". And a bacsic overall condesending attitude towards anyone who questions his genuis. Whatever.

I agree.

 

[Atomic Punk]

Not to mention this quote by Casualbb:

"Uh...I always thought that superset meant to perform antagonistic movements, back-to-back, such as alternating bench press with barbell rows.
"

So what do we have so far from caualbb? Let's RE-calcualte, shall we?

1. "Mike Mentzer didn't know what he was doing".
2. "Heavy straight sets are the only path to muscle growth". Paraphrasing.

and last but not least...........

3. "Uh...I always thought that superset meant to perform antagonistic movements, back-to-back, such as alternating bench press with barbell rows."

YOU DIDN'T even know what a fucking superset was in the first place! So for the future wannabe geniuses of the internet bb community take heed... if you want to sound smart, DON'T POST IF YOU ARE ACTUALLY STUPID. Either that or stick with simple cut & pasted material.

 

[Toozee]

Weird

 

[casualbb]

Bro, if you are such a genius, then why do you have a certification that an ape could've passed? Why not go with acsm? You too smart for them?

You know what? You pass that shit, then come back here and tell me it's one of the easiest certs.

YOU DIDN'T even know what a fucking superset was in the first place!

My quote:

Uh...I always thought that superset meant to perform antagonistic movements, back-to-back, such as alternating bench press with barbell rows.

Direct from weider:

Supersets (I & A) - Working opposing muscle groups in back-to-back fashion, taking as little rest as possible in between sets.

Forget NASM, you should check out Hooked On Phonics for starters.

"The only way to grow is by doing heavy basics with straight sets".

When did I say that? Look carefully. I said this: "I think you're referring to prefatiguing a muscle, which...quite frankly... has zero actual muscle-building value." I never said you won't grow from doing pre-fatigue stuff, I just said the act of prefatiguing itself adds nothing. Which is true.

I wasn't trying to be condescending at all, look back and see who started with the personal attacks (hint: it wasn't me). If someone's saying some incorrect shit, I'm gonna point that out.

 

[AgainstAllOdds]

You state things as fact when they aren't; they are just your opinion. There are too many variables in bodybuilding to say flat out: "That doesn't work. I'm 150lbs, probodybuilders train incorrectly. I have a NASM cert."

It doesn't matter the correct term. People often call a superset working 2 sets back to back regardless of muscle group, you need to chill out and stop being so critical. You look about 150lbs, obviously you haven't found a solid way to grow yet.

 

[Atomic Punk]

You state things as fact when they aren't; they are just your opinion. There are too many variables in bodybuilding to say flat out: "That doesn't work. I'm 150lbs, probodybuilders train incorrectly. I have a NASM cert."

It doesn't matter the correct term. People often call a superset working 2 sets back to back regardless of muscle group, you need to chill out and stop being so critical. You look about 150lbs, obviously you haven't found a solid way to grow yet.

I was thinking more like 135 pounds myself bro.

 

[casualbb]

This is what you guys resort to? Bashing my avatar? I was going to apologize for being hard on you but I don't think I want to anymore.

 

[AgainstAllOdds]

No one is resorting to anything. The fact is that you are small and think you know everything.

 

[casualbb]

I certainly don't think I know everything. I sure as hell know what I do know. I'm ready to back up most of what I say with references, because I know that on internet bodybuilding boards opinions run high and fact runs low.

If you'd like to debate facts, I'm game. But if you want to revive the "size = knowledge" debate, that's been done plenty of times.

 

[Debaser]

Atomicpunk and AgainstAllOdds, your logic seems to rest on little other than stupidity. I can't believe that there are still people out there that believe size dictates knowledge. You bash casualbb for the way he looks but he sure as hell knows a lot more than you guys; more than me as well. And I know an awful lot. We disagree on some things, but I don't use his pic as evidence against him. Some people are hardgainers, and some people have a much lower starting weight than others. If you knew he was about 90 lbs before he started training, would that affect your view of his knowledge? That would mean that by now he's put on 70+ lbs.

Supersets are completely unneccessary. Mentzer had his head on his shoulders on a few topics, but not so on many others. His concepts evolved into H.I.T., which is a much better (though not completely optimal) way to train for the average man compared to Weider principles.

Look at this way: if last week you bench pressed 300 lbs, what growth do you think a 150 lb bench would net you? Muscles respond to increased tension, not increased fatigue. If fatigue built muscle, then lumberjacks would have the biggest arms and rowing teams the largest backs. And doing hundreds of pushups every day would give you a massive chest. This isn't how it works.

You guys need to educate yourselves, you sound like high school jocks. What's next, are you going to say he's a fag, then insult his mama?

 

[louden_swain]

Supersetting can be used for:

Chest and Back
Triceps and Biceps
Lower back and Abs

Or one muscle group:

chest - bench presses and inclines
triceps - french presses and kick backs
triceps - lying french presses and close grip bench presses
quads - squats and leg extensions
lats - barbell rows and seated pulley rows
biceps - barbell curls and incline Db curls

Giant Sets:

are when you choose a muscle group such as chest:

Bench Presses
Incline DB Presses
Dumbbell Flyes
Cable Cross Overs

you work one exercise after another.

Both supersets and giant sets increase the intensity by decreasing the rest between sets.

 

[Toozee]

I agree w/ debaser. Most knowledgeable debates regarding training, or any other bb topic for that matter, usually have both sides presenting studies or some type of proof backing or showing more insight to that persons theories or ideas.
Casual seems to have done that.

The unfortunate response to that was ......well......nothing but "name calling". I think you gentlemen are better than that, and it would behove you to act so. So at this point go ahead and and at least agree to disagree.

-2Z-

 

[AgainstAllOdds]

Atomicpunk and AgainstAllOdds, your logic seems to rest on little other than stupidity. I can't believe that there are still people out there that believe size dictates knowledge. You bash casualbb for the way he looks but he sure as hell knows a lot more than you guys; more than me as well. And I know an awful lot. We disagree on some things, but I don't use his pic as evidence against him. Some people are hardgainers, and some people have a much lower starting weight than others. If you knew he was about 90 lbs before he started training, would that affect your view of his knowledge? That would mean that by now he's put on 70+ lbs.

Supersets are completely unneccessary. Mentzer had his head on his shoulders on a few topics, but not so on many others. His concepts evolved into H.I.T., which is a much better (though not completely optimal) way to train for the average man compared to Weider principles.

Look at this way: if last week you bench pressed 300 lbs, what growth do you think a 150 lb bench would net you? Muscles respond to increased tension, not increased fatigue. If fatigue built muscle, then lumberjacks would have the biggest arms and rowing teams the largest backs. And doing hundreds of pushups every day would give you a massive chest. This isn't how it works.

You guys need to educate yourselves, you sound like high school jocks. What's next, are you going to say he's a fag, then insult his mama?

If he started out at 90lbs, then he was grossly underweight in which case he probably just started eating food to get to 150lbs. Even without weight training that could be done.

I agree about tension -- I use TUT. But, you can prefatigue and many people believe in it. Your example of lumberjacks is terrible. Why? They do it too much -- so there body adapts to it. Prefatiguing is used to shock your muscles; whether you agree with it or not is irrelevant. It's used by many, many bodybuilders.

I'm more educated than you probably think -- maybe you shouldn't assume things.

Casual has a condescending attitude. His first post wasn't needed.

"Uh...I always thought that superset meant to perform antagonistic movements, back-to-back, such as alternating bench press with barbell rows.

I think you're referring to prefatiguing a muscle, which...quite frankly... has zero actual muscle-building value. You're only preventing yourself from moving the weight that you could in a rested state."

I consider that to be condescending. I know many experienced lifters that call supersets just using two exercises back to back; trisets using three exercises, etc. -- whether or not is a correct term really doesn't matter. People learn term names from who they're around -- a lot of high school coaches call that a superset.

What he should've said--if he doesn't want to come off as a condescending ass--is something along the lines of: I don't believe prefatiguing has a place in bodybuilding, blah blah blah.

As for supersets being useless -- have you ever trained with a real bodybuilder? You sound more like a powerlifter. Tension can be increased through different TUTS, not just through weight increase -- obviously someone benching 300lbs one week wouldn't be benching 150lbs the next. Progression is important but you can progress in many, many different ways.

Things great about supersets:

~Recruit more fibers -- supersets allow you to go heavy and high rep at the same time. So you can stimulate hypertrophy in most of your fast twitch fibers and some of your slower twitch muscle fibers. The more you stimulate the more growth you will experience!!

~Capillarization -- Vascularity not only a contributes to muscles overall size but also to how well the muscle functions. A pump will build more capillaries in a muscle, which gives it more size and also makes it more efficient at getting rid of waste products and pumping in needed substances for growth

 

[AgainstAllOdds]

Supersetting can be used for:

Chest and Back
Triceps and Biceps
Lower back and Abs

Or one muscle group:

chest - bench presses and inclines
triceps - french presses and kick backs
triceps - lying french presses and close grip bench presses
quads - squats and leg extensions
lats - barbell rows and seated pulley rows
biceps - barbell curls and incline Db curls

Giant Sets:

are when you choose a muscle group such as chest:

Bench Presses
Incline DB Presses
Dumbbell Flyes
Cable Cross Overs

you work one exercise after another.

Both supersets and giant sets increase the intensity by decreasing the rest between sets.

Giant sets are great.

 

[casualbb]

consider that to be condescending. I know many experienced lifters that call supersets just using two exercises back to back; trisets using three exercises, etc. -- whether or not is a correct term really doesn't matter. People learn term names from who they're around -- a lot of high school coaches call that a superset.

You're right: my tone in my first post was too antagonistic and I apologize. That still doesn't give you the right to jump in and start making things personal.

Yes, I'm still relatively little.

I started weight training seriously 10 months ago at 147 lbs. I was lucky I found HST so quickly because the attitude on their boards is "Can you back that up?" so most of what is agreed on has a good scientific basis. Now I'm about 170. I expect to be about 175 at about the one year mark, so 28 pounds is a solid gain.

Next time I'll be less condescending, but I would also like an apology.

 

[Atomic Punk]

You're right: my tone in my first post was too antagonistic and I apologize. That still doesn't give you the right to jump in and start making things personal.

Yes, I'm still relatively little.

I started weight training seriously 10 months ago at 147 lbs. I was lucky I found HST so quickly because the attitude on their boards is "Can you back that up?" so most of what is agreed on has a good scientific basis. Now I'm about 170. I expect to be about 175 at about the one year mark, so 28 pounds is a solid gain.

Next time I'll be less condescending, but I would also like an apology.

I apologize brother. I jumped the gun. To be honest about your physique bro-- you have the type that the majority of people whom I train, strive to achieve. I interviewed at a new gym today, and the personal training director & I, talked about the majority of people not wanting advice based on a Bodybuilders perspective, and how 99% of our clients do NOT like the "bodybuilder look" although he & I also agreed that we both prefer that look personally. Most clients want to be lean & muscular as you are. You look lean bro, and you're certainly not a stick by a long shot. Anyhow, you obviously don't have to be Gunter Schlierkamps size to know a thing or 2 about training. I actually wish I could stay as lean as you(I'm @ 10%). At my age, that part is the most difficult in the entire process in trying to achieve the perfect physique. O ya, and I also have no clue as to the difficulty of the NASM-CPT examination certification either bro. I can only speak for NSCA. I just said that to be an asshole, because I took offense to you disagreeing with my initial quotes. Bottom line: I certainly don't want to make any enemies here over something as trivial as how you define, perform, or view the effectiveness of, super-setting. So I'll call it water under the bridge if you will.

 

[bignate73]

ELITE FITNESS GROUP HUG!!!!



hehe. good to see things come together. we can agree to disagree, debate and learn from each other.

I have both NASM and NSCA. so i can see both sides of the story. i use weider principles and i use others that are more "recent" (i guess you could say)

lets all get along....and....

SHUT THE FUCK UP AND TRAIN!

hehe.

 

[casualbb]

Good call nate, and thanks atomic punk. Karma for that.

 

[Toozee]

I love you guys