BodyRecomposition Support Forums  

Go Back   BodyRecomposition Support Forums > General information > General training questions
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Closed Thread
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Unread 02-17-2017, 07:35 AM
jimjack jimjack is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,404
Default Rest days are unnecessary? Evidence seems to suggest so.

So I have been looking into conventional wisdom of lifting a bit and it doesn't always seem to be in line with the science. So one thing I have been looking at is training every day. I asked this question last year I believe and was told you need rest days. Basically every source I found said the same thing: you need rest days because your muscles grow and gain strength when they are repaired on rest days. If you don't have rest days you will not make gains and you will be overtrained.

Anyway I started hearing about greasing the groove. Lifting everyday, not to failure, staying fresh, and making serious gains to your lifts. Well how does this work if your muscles don't have time to repair themselves? Hmmm. Maybe conventional wisdom isn't right?

So I started looking at studies that tested training on consecutive days. I could find barely any at all. There are a lot of studies comparing frequency but they pretty much only compare 2 vs 3 days a week always with non consecutive days. So there are two studies I did find. I am on mobile right now so I will try to link them. They have been featured in two recent research reviews about frequency effects on strength but themselves are old.

So Gillam in 1981 did a study where they compared training frequencies. Basically every day people trained they did their 1 rep max for bench press 18 times in 18 different sets obviously. Seems brutal to me. But they trained either 1,2,3,4,5 days a week. Apparently the people training 5 days a week had the most progress and basically the more days a week people trained the better they did. But this could just be due to increased volume and not necessarily frequency.

So in 1985 hunter did a study where he had men and women do a basic full body workout. He had the people do sets of 10 reps to about failure for the different lifts. He had half the people do 3 sets of each exercise three non consecutive days a week. He had the other half do two sets a day for three days and three sets a day for one day. But these were on four consecutive days. The volume was exactly the same between the groups. The people training four consecutive days gained more muscle and strength after 8 weeks. Hmmm. Weird.

So why do people say that rest days are needed? And why havent more people done research on training on consecutive days?
  #2  
Unread 02-17-2017, 07:39 AM
jimjack jimjack is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,404
Default

Here is a link to a review that talks about the two studies. Obviously the names of the studies are in the sources of the paper. https://www.asep.org/asep/asep/JEPon...erra_Alves.pdf
  #3  
Unread 02-17-2017, 09:24 AM
lylemcdonald lylemcdonald is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 817
Default

GET OUT!

Becuase yeah, your'e right. 99.o999% of successful people take rest days

You find bullcrap to support your idiocy and you're right

GET
THE
HELL
OUT
OF
MY FORUM

You want to fail, you will fail, you fail daily. GET OUT
  #4  
Unread 02-17-2017, 09:24 AM
lylemcdonald lylemcdonald is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 817
Default

Two studies, almost assuredly in rank beginners means nothing

NOW GET THE F OUT OF HERE.
Closed Thread


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.