Volume and training natural...

[superqt4u2nv]

Ok so I been here a while and have been reading a number of ladies logs and I got to say there is a whole lot of volume in some 20 sets per body part being that you are natural IMO you would gain muscle much better if you kept to a lower volume lead with core lifts (squat, bench and deadlifts.) That kinda volume in my mind will only lead to over training. This is not an attack on anyone just want to open up a dialogue and debate a little.
Me personally even when on I might do a max of 9-12 work sets per body part even less for smaller body parts like biceps and triceps. I come from a powerlifting back ground so I am not big on all the isolation exercise and for the most part I believe a lot are junk you are probably already hitting them with the core lifts so then your hit it twice. With all thing in life especially training I like the KISS approach.

 

[The Shadow]

I totally agree.

I have told some folks time and time and time again that at 20 sets per bodypart - you might be training hard...but you arent training smart

 

[Daisy_Girl]

especially training I like the KISS approach.

SERIOUSLY.

People seems to think that training needs to be complicated to work. They plan out these elaborate routines and then see little results.

If they would only focus on HARD, HEAVY training, and compound movements - things would likely improve. So many people do 3 sets of a compound movement and then 852 sets of isolation movements. WTF?

Not to mention you can cut your time in the gym IN HALF (or more) if you train smart. Lifting should not take 1-2 hours. In my opinion, 30-45 min is plenty if you are lifting heavy and smart.

 

[superqt4u2nv]

SERIOUSLY.

People seems to think that training needs to be complicated to work. They plan out these elaborate routines and then see little results.

If they would only focus on HARD, HEAVY training, and compound movements - things would likely improve. So many people do 3 sets of a compound movement and then 852 sets of isolation movements. WTF?

Not to mention you can cut your time in the gym IN HALF (or more) if you train smart. Lifting should not take 1-2 hours. In my opinion, 30-45 min is plenty if you are lifting heavy and smart.

Agreed 110% I rarely lifting more then 45 mintues the split I have now cut the already low volume I did in half. I tell you I am more sore after workouts then I have been in a long time. I make every rep every set count and push myself so after each work I know I couldn't do another set.

 

[the-short-one]

Before Sadow, I was working out for a couple of hours a night. I made some good gains this way (I was enhanced, or course) - but I did it primarly because I liked doing it. They weren't isolation exercises, tho - it was a lot of compound movments - rowing, squatting, etc.

This past week, I've been in and out pretty fast, and have been SORE.

 

[claire]

Most of my workouts take less than 90 minutes. That includes stretching, warmup, lifting and cardio. If I am in the gym longer it is because I am talking too much.

My workouts used to last over 2 hours (just lifting). I love the gym and was overtrained. If someone suggested a new exercise I would just add it to my list and not delete anything. I finally have a trainer that tells me exactly what to do. I receive a list of exercises along with sets and reps. He varies my volume weekly. When it is time for my low volume week my body needs it. I want to be lifting weights when I am in my 80s. So I need to be smart in the gym and not injure or burn myself out. It is hard to come to terms with more is not always better.

 

[Daisy_Girl]

Of course if you are including cardio and other things such as stretching, it will take longer. A GOOD weights-only workout should not take hours if your goal is muscle growth (natural people esp).

 

[T-Cake]

What I've learned recently is that you have to bulk up the muscle, like clay, and then sculpt it from there if you're looking for the definition/cuts.

I've been doing 8-12 rep sets with max volume for... 5 weeks now post-surgery. My legs are now not in proportion with my upper body because they're too bulked... so I'm now doing 20 rep sets for lower body to trim them back down.

So is there a compromise? Is what I just described the happy medium? I tend to go on 6 week rotations -- change it up, focus on 4 moves per body sector... and then maybe superset it for 6 weeks (which cuts back the time in the gym IMMENSELY -- I supersets!)... and now I'm down to cutting and 20 rep sets.

Is this to determine what routine is best? Or are we all just trying to find agreement that the shorter and more focused/goal-oriented the training session is, the better off the body will be?

Without cardio, my lift time is about 45 minutes to an hour depending on wait time for dbs, squat racks, etc. When I can fly from move to move and not have to run all over the gym looking for 20# dbs, it DEFINITELY saves time.

The days I have cardio too... that's at least 60 minutes more -- weekend days I'm in the gym 2.5 hours or so with everything. Talk about half the day feeling like it's gone! I just don't see a way around it though if I'm going as fast as I can.

 

[treilin]

I think there is a purpose for everything. I agree high volume all the time is counter productive. Used appropriately I think it has it's positive's. Let's say you want to overtrain a body part so it won't grow any more but to keep the current size or a tad smaller. What if the higher volume will help certain body parts come back into more symmetry with the rest of the body. Like people with larger legs then upper body, or vice versa. It will tend to recruit more of the slow twitch muscle fibers to possibly bring the size down. As a natural lifter we have to rely on tricks inside the gym to control the outcome.
I'm personally using it as a follow up to strength for a few weeks. So if just by incident my log was checked out, this week that's why you'll see in there. If you flipped back through the pages this is not something I do long-term. Believe me, I love strength. My thought is that I have just completed strength what's the best follow up, Hypertrophy.
I figure you can lift heavy and lift heavy.. and lift heavy.. but don't you think that by just lifting heavy you are also going to hit a point where you cannot adjust up?! Cycling different aspects will shock you and possibly stimulate growth. I think to much of any one thing is not good. IMO
I do agree too long of sessions at the gym are not good as well. I try and keep my work-out in the hour range.

 

[superqt4u2nv]

Yes the body does need a rest and a change you can't train heavy all the time but my point is why is somone doing 5 diffrennt exercise for say hams? There is simply no need for it. For example my weak area is shoulders and biceps, for shoulders even after hitting them hard I will rarely do more then 3-4 exercise for them on a down cycle. For biceps at most I might do 3 exercise but generally only 2 hitting it with more exercise and sets then that is simply overtraining. The gains you made will suffer because of that. I am also talking about the total number of sets not rep range like I said in the first post 20 sets for 1 muscle group why?

 

[treilin]

Yes the body does need a rest and a change you can't train heavy all the time but my point is why is somone doing 5 diffrennt exercise for say hams? There is simply no need for it. For example my weak area is shoulders and biceps, for shoulders even after hitting them hard I will rarely do more then 3-4 exercise for them on a down cycle. For biceps at most I might do 3 exercise but generally only 2 hitting it with more exercise and sets then that is simply overtraining. The gains you made will suffer because of that. I am also talking about the total number of sets not rep range like I said in the first post 20 sets for 1 muscle group why?

I see noone else has a comment. Different exercises for lets say hams to hit the muscles differently, and different aspects of the muscles. The Hamstrings are 3 different muscles (4 if you want to throw in Adductor Magnus which sometimes it is). Granted they all work together but a tad bit differently. Just because like in my log I may list deadlifts, or hamstring curls doesn't detail the actual degree difference between what I am doing. Like deads on riser, bent leg straight leg, SLDL or Romanian type, Partials or full movements. Different components hit different aspects. Hamstring curls on elbows toes pointed in or out... There are minute differences that can also be accomplished. So maybe you start out with the big exercises and then break down your way of fatiguing each part of the muscle so you up the reps change exercises or other variables.
Arms I typically don't do as much since they are hit with everything else. Back to my original post on doing more volume to try and diminish the degree of growth is what I am aiming for in my arms. My arms don't need to get any bigger at this point in direct relation to my legs.
Well that's all my opinion anyway. If someone else is doing anything differently then my reasoning I can't answer for them. Then again like I said in my other post this is not 'typical' training I do anyway.

 

[superqt4u2nv]

Hey maybe I am lazy but I just think it is a waist of time and energy assuming you’re doing SLDL proper form etc you’re hitting every part of the ham you do 3 good sets of that it is pretty burned out only need one set of say lying leg curls to kill them like I said just my opinion. I have never believed in the need to hit the muscle from every angle because I have felt compounds fatigue the area enough.
As for your comment on bring an area down I have always had to bring my legs down to match my upper body and I tried the 20 million set approach and it didn’t do squat. Only time I noticed the legs actually coming down is after time on the step mill.

 

[the-short-one]

Hey maybe I am lazy but I just think it is a waist of time and energy assuming you’re doing SLDL proper form etc you’re hitting every part of the ham you do 3 good sets of that it is pretty burned out only need one set of say lying leg curls to kill them like I said just my opinion. I have never believed in the need to hit the muscle from every angle because I have felt compounds fatigue the area enough.
As for your comment on bring an area down I have always had to bring my legs down to match my upper body and I tried the 20 million set approach and it didn’t do squat. Only time I noticed the legs actually coming down is after time on the step mill.

You won't have to worry about that anymore. Now, you can bring your upper body up to match your legs! Yay!!

 

[superqt4u2nv]

You won't have to worry about that anymore. Now, you can bring your upper body up to match your legs! Yay!!

That is much more fun Trying to kill my legs sucked working completely against my genetics.

 

[treilin]

Hey maybe I am lazy but I just think it is a waist of time and energy assuming you’re doing SLDL proper form etc you’re hitting every part of the ham you do 3 good sets of that it is pretty burned out only need one set of say lying leg curls to kill them like I said just my opinion. I have never believed in the need to hit the muscle from every angle because I have felt compounds fatigue the area enough.
As for your comment on bring an area down I have always had to bring my legs down to match my upper body and I tried the 20 million set approach and it didn’t do squat. Only time I noticed the legs actually coming down is after time on the step mill.

Well opinions are like you know what everyone has one... And for you maybe it is being lazy or think it's a waste but that's your opinion.

If I only did 3 sets of sldl or Romanians: I'm sorry but my legs would not be burnt out!! LMAO
When you start getting into the 300 plus numbers on deads, your upper body will give out before the legs. So what to do A) Pre fatigue the muscles B) up the volume/reps C) Switch around exercises D) manipulate tempo, rest, drop sets, reps, pyramid, wave, etc... etc.. My legs are way to strong to only be doing 3 sets to even see any type of growth. Upping the weight higher induces more of a risk of injury for my back and it's condition.

Again what works on your body is not the only way. That's why there is no cookie cutter plan or else we would all be able to obtain the exact same physique. This is what this site preaches for is "trying what works for you." Shadow has TSO on a certain plan and he even says this plan will 'NOT' work for everyone it is geared towards her specific body. Maybe high reps didn't do 'squat' for you, but I physically notice a difference from more reps on my arms, they do not grow under that environment which is proven for me over years', even back in the day pre-EF.

Everyone needs to think outside the box a tad and drop thinking there is only one approach to getting ripped.

 

[superqt4u2nv]

Everyone needs to think outside the box a tad and drop thinking there is only one approach to getting ripped.

Agreed

 

[the-short-one]

Well opinions are like you know what everyone has one... And for you maybe it is being lazy or think it's a waste but that's your opinion.

If I only did 3 sets of sldl or Romanians: I'm sorry but my legs would not be burnt out!! LMAO
When you start getting into the 300 plus numbers on deads, your upper body will give out before the legs. So what to do A) Pre fatigue the muscles B) up the volume/reps C) Switch around exercises D) manipulate tempo, rest, drop sets, reps, pyramid, wave, etc... etc.. My legs are way to strong to only be doing 3 sets to even see any type of growth. Upping the weight higher induces more of a risk of injury for my back and it's condition.

Again what works on your body is not the only way. That's why there is no cookie cutter plan or else we would all be able to obtain the exact same physique. This is what this site preaches for is "trying what works for you." Shadow has TSO on a certain plan and he even says this plan will 'NOT' work for everyone it is geared towards her specific body. Maybe high reps didn't do 'squat' for you, but I physically notice a difference from more reps on my arms, they do not grow under that environment which is proven for me over years', even back in the day pre-EF.

Everyone needs to think outside the box a tad and drop thinking there is only one approach to getting ripped.

I believe in high volume training for specific body parts that need 'catch up' or don't grow as easily. I spent all of last year doing this with my shoulders/arms. (My biceps are still lagging a little) It worked.

I agree that hvt definitely has it's uses - but it can be overdone. You are correct that the same plan of action does not work for everyone, and no plan of action works forever.

 

[caligirl]

That is much more fun Trying to kill my legs sucked working completely against my genetics.

Keyword, GENETICS !!

I'm ALL natty, and for me to gain muscle I have to train VERY hard, long and frequent... I also have to eat hella huge amounts of food. My body recovers fast, but needs to be seriously over stressed to actually SEE gains. it's what works for me.