rthor4573
Member
I'm curious what methods people use to create progression and progressive overload in their programs and splits, and how people set up their mesocycles. High volume, moderate intensity, high intensity low volume, etc. For example, Mike Israetal from Renaissance Periodization advocates for adding sets throughout the mesocycle, and applies Minimum Effective Volume (MEV), maximum recoverable vokume (MRV), and Maximum Adaptive Volume (MAV) (terms that he has sort of coined) to his progression strategies. He also utilizes RIR, and adds weight to the bar.
I'm just curious how everyone structures their programs. Not necessarily their split, but do you have a set number of sets you do each meso, and just add weight to the bar? Do you go to a certain proximity to failure and let that dictate your reps? Does this progress as your mesocycle progresses? Does the frequency with which you hit a muscle group change? Do you add sets over the course of your training block? Do you add volume or weight? Etc etc.
I've been listening to a lot of Mike Israetal and Eric Helms stuff lately, and their stuff is the "backed by science, theoretical, can logically conclude" brand of program structuring. I get really into the studies, and the theoretical side, but i don't suffer from the paralysis from analysis syndrome, i just think it's interesting. But I also love hearing the anecdotal, old school experience stuff, ala John Meadows, etc...
So for anyone that makes their own programs, I'm just curious how all of you structure your progressions.
✌
I'm just curious how everyone structures their programs. Not necessarily their split, but do you have a set number of sets you do each meso, and just add weight to the bar? Do you go to a certain proximity to failure and let that dictate your reps? Does this progress as your mesocycle progresses? Does the frequency with which you hit a muscle group change? Do you add sets over the course of your training block? Do you add volume or weight? Etc etc.
I've been listening to a lot of Mike Israetal and Eric Helms stuff lately, and their stuff is the "backed by science, theoretical, can logically conclude" brand of program structuring. I get really into the studies, and the theoretical side, but i don't suffer from the paralysis from analysis syndrome, i just think it's interesting. But I also love hearing the anecdotal, old school experience stuff, ala John Meadows, etc...
So for anyone that makes their own programs, I'm just curious how all of you structure your progressions.
✌
