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

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #141  
Unread 09-29-2018, 01:45 PM
PyromanXP PyromanXP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 117
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcdonald View Post
Oh this again

Strength and size are correlated
Strength per se predicts NOTHINZG

Strength gains IN A MODERATE REPETITION ragne (as per Dante) plus propper nutrition = growth

A guy using technique and neural changes to boost his 1RM isn't stimulating growth

A guy going from 100X8 to 200X8 is
That's what I needed to hear :-)
And as your specialization routines are 5x5 I understand that moderate is something from 5 to 12.
I will try specialization routine next time, I m not ready for the brad workout with 2343245 sets permuscle group

I just don't know what is better for the 5x5 progression, only add weight when there is reps remaining on the last set ? or pyramiding down between sets ? (I know it must have been asked a lot of time and it should probably be on the specialization topic, but I cannot get a strict answer :/)
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Unread 09-29-2018, 04:31 PM
w1cked w1cked is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,935
Default

part 2 is out

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oyikCv0L4Q&t=1896s

should be helpful for people doing gbr or spec
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Unread 09-30-2018, 09:06 AM
AlphaOmega AlphaOmega is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 201
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcdonald View Post
I will be doing a detailed analysis of the 7 extant studies on the topic. There is LIMITED evidence that legs need a little more volume. Upper body invariably falls right in the 10-15 set/week range. Justl ike Wernbom said a decade ago.
Very much looking forward to this analysis, Lyle. Maybe Lucas will contribute as well.

Again, to me, if my 12-15 weekly sets for back equates to just as many bicep sets, or my 15 sets of compound pressing is 15 tricep sets, then programming just got weird and cumbersome. Im just not buying it, and I've trained for YEARS

Just thinking about 30-45 sets of sufficient effort makes me sore...

Last edited by AlphaOmega : 09-30-2018 at 09:09 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Unread 09-30-2018, 09:40 AM
lylemcdonald lylemcdonald is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,175
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaOmega View Post
Very much looking forward to this analysis, Lyle. Maybe Lucas will contribute as well.

Again, to me, if my 12-15 weekly sets for back equates to just as many bicep sets, or my 15 sets of compound pressing is 15 tricep sets, then programming just got weird and cumbersome. Im just not buying it, and I've trained for YEARS
Exactly. the logic fails on every level and Brad didn't evcen pretend to acknowledge it publicly until he was trying to dismiss a contrary study.

Oh, NOW isolation should be counted differently. K
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Unread 09-30-2018, 01:00 PM
alcahuetej's Avatar
alcahuetej alcahuetej is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 778
Default

"According to Google Scholar, Brad has published about forty seven papers already this year. Thatís 5 per month since itís only September, most researchers do maybe 1 a year because that is how long data gathering and analysis usually takes."


I don't know what's more absurd. The amount of volume in the workouts, or the number of papers he's published.

I work in Biopharma, I don't think anyone publishes papers that frequently. Between research, study design, feasibility studies, protocol review/approval, having our in-house statistician perform data analysis, writing the report/paper itself, and then review/approval of that...there's just no way.

And I'm testing products and equipment, not people. Gathering the proper group takes time as well.

We're also a large company with a team behind us, and access to numerous resources. It sounds like he probably has a much smaller team and less resources.


I also laughed at one of the typos that said 55 sets for face pulls...I laughed because it might be possible it wasn't a typo based on his suggested volume...
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Unread 09-30-2018, 01:55 PM
w1cked w1cked is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,935
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alcahuetej View Post
"According to Google Scholar, Brad has published about forty seven papers already this year. Thatís 5 per month since itís only September, most researchers do maybe 1 a year because that is how long data gathering and analysis usually takes."


I don't know what's more absurd. The amount of volume in the workouts, or the number of papers he's published.

I work in Biopharma, I don't think anyone publishes papers that frequently. Between research, study design, feasibility studies, protocol review/approval, having our in-house statistician perform data analysis, writing the report/paper itself, and then review/approval of that...there's just no way.

And I'm testing products and equipment, not people. Gathering the proper group takes time as well.

We're also a large company with a team behind us, and access to numerous resources. It sounds like he probably has a much smaller team and less resources.


I also laughed at one of the typos that said 55 sets for face pulls...I laughed because it might be possible it wasn't a typo based on his suggested volume...
You need to be at MRV for publishing papers or you won't make progress mesocycle to mesocycle while you mini cut and resensitize
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Unread 09-30-2018, 04:57 PM
lylemcdonald lylemcdonald is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,175
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alcahuetej View Post
"According to Google Scholar, Brad has published about forty seven papers already this year. Thatís 5 per month since itís only September, most researchers do maybe 1 a year because that is how long data gathering and analysis usually takes."


I don't know what's more absurd. The amount of volume in the workouts, or the number of papers he's published.

I work in Biopharma, I don't think anyone publishes papers that frequently. Between research, study design, feasibility studies, protocol review/approval, having our in-house statistician perform data analysis, writing the report/paper itself, and then review/approval of that...there's just no way.

And I'm testing products and equipment, not people. Gathering the proper group takes time as well.

We're also a large company with a team behind us, and access to numerous resources. It sounds like he probably has a much smaller team and less resources.


I also laughed at one of the typos that said 55 sets for face pulls...I laughed because it might be possible it wasn't a typo based on his suggested volume...
Typing quickly, I'm sure Brad and eric and james said "see, lyle thinks it's 55 sets" to dismiss it

The general concensus, and apparently this is a real issue, is of researchers getting their names on papers they have nothing to do with. Call up lab buddies across teh world, give them your opinion on a paper, get name on paper.

I mean, what did Bret do on this paper, is he even in teh same state or country as Brad? I doubt it. HE just got his name thrown on the paper.

Do think Menno contributes anything meaningful to teh reviews hes' on?

Me neither. Maybe a semicolon.
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Unread 10-01-2018, 11:10 AM
AlphaOmega AlphaOmega is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 201
Default

Just read your recent post, Lyle. You summed it up perfectly, because after all the lab-coating is done.."DO THE F**KING WORKOUT" is exactly where this proves itself absurd.

The reality test sinks the whole thing. I've tried some high volume before. Never went above 20 / muscle / week. That is hard enough as it is.
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Unread 10-01-2018, 09:37 PM
loc loc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 609
Default

Saw this was reviewed by Helms in the latest issue of MASS. He doesn't tear the study apart, but does state in the end that "My anecdotal experience as a coach and the majority of research would suggest that ~10-20 sets per muscle group/movement is a much more appropriate beginning range to program for hypertrophy and strength." He also suggests specializing one muscle and increasing volume for that muscle group once you've really hit a plateau. So in the end, still in line with Lyle's recs...
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Unread 10-02-2018, 07:17 AM
alcahuetej's Avatar
alcahuetej alcahuetej is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 778
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by loc View Post
So in the end, still in line with Lyle's recs...
I haven't added it up, but I currently run a modified version of his novice routine from his book. So it's likely in line with what he recommends as well.

Unless he plans on updating his book after Brad's studies...
Reply With Quote
Reply


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 10:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.