Favorite Programs To Get Huge

[dnoyez]

And no one said time under tension is the only factor that increases hypertrophy.And really progressive overload as far as the eye can see....that sounds inpractable to me.Do you see 2d or 3d in your head when you picture these mechanisms?Well you go head and work your way up to that progressive overload 800lb straightleg deadlift just for that little bit more hamstring development and hell....Lets all work up to the goal of 500lb barbell curls just to get the guns up to 21 inches like all the guys in the mags ..hmm ,they must do it right?Progressive overload it is guys because you say so.I continue to stand my ground that in general a lifter will stall on (size gains)not strength gains with low rep very short sets.And I know all about volume with heavy weight 8x3,10x1 etc...but for the guy that originally wanted size and cared less about superhuman lifts...no.

 

[romaleos]

I've relied on volume training for my mass, using Arnolds book, and the weider principals to design my workouts. I often use a sort of pyramid strategy for the overall plan (not necessarily in my set design), I do strength training (2-4 rep range), mass building (6-10), and conditioning/endurance (12-30 range), I feel this gives a very balanced approach to my overall appearance. I also employ various "shocking" techniques as Arnold likes to call them, negatives, running the rack, strip sets, rest between sets, 1RM (most of the time, I get 2RM, because I don't have a training partner all the time), super sets, and order of exercises.

For extreme weight changes (downwards) I employ HIT or HIIT training principals, I have not really used too much HIIT since I stopped boxing however. I still employ HIT every now and then, but find the stress on my body to be a bit much and I can't take it like I could when I was younger.

That is a well thought out conjugated approach to Hypertrophy Specific Training. Keeping the body in constant adaptation through variation, progressive overload, and deload/super compensation is the path to constant gainz.

 

[weighted chinup]

Read what you wrote and look at all the contradictions there.Im not the one spewing bro science.

I looked back and I don't notice any contradictions that I can think of.

My whole point was that strength is important, any rep range can be effective when enough volume is done, and that tension does more for increasing effort and promoting strength than it does for straight up hypertrophy like many in the bb'ing world suggest.

I mentioned several times that I preferred the 8-12 rep range but I also said that 1-5 rep maxes can be just as effective which is true, its just that you have to do them with a lot more volume than most are willing to do to get the same hypertrophy you would normally get from a moderate rep range.

You mentioned the 5x5 being ineffective for growing a wicked quad sweep, while that may be the case I would bet it would be very effective if volume was doubled and more work was done. Increasing the volume of squats would be more effective in overall growth than high rep isolation / accs. work.

It got a bit drawn out and rambly though, I apologize for that.

I'm certainly not trying to be dogmatic in my approach, I just disagree with the popular notion that strength is irrelevant in bb'ing.

 

[4leafclover]

I should also mention that I do quite a few "standard" lifts, and never remove those from my plan. Always included every week, for the last 10 months straight. Bench press, incline bench, dumbbell fly's, squats, deadlifts, wide grip pull ups, barbarian curls, barbell curls, over head press, Arnold press, lateral raises, front raise. I prefer free weights to any cable machine, but lately, I have been liking the free weight machines for a few exercises.

 

[dnoyez]

And no one said time under tension is the only factor that increases hypertrophy.And really progressive overload as far as the eye can see....that sounds inpractable to me.Do you see 2d or 3d in your head when you picture these mechanisms?Well you go head and work your way up to that progressive overload 800lb straightleg deadlift just for that little bit more hamstring development and hell....Lets all work up to the goal of 500lb barbell curls just to get the guns up to 21 inches like all the guys in the mags ..hmm ,they must do it right?Progressive overload it is guys because you say so.I continue to stand my ground that in general a lifter will stall on (size gains)not strength gains with low rep very short sets.And I know all about volume with heavy weight 8x3,10x1 etc...but for the guy that originally wanted size and cared less about superhuman lifts...no.

By the way these arguments or rather debates are good,keeps people learning and the forum alive.

 

[weighted chinup]

By the way these arguments or rather debates are good,keeps people learning and the forum alive..so bring it.

Agreed brother, discussions like this one have a tendency to bring out really good info and draws people in. I enjoy these, especially on the training side of things.

 

[weighted chinup]

And no one said time under tension is the only factor that increases hypertrophy.And really progressive overload as far as the eye can see....that sounds inpractable to me.Do you see 2d or 3d in your head when you picture these mechanisms?Well you go head and work your way up to that progressive overload 800lb straightleg deadlift just for that little bit more hamstring development and hell....Lets all work up to the goal of 500lb barbell curls just to get the guns up to 21 inches like all the guys in the mags ..hmm ,they must do it right?Progressive overload it is guys because you say so.I continue to stand my ground that in general a lifter will stall on (size gains)not strength gains with low rep very short sets.And I know all about volume with heavy weight 8x3,10x1 etc...but for the guy that originally wanted size and cared less about superhuman lifts...no.

Low rep ranges aren't the most efficient route for size, this is correct and I stated that moderate rep ranges make more sense from a bodybuilding point of view, but I still think its important that you are getting stronger even in those higher rep ranges.

The only point I was trying to make in defense of low rep ranges was that pretty much anything can work for hypertrophy assuming volume is adjusted. Is doing high volume triples the most efficient way, probably not but the evidence out there shows that it will work.

You are right, eventually progressive overload becomes impractical, but real talk man, how many lifters do you think are going to get anywhere near that point in their lifting careers? It is still the most effective / proven progression model. All the guys on the Olympia stage are insanely strong in moderate rep ranges, and imo that is what is responsible for the majority of their development.

 

[romaleos]

My apologies as I tend to interchange micro, meso and macro training cycles of periodization without reference to what context I am in at the current discussion.

In the macro/yearly training cycle all well thought out training programs are conjugate and a program that may appear varied in the micro/meso length but never changes year to year is actually linear progressive overload.

My point is that fitness is a lifestyle spread across broad time and modal domains. Your goal adaptations determine the protocol.

 

[HuckingFuge]

you guys are arguing about spilled milk. both ways work. Dorian used heavy training like DoggCrapp training and you got guys that use volume. you should do both!

 

[romaleos]

you guys are arguing about spilled milk. both ways work. Dorian used heavy training like DoggCrapp training and you got guys that use volume. you should do both!

That's what I'm saying.

 

[devildog93]

I wasn't arguing against any of the rep schemes from 5-20. My point was that there is a reason you don't see people doing a lot of powerlifting movements for doubles or singles, but it isn't because they are not getting size or strength off it. It is fucking hard. Not damn i just ran 3 miles in 19 minutes hard. Not i can't believe people do this repeatedly but i finished the 300 workout hard. I am training to remove car doors if someone happens to get trapped and the jaws of life are not available and that is absolutely all i have at the moment hard.

The difference in stress levels between a single and a burn set or a superset are night and day. When i finish a 8 week deadlift cycle and nail it, hitting a 1 rep pr...i am fucking done. By done i mean my nervous system is shot and i am close to point of failure in a couple of areas whether it is grip, lower back, etc. I won't be going to play softball, jog around the block, or go run an obstacle course. My coordination and fine motor movement is trashed temporarily. The closest thing to it that isn't powerlifting would be a competitive wrestling match, but even that doesn't meet up effort wise. You are concentrating all your effort into a few seconds, maybe just 3.

I am far from a powerlifting purist. I'm just some guy who works out at home and has managed to put some mass on and gained some strength without making it a full time job. In the end, people can work out however they want and for whatever reason. I personally see no point unless it is useable. I also don't prioritize my car's paint job over the engine. I'm a classic musclecar kind of guy. The engine and what it can do takes priority to me. If you are the type who would rather build a donk, have sweet 20" rims and put a wrap on it pimping Sugar Smacks, then more power to you. Some people would rather it look good than actually be good.

The bottom line is that powerlifting movements do indeed build mass and we don't have to theorize. there are 100s of examples walking the streets. We see them on ESPN a few times a year. To be clear, i am definitely not in the same league as the WSM competitors, but i wish i was. They are the pinnacle of the iron game in my mind. Functional strength and size, with some endurance and coordination to boot.

 

[weighted chinup]

you guys are arguing about spilled milk. both ways work. Dorian used heavy training like DoggCrapp training and you got guys that use volume. you should do both!

Agreed, I've always been of the opinion that anything can work for hypertrophy if its a well made routine and there is enough volume.

My own training is high volume p/p/l routine using dual factor periodization. I do all my work with an 8-10 rep max, with a strong emphasis put on getting stronger in that rep range in my major lifts.

I actually don't do any of the big 3 lifts in my own training, no flat bench, no back squat, no regular deadlifts, etc. Instead I do weighted dips , incline , front squat, and romanian deadlifts.

No low rep work in my training as you can see, everything is done with a moderate 8-10 rep max, but I still believe that any rep range can work just fine. I can assure you my friend that I am the least dogmatic guy you will ever meet when it comes to training for bodybuilding/hypertrophy.

I just like discussing training theories and other boring shit haha.

 

[HuckingFuge]

Agreed, I've always been of the opinion that anything can work for hypertrophy if its a well made routine and there is enough volume.

My own training is high volume p/p/l routine using dual factor periodization. I do all my work with an 8-10 rep max, with a strong emphasis put on getting stronger in that rep range in my major lifts.

I actually don't do any of the big 3 lifts in my own training, no flat bench, no back squat, no regular deadlifts, etc. Instead I do weighted dips , incline , front squat, and romanian deadlifts.

No low rep work in my training as you can see, everything is done with a moderate 8-10 rep max, but I still believe that any rep range can work just fine. I can assure you my friend that I am the least dogmatic guy you will ever meet when it comes to training for bodybuilding/hypertrophy.

I just like discussing training theories and other boring shit haha.

I could never see myself not doing bench, squat, and deadlifts.

 

[weighted chinup]

I could never see myself not doing bench, squat, and deadlifts.

Haha yeah that rings true for a lot of folks, I start my chest day out with weighted dips and then do incline right after, pretty much how most guys start off with flat bench. Honestly weighted dips and flat bench are pretty much interchangeable imo.

I can't imagine not squatting either, but I definitely prefer front squat over back squat, I enjoy it much more and find it more challenging and rewarding. Doesn't really make a huge difference hypertrophy wise though.

As for deadlifts....well you got me on that one haha. RDL's aren't really comparable to deadlifts off the floor but they are my favorite lift for growing out the back legs / hamstrings. I do plenty of other vertical pulls though, like weighted chin ups and pull ups.

 

[dnoyez]

Never the less good stuff guys.

 

[romaleos]

DO IT ALL!!!

Even though conventional wisdom is against me, I want to prove that a KING OF ALL TRADES athlete can be made. Think elite Crossfit athlete with freak strength or WSM athlete that's proficient on gymnastics rings or Olympic weightlifting medalist with a sub 20 min 5k run.

So far only Jacks of all trades, masters of none. It's a rare athlete that has all the measurables to pull it off. Plus there is no sport for which such an athlete can be measured and receive glory.

 

[devildog93]

The wsm athletes are already there imho. Pulling a truck isn't pure strength. There is plenty of endurance involved. The fingers require brute strength, a little coordination, and again endurance. Really the only lifts that don't require a heavy mix are the ones closest to powerlifting , like squatting barrels or deadlifting a car. They are definitely on the strength side of the equation, but that's ok. We have other events like the triathalon and marathon to celebrate endurance.

I have always looked at it like a science experiment. I have always been amazed at the difference in strength between say chimps and humans of comparable size. http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Wellness/chimpanzees-humans-sizing-strength/story?id=16696826

So for those not watching the link, chimps are 4x the strength of humans of comparable size.Their tie-ins are more dense and they have less control over the muscles. By this they mean they go 0-100% very well, but in between is a bit more difficult for them. So this leads to the theory that while a bit different, there is something else at work other than physiology allowing their difference in strength. It has been proposed that humans have a internal governor of sorts that chimps do not have.

This is pure bro science on my part, but i have always thought training for strength is in part trying to remove those safeties, or at least push them up higher, allowing us to perform what most would consider superhuman feats. Things like people pulling cars off someone or a mother ripping a car door to get her kid out of a burning car are examples of extreme cases where these safeties look to have been bypassed. When watching Marius in the wsm events for many years my wife has commented that he looks completely nuts when absorbed in full effort. Maybe there is something to it.

Anyways, a bit off topic, but size and strength while related, are definitely not a linear tie-in. When i was talking about getting bigger earlier i was just really letting people know what worked for me and how my body type changed from 135 pound endurance athlete to 230 pounds and more on the strength side of things. Take it for what it is worth and for sure try things out yourself. Different strokes for different folks and all that.

I beat my head again the wall for years with different bodybuilding workouts with varying results. I most likely kept myself in a overtraining rut for long periods of time before simplifying it and finding an approach that worked for me. That is what we should do right? Try something for a given period, assess, back up, make some changes, attack it again. For me simple was better.

 

[romaleos]

The wsm athletes are already there imho. Pulling a truck isn't pure strength. There is plenty of endurance involved. The fingers require brute strength, a little coordination, and again endurance. Really the only lifts that don't require a heavy mix are the ones closest to powerlifting , like squatting barrels or deadlifting a car. They are definitely on the strength side of the equation, but that's ok. We have other events like the triathalon and marathon to celebrate endurance.

I have always looked at it like a science experiment. I have always been amazed at the difference in strength between say chimps and humans of comparable size. http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Wellness/chimpanzees-humans-sizing-strength/story?id=16696826

So for those not watching the link, chimps are 4x the strength of humans of comparable size.Their tie-ins are more dense and they have less control over the muscles. By this they mean they go 0-100% very well, but in between is a bit more difficult for them. So this leads to the theory that while a bit different, there is something else at work other than physiology allowing their difference in strength. It has been proposed that humans have a internal governor of sorts that chimps do not have.

This is pure bro science on my part, but i have always thought training for strength is in part trying to remove those safeties, or at least push them up higher, allowing us to perform what most would consider superhuman feats. Things like people pulling cars off someone or a mother ripping a car door to get her kid out of a burning car are examples of extreme cases where these safeties look to have been bypassed. When watching Marius in the wsm events for many years my wife has commented that he looks completely nuts when absorbed in full effort. Maybe there is something to it.

Anyways, a bit off topic, but size and strength while related, are definitely not a linear tie-in. When i was talking about getting bigger earlier i was just really letting people know what worked for me and how my body type changed from 135 pound endurance athlete to 230 pounds and more on the strength side of things. Take it for what it is worth and for sure try things out yourself. Different strokes for different folks and all that.

I beat my head again the wall for years with different bodybuilding workouts with varying results. I most likely kept myself in a overtraining rut for long periods of time before simplifying it and finding an approach that worked for me. That is what we should do right? Try something for a given period, assess, back up, make some changes, attack it again. For me simple was better.

Bro it's not broscience regarding your theory on human musculoskeletal physiology and it's internal governors. The proper terminology depending on direction of the stretch shortening cycle of muscle fibers are the Golgi tendon and muscle spindle. Every muscle group has them. You are correct in that training stress develops the adaptation to release and raise the limits of such governors resulting in increases in power development.

These evolutionary characteristics of our anatomy are in place to protect us from soft and connective tissue damage. Also they serve as an automatic safety reflex for the communication lag within our central nervous system between muscle fibers and the brain. A great example of this is how a doctor can make you kick your leg if he taps your patellar tendon. You are correct that these safeties hold us back for our actual strength potential.

Yes in the end it's all about trying everything and taking what works and tweaking it for the goals/adaptations you want. AAS is a great tool to accelerate the process. Good stuff...keep it coming.

 

[4leafclover]

Lifting is one of the areas where I listen to a lot of bro science, it took the science community 20 years to confirm what Arnold and Co. developed during his time, and they are just validating stuff Yates figured out in the 90's.

 

[romaleos]

Don't forget that what Arnold and co. were using was adapted from the real science developed by Russian and Eastern European Olympic Weightlifting coaches/scientists. So it's all just science-broscience-brah-scientology in the end.