Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

What constitutes overtraining

bigp3

New member
I think many people are confused and bewildered by the question of how many sets per body part should they do in a workout. I know I have asked myself this very thing many times. This seems to be the most common question that I hear from people that are beginner and intermediate bodybuilders/ weight trainers. Well, the more I thought about it, the more it became apparent to me that the answer is quite simple. You do enough to stimulate growth and allow yourself to recover in the shortest possible time so you can workout and grow again.

With this thought in mind, I found that it is possible to induce growth from just one set. Yes, I said it, one set. I know this is a taboo Mike Mentzer style of thinking, but it is the best way to train bar none in my opinion.

Let’s break this down for a second and understand the principles of why one set works. First off, I know that most of us experienced lifters have heard of the overload principle. This principle is key to my thinking. For those of you that have not let me explain. The overload principle simply states that all that is necessary to stimulate growth is an overload from the previous workout. I.E. Joe Blow benched 315 for 8 reps last week and he does 10 with it this week. This constitutes an overload and induces muscle growth. You say bullshit, right? Well hold your guns for a second tex, the overload principle has been scientifically proven and is accepted medically. It is also printed in many college medical text books. Go look.

Now, let’s go back to Joe Blow’s bench workout for a second. With the overload principle in mind and understood now, what is the point in Joe doing more sets of bench when he has already produced the stimulus to grow. I say it is pointless. What does Joe gain by doing more sets? Well let’s see, nothing. He has already produced the overload required to grow. What does Joe have to lose by doing more sets? Well for each additional set Joe does, he is increasing the trauma caused to the muscle and using more of his body’s resources to fuel the extra effort. What does this mean? It means that Joe has increased his recovery time from his workout. His body is going to need more time to repair than it would have with one set. This translates into Joe having to take an extra couple of days off to recover compared to if he just done one set. Well you say, so what, it is only a couple of days. You are exactly right a couple of days it is. Well over the course of a year those couple of days translate into months of lost training. Let’s say Joe can only train twice a two week span doing a high set workout as compared to being able to train 3 times in two weeks doing one set. Well that does not sound like all that much of a difference, but it is. Think about it, he can train 78 times using 1 set in a year as compared to 52 the high volume way. That is a 50% increase in his growth producing workouts per year. Yep that is right. 50%. You tell me which is more efficient. Remember this, bodybuilding is a game of detail and the small things you do each day or each week add up to major differences over the sum of a year.

An explanation on sets. When I say 1 set, I mean 1 work set per body part. I in no way expect you to come into the gym and put 315 on the bar and start benching it. Warm ups do not count as work sets. I say do as little as possibly needed to warm up, but don’t skip it.

Another note, one set per body part is not going to work if you are not giving 100% effort. It is going to be a waste of time. You have to put your balls into it ladies.

I know what I have just said is going to have a lot of you scratching your heads and saying I am an idiot. People are not receptive to change and never will be. They like to hold onto the things that they believe are true. Remember, it was a well known fact that the world was flat. People were chastised and locked away for life for believing otherwise. Keep and open mind and think critically about things.

Peace out,

P
 
nice piece of writing. yes, this way of training seems to be best, both on paper and with results (DC's training on this board, for example)
 
I only do 1-2 sets per exercise, 3 exercises per workout, 3 workouts per week. Guess what? I get stronger every fucking week. I'm only 20, and I can total almost 1,900 RAW, no wraps, no belt. This shit works people. Cut back on sets, and load up on calories, and see what happens.
 
Debaser,,,, lol
 
ive seen great gains on dc so far...weights have gone up every workout...havent hit a plateu in ANY exercise yet.
 
1 set is all i need to gain.

I have gained 10 quality lbs since Feb. . due to low volume. . I will never go back to high volume. . NEVER!!
 
everything works, but nothing works forever..

its a cliche but a goodie :D

I used to train like that - burned me out bigtime.
It doesn't take into account things like dominant fiber type etc.
Mixed and slow twitch guys can take a lot more abuse than fast twitch types.
If your nuerally effecient you'll make far greater inroads into your CNS recovery training like that.
 
Last edited:
what is the point in Joe doing more sets of bench when he has already produced the stimulus to grow

Because more sets produce more growth. It really depends what you're training for. For growth, I couldn't see doing more than three. For strength? 6-8 sets of triples isn't unheard of.

Low volume isn't the magic bullet of growth, high frequency and progressive load are. Low volume is necessary to maintain those for any reasonable time while avoiding overtraining.

Another note, one set per body part is not going to work if you are not giving 100% effort.

That's a complete lie. Sorry.

I know you love Mentzer, but there were some fundamental ideas which he simply got wrong.

It doesn't take into account things like dominant fiber type etc.
Mixed and slow twitch guys can take a lot more abuse than fast twitch types.
If your nuerally effecient you'll make far greater inroads into your CNS recovery training like that.

Colin -- I really think the fiber type thing is less important than you make it out to be. There's evidence that fiber makeup even changes depending on training. Neurological efficiency is also variable, increasing or decreasing depending on training.

-casual
 
slobberknocker said:
I only do 1-2 sets per exercise, 3 exercises per workout, 3 workouts per week. Guess what? I get stronger every fucking week. I'm only 20, and I can total almost 1,900 RAW, no wraps, no belt. This shit works people. Cut back on sets, and load up on calories, and see what happens.

Damn slobber, that's a hella raw total. You compete much?
 
I give absolutely no regard to fiber type. The weight progression is what matters, whether you're adding to your 20 rep squat or your 5 rep squat.
 
Debaser said:
I give absolutely no regard to fiber type. The weight progression is what matters, whether you're adding to your 20 rep squat or your 5 rep squat.


But that`s exactly what you`re doing when doing 20 reps or 5 reps. Stimulating those different fiber types.
 
I don't understand why it matters then. If I take my 20 rep squat to 400 lbs, my 5 rep squat will be increasing along with it. Similarly if I take my 5 rep to 600 lb my 20 rep will be increasing at the same time, even if I'm not doing 20 reps. 20 rep squats are down in iron history as one of the best mass builders ever, you think all the people that profited from them had the corresponding fiber type?
 
Debaser said:
I don't understand why it matters then. If I take my 20 rep squat to 400 lbs, my 5 rep squat will be increasing along with it. Similarly if I take my 5 rep to 600 lb my 20 rep will be increasing at the same time, even if I'm not doing 20 reps. 20 rep squats are down in iron history as one of the best mass builders ever, you think all the people that profited from them had the corresponding fiber type?


I am by no means an expert, but In regards to fiber types needing thier own stimulus, I would guess the people doing the 20 rep squats have been doing the 5 reppers and sorta stimulated the low rep fibers already (so to speak) Now that they`re doing 20 reps, it "wakes up" all the higher rep fibers and adds to the OVERALL muscle gain.

If someone was to only do 20 rep squats all the time, I would think they would make more gains if they went down to the 5`s. I doubt you could find someone who has ALWAYS done 20 reps and no less their whole lifting career. lol

I don`t think it`s that cut and dry, one or the other, but one CAN stress the different fibers. To help the overall muscle. IMO.
 
Fiber recruitment always starts with lower threshold fibers and goes to upper (unless you're doing uber-explosive speeds lifts, then it's only fast-twitch).

So for a lift if you're recruiting your fast twitch, you're also recruiting your slow-twitch, so it's pointless to deliberately do high reps in an effort to hit the slow twitch because they get recruited first regardless of weight.

Doing a 15RM vs a 5RM will probably recruit the same number of motor units, you'll just recruit fewer units per rep with the 15 than you will with the 5.

Doing 20 reps vs 5 reps trains the different energy pathways, though, which is a totally different thing. As to that, if you're a BB-er it doesn't matter, and if you do sports make it sports-specific (ie powerlifters do low reps, endurance athletes make sure to do some high reps)
 
casualbb said:
Fiber recruitment always starts with lower threshold fibers and goes to upper (unless you're doing uber-explosive speeds lifts, then it's only fast-twitch).

So for a lift if you're recruiting your fast twitch, you're also recruiting your slow-twitch, so it's pointless to deliberately do high reps in an effort to hit the slow twitch because they get recruited first regardless of weight.

Doing a 15RM vs a 5RM will probably recruit the same number of motor units, you'll just recruit fewer units per rep with the 15 than you will with the 5.

Doing 20 reps vs 5 reps trains the different energy pathways, though, which is a totally different thing. As to that, if you're a BB-er it doesn't matter, and if you do sports make it sports-specific (ie powerlifters do low reps, endurance athletes make sure to do some high reps)

Good info casual, So why do people do the 5X5 then do 3X8 or even do the 20 reppers for that matter? are they wasting thier time if they`re not using it for sport specific training?
 
Kinda. The endurance energy pathway is glycolysis/oxidative pathway. There's some evidence that the use of this pathway can slightly enhance hypertrophy. However I doubt most of the people doing it know that. They're either trying to train a slow fiber type or pursuing some kind of "burn" or extreme failure. So yes it helps but they're doing it for the wrong reasons.

You only need it if you're doing worksets of less than, say, 10 reps. But the effect I'm talking about is far from necessary. Obviously people get huge doing low reps. A lot of the HST people choose to do dropsets but that's because we're all perfectionists. :D
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom