Why can't high volume be equally if not better designed than a heavy compound session?
-
Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community!
-
Check Out IronMag Labs® KSM-66 Max - Recovery and Anabolic Growth Complex
How much time is too much time at the gym
- Thread starter millertime
- Start date
Why can't high volume be equally if not better designed than a heavy compound session?
Trapzilla, humour me please with a few more details about you and your training. You're clearly getting results and I'm not about to shoot you down - I'm just trying to wrap my head around where you're coming from. Here goes.
How old are you?
How old are your natural buddies who train this way?
Are you eating to gain, cutting, or at maintenance?
How long have you been training this way?
How old are you?
How old are your natural buddies who train this way?
Are you eating to gain, cutting, or at maintenance?
How long have you been training this way?
Sure thing Bulit
I'm 20
lets see, erm 15-18 year olds, 40 year olds, 30 year olds, and some other mid 20's
eating to gain at the moment but have trained my way whilst cutting
training this way for a little over 2 years
How much weight have you gained in this time?
The others, I actually don't want generalities. I'm 48 and female, and I've been at this since I was 38 - I only started training then and I can assure you, the one time I tried training this way I got very, very overtrained - and fast. I became so injured I had to take a break before resuming my lower-volume work. Younger people, especially young men - can often get away with more training volume while eating to gain, for a while anyway. Cutting is a different matter. Initially, you will find this is not a problem; however, I urge you to reconsider your strategy as you actually become lean. You'll see why if you choose not to heed this warning.
I want to know details about specific other individuals, not broad sweeping generalizations. Pick a few, and discuss how much weight they gained and over how long of a period, and of course how they look.
The others, I actually don't want generalities. I'm 48 and female, and I've been at this since I was 38 - I only started training then and I can assure you, the one time I tried training this way I got very, very overtrained - and fast. I became so injured I had to take a break before resuming my lower-volume work. Younger people, especially young men - can often get away with more training volume while eating to gain, for a while anyway. Cutting is a different matter. Initially, you will find this is not a problem; however, I urge you to reconsider your strategy as you actually become lean. You'll see why if you choose not to heed this warning.
I want to know details about specific other individuals, not broad sweeping generalizations. Pick a few, and discuss how much weight they gained and over how long of a period, and of course how they look.
Ok built sorry, was in abit of a rush
one guy-19 6 foot 1, starting weight when began to train with me 65kg-and 17% bodyfat current stats after close to a year and a half 84kg bodyweight 9% bodyfat-he refuses to do legs with me, very wide back and wide shoulders due to training not bone structure very narrow clavicles-cutting diet followed for the most part. strengh increase on bench from 50kg to 110kg for 1rm
2nd guy 32 6 foot 3, narrow clavicles again starting weight 12 stone small overall mass in 3 months 14 stone 3 lean bulking diet, very dense chest and delts with a very strong back,t-bar rows up from 3 plates to 6 for reps
3 rd guy 40, 5 foot 7, narrow clavicles yet very deep sternum around 13.5 stone starting weight after 4 months weight gain to 14.7 stone whilst recomping added mass to arms and back whislt reaching new tricep and quad striations
4 th guy 16 starting weight 72 kg, very wide clavicles and hips, slightly over weight, first 7 months bulked up to 90kg much greater leg size and back development, whilst dropping a few points bodyfat. then last 2 months cutting strength increased still, size increased further bodyfat dropping steadily.
can only be that precise on those i'm afraid
in this time i've gone from 25% bf at 5foot 9 and 85 kg to 13% bf at 5 foot 10 ish and 108.3 kg
Damn you were 25% body fat? I thought you started off skinny.
He gained 19kg in a year. He was a skinny, novice, 19 year old male on a pretty aggressive bulk, eating at a clear and definite surplus and he was most obviously under-trained to start. Anything he did would have worked, as long as he continued with this - you say cutting diet? You appear to be unclear on the concept of cutting. He gained weight, therefore this was a bulk.
Next:
Another novice who bulked for 3 months and gained 28 lbs in three months - again, a very pronounced surplus (lean bulk means nothing in this context btw - he ran a pronounced surplus and he was clearly underdeveloped to begin with at 6'3" and only 168 lbs to start holy FUCK he was thin! He must have been eating everything in sight - and he needs to keep going. He's only 196 lbs NOW!!!
Next:
And... another bulker! This guy has been at this for four months. At 5'7" and 190 lbs he could stand to lose some weight, not gain. I highly doubt he's recomped much if he's gained 17 lbs since then. My money says buddy's a strong, fat guy who needs to lose some weight. He will have to change his strategy when he does this.
Next:
How tall is this guy? He was only 158 lbs to start. At 198 lbs, he's now overweight? He gained too fast.
Regardless, he's sixteen. Virtually anything works on a sixteen-year-old, untrained male. And again, he bulked. He's only just started cutting. Let's see how that goes.
So you started out 5'9" and 188 lbs, with 141 lbs lean mass.
You are now 238 lbs, 13% bodyfat with 208 lbs lean mass? At 5'10". Really. Damn. I want whatever you're on. Seriously. How was your bodyfat determined?
Listen - so far, you've described very predictable results with a bunch of novice male lifters who were eating bulking diets, evidenced by the fact that they ALL GAINED WEIGHT.
You have done well - however, you are nowhere near lean yet; and I'd love to see pix of you now. 208 lbs of lean mass at 5'10" tall is one impressive physique!
I think it is worth mentioning he pyramids his volume. He starts off low and adds a few exercises/sets each week until he almost over trains and then takes a week off and starts back at low. At least that's what I got from a talk we had in PM. This is very different to me than just hitting 40 sets every other day for 12 weeks.
The pics won't happen because i'm not happy with my physique by a long shot. I wanna be 300lbs @ sub 5% bf on stage and until that time i've set down a mantra of no pics.
I appreciate the compliment though all the same.
I hope i'm not coming off as defensive, i'm just trying to fully explain in places, and i understand that my training so far is not set tested across all mediums and i would not suggest it for women even those chemically enhanced!
You most certainly do not understand what a cutting diet is. A cutting diet means you lose weight. Bulking means you gain weight.
Your skinny novice finally started eating, or he wouldn't have gained weight. You may not have clued into this, but weight gain is a product of diet, not training. This style of training may have made him hungrier, so he finally gained some weight. He's still skinny as fuck; he'll continue to grow well until he fills in some more; case in point: ihateschool.
A sixteen year old will grow on ANY training program if he eats, my friend. Again, there isn't a training plan in the world that will pack mass on ANYONE. Nobody gets big from the lifting. They get big from the eating. The lifting just tells the food where to go.
Thyroid failure means he would gain weight, not lose it. Maybe you mean he went hyperthyroid and had to have it killed? He'd go on thyroxine after that, for sure. I'm on thyroid replacement meds, myself. Back to your friend: the gear use changes all the rules - if he lost mass, he'll regain it quickly no matter what. Regained muscle and new muscle are very different beasties.
Listen, all your examples have been men who were eating at a surplus. They all grew because they ate more calories than they required. Those extra calories mitigated the possibility of overtraining. There's a famous line variously attributed to anybody famous that goes something like "there's no such thing as overtraining - just undereating."
I guarantee you, they could have done at least as well with less volume and smarter training, but this is working; a lot of things work. Not everything works optimally, and cutting is a very different process than bulking.
I can tell you, I don't drop my calories below maintenance when I'm very active recreationally. When I'm focused on leaning out, my training slows to a crawl. Very short workouts - toward the end this became a push, a pull and legs - 3x5-8 each, followed by a 20 minute walk, 3 times a week, with some walking on off-days and maybe a few 5-8 minute bursts of sprints in there somewhere. That's it.
When you've successfully dieted down, naturally, to where your abs look like how mine did when I successfully dieted down naturally, we'll talk some more about high-volume training while cutting. (If you go on gear, ignore that last statement - the rules change on gear)
In the meantime, if you enjoy this type of training and you're making gains you like, keep doing it. Just be aware that it may not be optimal for everyone, and that it might not be optimal for you after a while - as your conditioning base and strength improve you'll get more trashed from less volume simply because you'll be lifting heavier weights. Happens to everyone. As you become leaner, and even as you age, the rules change. I urge you to pay attention to those variables. While I often think some folks don't train with quite enough volume, I see the converse often as well.
Your skinny novice finally started eating, or he wouldn't have gained weight. You may not have clued into this, but weight gain is a product of diet, not training. This style of training may have made him hungrier, so he finally gained some weight. He's still skinny as fuck; he'll continue to grow well until he fills in some more; case in point: ihateschool.
A sixteen year old will grow on ANY training program if he eats, my friend. Again, there isn't a training plan in the world that will pack mass on ANYONE. Nobody gets big from the lifting. They get big from the eating. The lifting just tells the food where to go.
Thyroid failure means he would gain weight, not lose it. Maybe you mean he went hyperthyroid and had to have it killed? He'd go on thyroxine after that, for sure. I'm on thyroid replacement meds, myself. Back to your friend: the gear use changes all the rules - if he lost mass, he'll regain it quickly no matter what. Regained muscle and new muscle are very different beasties.
Listen, all your examples have been men who were eating at a surplus. They all grew because they ate more calories than they required. Those extra calories mitigated the possibility of overtraining. There's a famous line variously attributed to anybody famous that goes something like "there's no such thing as overtraining - just undereating."
I guarantee you, they could have done at least as well with less volume and smarter training, but this is working; a lot of things work. Not everything works optimally, and cutting is a very different process than bulking.
I can tell you, I don't drop my calories below maintenance when I'm very active recreationally. When I'm focused on leaning out, my training slows to a crawl. Very short workouts - toward the end this became a push, a pull and legs - 3x5-8 each, followed by a 20 minute walk, 3 times a week, with some walking on off-days and maybe a few 5-8 minute bursts of sprints in there somewhere. That's it.
When you've successfully dieted down, naturally, to where your abs look like how mine did when I successfully dieted down naturally, we'll talk some more about high-volume training while cutting. (If you go on gear, ignore that last statement - the rules change on gear)
In the meantime, if you enjoy this type of training and you're making gains you like, keep doing it. Just be aware that it may not be optimal for everyone, and that it might not be optimal for you after a while - as your conditioning base and strength improve you'll get more trashed from less volume simply because you'll be lifting heavier weights. Happens to everyone. As you become leaner, and even as you age, the rules change. I urge you to pay attention to those variables. While I often think some folks don't train with quite enough volume, I see the converse often as well.
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2002
- Messages
- 2,699
- Reaction score
- 24
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 50
- Location
- Running around somewhere
No offense bro, but if your seriously want to be 285 lbs of lean mass you're crazy. Jay Cutler competes at about 270. Have you been cycling for the past two years?
I'm only saying that because I've worked with guys who have been on cycle for 6-8 years and they have craploads of health problems, never mind barely being able to move properly without pain. Most of the time I'm giving them a workaround so that they can lift without further destroying their backs, knees and shoulders.
If you are 238 right now and 13% why not compete at light heavy and blow everyone off of the stage?
No offense bro, but if your seriously want to be 285 lbs of lean mass you're crazy. Jay Cutler competes at about 270. Have you been cycling for the past two years? well the first year was only orals really, but technically yes. and I do, ronnie stepped on stage at 290 ish and quincy taylor competed near or slightly over 300lbs
I'm only saying that because I've worked with guys who have been on cycle for 6-8 years and they have craploads of health problems, never mind barely being able to move properly without pain. Most of the time I'm giving them a workaround so that they can lift without further destroying their backs, knees and shoulders. i understand the health risks i'm undertaking i assure you of that but it something ijust have to do, there is a bit of pyschology behind it , that i'm not prepared to talk about in open forum.
If you are 238 right now and 13% why not compete at light heavy and blow everyone off of the stage?because that is not what i want to do, i want to compete at 300lbs and if i never get there the so be it.[/QUOTE]
You're running gear. Train any way you want - if you eat at a surplus, you'll grow. If you eat at a deficit, you'll lean out. I hope you're not still just running the orals; at twenty you don't really need anything but at least take care of yourself.
If you think I have a hate on for men, you really don't know me - my point was that men have at least 10-20 times the testosterone of women; there's a lot more to protect your lean mass than we have. Older men don't have as much testosterone as younger men; the rules change for them too - again, unless they're on gear.
I'm a fan of not fixing non-broken things. You like how you train, and your convenience sample of people who were either young novices or older recovering athletes over a short period of time demonstrated gains.
This gave me pause, however: "so if the lifting is inefficient the food will not be properly utilised and hence they will not grow, ergo the training is the direct growth medium."
- Do you mean to say that a skinny sixteen year old could eat at a surplus and not grow unless he lifts?
Also this one: "B.s. I know a god damn cut stop beating that drum! i've gotten down to a four pack abs-cutting and as far as i'm concerned a cutting diet is a caloric deficit which i use as about 500 cals below maintenace, which works for me. "
- You suggested your friend gained weight on a cutting diet. Do you also gain weight on a cutting diet?
If you think I have a hate on for men, you really don't know me - my point was that men have at least 10-20 times the testosterone of women; there's a lot more to protect your lean mass than we have. Older men don't have as much testosterone as younger men; the rules change for them too - again, unless they're on gear.
I'm a fan of not fixing non-broken things. You like how you train, and your convenience sample of people who were either young novices or older recovering athletes over a short period of time demonstrated gains.
This gave me pause, however: "so if the lifting is inefficient the food will not be properly utilised and hence they will not grow, ergo the training is the direct growth medium."
- Do you mean to say that a skinny sixteen year old could eat at a surplus and not grow unless he lifts?
Also this one: "B.s. I know a god damn cut stop beating that drum! i've gotten down to a four pack abs-cutting and as far as i'm concerned a cutting diet is a caloric deficit which i use as about 500 cals below maintenace, which works for me. "
- You suggested your friend gained weight on a cutting diet. Do you also gain weight on a cutting diet?
A. I mean a skinny sixteen year old will not grow-in terms of muscle mass unless he eats and trains, without the muscle stimulus he will grow in fat terms however.
B. No but I am not the same as my friend in any way, shape of form, but following a cutting diet he indeed gained muscle and lost fat and gained weight yes
A. Thanks for the clarification. Surprisingly, you're actually wrong - even sedentary people gain muscle when they gain weight; you need extra muscle to move the extra body. But lifting definitely enhances partitioning - and I'm just splitting hairs.
B. If he gained weight, he wasn't on a cutting diet.
- Cutting means losing weight, with an aim toward losing most of it from fat. You do this by eating less food than your body requires (the weight-loss) and convincing muscle to stick around (heavy lifting, anabolics, plenty of protein) rather than splitting (which happens when you try to do too much activity while cutting, if you run too deep a deficit, and/or eat too little protein).
- Bulking means gaining weight, with an aim toward gaining most of it as muscle. You do this by eating more food than your body requires, and then directing calorie-traffic toward muscle-growth (heavy lifting, anabolics, plenty of protein)
The "Universal Law of Thermodynamics".
One of the first things I learned when I decided I wanted to be a bodybuilder.
One of the first things I learned when I decided I wanted to be a bodybuilder.
Between gravity and conservation of mass/energy, Newton is every bodybuilder's very best friend.
I thought it was chicken and rice! LOL
i'm still not entirely convinced on your verdict that he was bulking, but as he is only a friend and not a client or what have you I can only go off what he gave me as his macros and what articles he used to construct said diet. so there is a possibility he was following a cutting diet i.e. CKD whilst on an above maintenance level of calories. he used this article T NATION | Carb Cycling Codex to construct the carb cycling proportion of his diet, after re-looking over it calories seem higher than i'd expect well certainly carbs do which may attest to the weight gain.
There is exactly one way to gain weight: eat more calories than you burn. If you gain weight, by definition you are eating more calories than you require - thus, you are not cutting.
What part of this is so hard for you to grasp - do you think it's the carbs that make you gain weight or something? Or that it's the relative proportions of protein, carb and fat that make the difference between bulking and cutting? I'm not getting through - I wonder if this is why?
What part of this is so hard for you to grasp - do you think it's the carbs that make you gain weight or something? Or that it's the relative proportions of protein, carb and fat that make the difference between bulking and cutting? I'm not getting through - I wonder if this is why?
Your starting to piss me off with your holier than thou attitude Built.
I know bulking and cutting, I know that what my friend showed to me was lauded as a cutting and ticked those boxes, he then happened to gain weight, now wether that was due to him either A.underreating by even more prior or through him not sticking to his diet we'll never really know, hell he could have even gone on steroids! All i've said from the beginning was he was following a cutting diet.
when you've pointed out your credentials to me as to what gives you the right to talk down so much to someone you've never met, then i'll listen more. K
?at the moment i'm seeing a woman who is ripped and so seems to think that makes her the goddess of diet!
with regards to your statement about what i interpret the requirements of cut to be are the following are effective in my experience; carb cycling keeping fats constant, CKD or higher carbs very low fats, these in my experience are effective enough for my desired results.
what part of what you have just said is not dripping with a great sense of rightousness?
I have not once argued contrary to what you are saying. I am aware that in a incredibly simplified perspective bulking = calories in < calories out and cutting the opposite, in fact state this in most of my posts. yet each time you choose to omit these statements from your response.
I have only been saying what he told me which the above post says, but I give up i cannot be bothered arguing with a keyboard warrior on a crusade.
You keep changing your story bud - you said your friend gained weight on a cutting diet, but insisted it was indeed a cutting diet because it was a carb cycle. It's not my fault if you can't do math.
I swear I am on the verge of sparking you out!
FOR FUCK SAKE READ THE WHOLE FUCKING RESPONSES!
I listed 3 variables that may account for the weight gain and said that as i was not monitoring his intake i cannpt verify whether he was or was not cutting, only that he said he was!
fucking hell! and you think i'm stupid? fucking braud
I now officially think you are stupid, yes.
You're also very angry. It's an amusing combination to read.
He gained weight. Therefore we are all 100% he wasn't on a cutting diet. Okay, except you - you're still trying to wrap your head around this concept.
Actually Built, i'm a very calm easy going person, but you just keep smacking your fucking skull against all my buttons don't you?
I'm not denying he gained weight or that the end results of his diet was bulking! I am merely pointing out the fact he attested that he was on a cutting diet!
jesus no wonder we ruled over you yanks for sooo fucking long you didn't see the whole picture! (i apologise to all other american members of this board)
