# Working a theory,  need your input!



## chicken_hawk (Aug 14, 2014)

Hey brothers and possibly sisters,  I love being my own lab rat but need a baseline for comparison. So, here is my question,  what do feel the relationship between recovery, volume ie. Work load and rate of gains? My general theory is that people who can't handle high volume are easier gainers. 

So, an athlete who can handle higher volumes makes somewhat slower gains...I know it's not fair but I am working this theory to help myself and others find the volume that maximizes their individual potential. 

How would you describe yourself? 

Thanks,
Hawk


----------



## Phoe2006 (Aug 14, 2014)

If you ever read my workout log which I haven't filled out in more than a few months(and I know you have ch). I love high volume but my legs grow and get strong no matter what I throw at em just wish the rest of my body was the same way. So yes I'd have to agree with your statement that for me anyways it slow and steady.


----------



## Magnus82 (Aug 14, 2014)

You know Hawk,  I would have to agree.  I for one cannot handle the high volumes which I did for years.   Could never break 200.  Then came hit which definitely put  mass on me,  but plateaued as well.   Then along came DC training.  Bam,  more mass.   Now I do a 2 way split,  2 on 1 off in the summer and eod in the winter.   I never do more than 8 sets per body part split between 2 exercises.   Always basic exercises.  This has allowed me to continually grow.   I used to consider myself a hard gainer,  but am I fact an easy gainer.   I was  the wrong routine for my body.   I have found 2 days 1 off the perfect  balance of stimulation and recovery.   Work is my cardio.  I have always wanted to post in Bricks "What are you training "  but was to embarrassed to post what I do by comparison to the others.  I often consider myself the lazy lifter,  as I feel I get way more out of it than what I put in.   I do lift very  intensely similar to Platz/Meadows.  Mind/muscle connection is great to which may be part of the reason I simply cannot train with high volume.


----------



## Magnus82 (Aug 14, 2014)

Btw Phoe,  your big everywhere freak!


----------



## Phoe2006 (Aug 14, 2014)

Magnus82 said:


> You know Hawk,  I would have to agree.  I for one cannot handle the high volumes which I did for years.   Could never break 200.  Then came hit which definitely put  mass on me,  but plateaued as well.   Then along came DC training.  Bam,  more mass.   Now I do a 2 way split,  2 on 1 off in the summer and eod in the winter.   I never do more than 8 sets per body part split between 2 exercises.   Always basic exercises.  This has allowed me to continually grow.   I used to consider myself a hard gainer,  but am I fact an easy gainer.   I was  the wrong routine for my body.   I have found 2 days 1 off the perfect  balance of stimulation and recovery.   Work is my cardio.  I have always wanted to post in Bricks "What are you training "  but was to embarrassed to post what I do by comparison to the others.  I often consider myself the lazy lifter,  as I feel I get way more out of it than what I put in.   I do lift very  intensely similar to Platz/Meadows.  Mind/muscle connection is great to which may be part of the reason I simply cannot train with high volume.


Start posting in there brother completely judgment free zone. And thanks but idk what it is but I think I'm small in comparison to others. Sure I have 20"+ arms but they're not lean like others ie yours. 

I do change it up every 2-3 weeks I'll go heavier for less reps just to throw something different at my body.


----------



## MattG (Aug 14, 2014)

I agree with Phoe, start posting up magnus. Hell, i learn a lot in there and im struggling to hit the 200 mark just like you once did.  Myself and others could learn something from you! If all you need is 8 sets, then no need for more. Bring over some knowledge brother :headbang:


----------



## Enigmatic707 (Aug 14, 2014)

I will come back to this- but I periodize.. I spend most of the year in the "high volume" style but I know there are weeks and months that I need to get in there and do power style workouts and also get in and do hit style lifting in order to keeps the scale moving up in weight.

Periodization seems to be a forgotten subject- it was what everyone talked about. 10 years ago, but I think people got tired of the complexity of it or trying to explain it to a newb and it was just kinda abandoned.


----------



## aon1 (Aug 14, 2014)

I'm still a newb but so far pyramiding low volume with high weight has been working best for me. and I've never been a small guy so I guess I'm a easy gainer, if I would eat more I'm pretty sure I would gain faster as well.


----------



## aon1 (Aug 15, 2014)

aon1 said:


> I'm still a newb but so far pyramiding low volume with high weight has been working best for me. and I've never been a small guy so I guess I'm a easy gainer, if I would eat more I'm pretty sure I would gain faster as well.




I got to thinking about this after I posted it and its really not 100% because after watching one of richs videos a while back about how if you want big arms ect then you need high reps because you already go heavy on the compound lifts , I changed some of my lifts to high reps and it has been working better for example tri rope push downs I still pyramid but my starting and stoping weight I try to do like 20 or more reps basicly to fail. I have to do this on a few other things as well like leg curl ect.

But having said that the reason I stated I was a newb is it seems like no matter what routine I try being a newb I make some gains it just seems that going heavy in general works best


----------



## chicken_hawk (Aug 15, 2014)

Magnus82 said:


> You know Hawk,  I would have to agree.  I for one cannot handle the high volumes which I did for years.   Could never break 200.  Then came hit which definitely put  mass on me,  but plateaued as well.   Then along came DC training.  Bam,  more mass.   Now I do a 2 way split,  2 on 1 off in the summer and eod in the winter.   I never do more than 8 sets per body part split between 2 exercises.   Always basic exercises.  This has allowed me to continually grow.   I used to consider myself a hard gainer,  but am I fact an easy gainer.   I was  the wrong routine for my body.   I have found 2 days 1 off the perfect  balance of stimulation and recovery.   Work is my cardio.  I have always wanted to post in Bricks "What are you training "  but was to embarrassed to post what I do by comparison to the others.  I often consider myself the lazy lifter,  as I feel I get way more out of it than what I put in.   I do lift very  intensely similar to Platz/Meadows.  Mind/muscle connection is great to which may be part of the reason I simply cannot train with high volume.



Thanks for the input Magnus, I think you made my point better than I was able to. Indivuals are different and are going to repond differently to each routine.  Yet, they could be fighting an uphill battle for years if they attempt to do what their friends do.

Hawk


----------



## chicken_hawk (Aug 15, 2014)

Enigmatic707 said:


> I will come back to this- but I periodize.. I spend most of the year in the "high volume" style but I know there are weeks and months that I need to get in there and do power style workouts and also get in and do hit style lifting in order to keeps the scale moving up in weight.
> 
> Periodization seems to be a forgotten subject- it was what everyone talked about. 10 years ago, but I think people got tired of the complexity of it or trying to explain it to a newb and it was just kinda abandoned.



You make a good point bro. Periodization has all but been foresaken by most gym rats, preffering to hit a wall time after time as an alternative. However,  with that being said an individual would still need to adjust volume and intensity accordingly. That is to say a volume period for you may be 16 sets per body part,  for me it may be 10...

Hawk


----------



## chicken_hawk (Aug 15, 2014)

aon1 said:


> I got to thinking about this after I posted it and its really not 100% because after watching one of richs videos a while back about how if you want big arms ect then you need high reps because you already go heavy on the compound lifts , I changed some of my lifts to high reps and it has been working better for example tri rope push downs I still pyramid but my starting and stoping weight I try to do like 20 or more reps basicly to fail. I have to do this on a few other things as well like leg curl ect.
> 
> But having said that the reason I stated I was a newb is it seems like no matter what routine I try being a newb I make some gains it just seems that going heavy in general works best



You actually make a few valid points, 1. The Noob effect 2. the body will adapt to whatever stress we submit it to. However, some people will respond better to a certain stressors better then others.

I suspect at this point that each person needs to find their own road like Magnus did. I also think that naturally heavier guys like myself who was made to be a linebacker or lineman respond to lower volume higher intensity....while the wide receiver body type will be better off to more volume...and they may actually be able to go bat out of hell for many sets and still recover. However,  that is a broad stereotype. 

Hawk


----------



## Sully (Aug 15, 2014)

I like the majority of what everyone is saying here. Seems like lots of good info. The only issue I have with any of it is definitions. The terms high and low volume are used regularly, but rarely defined. 

In talking to a lot of different guys and pressing them for their definition of high volume, I've heard descriptions that vary wildly of what high volume is. I know guys that think that 60-70 reps per body part is high volume. I've also known guys that high volume starts at 200 reps per exercise. 

I'm just curious how close we all are to being on the same page when it comes to what "high volume" is.


----------



## Phoe2006 (Aug 15, 2014)

Lil' Sully said:


> I like the majority of what everyone is saying here. Seems like lots of good info. The only issue I have with any of it is definitions. The terms high and low volume are used regularly, but rarely defined.
> 
> In talking to a lot of different guys and pressing them for their definition of high volume, I've heard descriptions that vary wildly of what high volume is. I know guys that think that 60-70 reps per body part is high volume. I've also known guys that high volume starts at 200 reps per exercise.
> 
> I'm just curious how close we all are to being on the same page when it comes to what "high volume" is.


Here's an example of high volume

http://anasci.org/vB/showthread.php?p=233583


----------



## Phoe2006 (Aug 15, 2014)

I think that was a lighter week where I didn't have anything to go heavy with on skull crushers either. Today I got up to 155x4 in skull crushers


----------



## The Grim Repper (Aug 15, 2014)

I'm all over the place like shit as they say.  Usually, you'll see me post high volume stuff because that's served me pretty well.  Of course, I can't go extremely heavy with high volume because you can't make it through.  You can lift heavy or you can lift long, but you can't do both at the same time.  I try to stay injury free, so lifting weights I can control is the key for me.  This means I'm not lifting the house.
As far as periodization, I'll use micro cycles sometimes consisting of 1-2 maybe 3-4 workouts with heavier weights and less reps to 'train' my CNS a bit to handle more weight then I'll creep my volume poundages up some to take advantage of that.
Grim


----------



## thebrick (Aug 15, 2014)

Chicken Hawk, good points. I wonder how much the "fast twitch" vs. "slow twitch" ratio each person has of muscle fiber plays into this? For example, when I was a skinny kid in school and in track, I was a very quick sprinter. I was excellent in the 100 yard dash, 220 and was always on the relay teams. In the long distance events, more endurance oriented, I totally sucked. Likewise when I got into the gym, at first I was really green, and I think I tended to train too much and too light. I did make gains though. When I switched to more of a powerlifting style, increasing the weight and fewer sets, more "explosive" style, my gains really took off and those days are when I grew the fastest and most. 

All in all, for the most gains, I think you have to optimize both, so maybe that's where periodization comes in.

Magnus, drop in to  the Brick training thread any time. Phoe is right, its a no judgement zone, more of a day by day check-in with training and life's "everyday stuff"


----------



## Enigmatic707 (Aug 15, 2014)

I think the key here is adjust-

If hypertrophy slows for me I go more into a "muscle maturation" routine where I do more time under tension style training and really emphasize the negatives and try to go for mitochondrial proliferation. 

The thing these days seems like guys are going for the pump and I can see why, but i think this style of training is much more beneficial for some one who has been in the game for 10+ years and is carrying 50-100 extra lbs of lean mass. I don't think that style is great for guys who are just a few years into lifting.

I've always said strength is a precursor to size, you really have to alter between strength and power and hypertrophy.


----------



## The Grim Repper (Aug 15, 2014)

Enigmatic707 said:


> I've always said strength is a precursor to size, you really have to alter between strength and power and hypertrophy.



Exactly.  The bigger the weights you rep in a hypertrophy range with good form the bigger you're going to get for the most part.


----------



## tri-terror (Aug 16, 2014)

I haven't read everyones posts but here are MY thoughts on recovery vs. volume.  ANYONE/EVERYONE should only train with as much volume necesary to trigger a response and then get out of the way.  Some people have better rates of recovery and that can let them get away with more volume but that does not necesarily make that extra volume better.

I like the shoveling a hole analogy.  When you are working out, you are taxing your muscles, like a shovel is taxing/digging at the ground.  The bigger the hole you dig, the more time you have to spend filling it in right?  Well the more volume you do the longer it takes you to recover to get to your baseline and you need to be at baseline before you gain on top of that...

The other thing is, to get better at something you need to practice that something right? It's the SAID principle: Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demand.  If you want to be a better bench presser you have to bench press.  Well how do you bench press 2 or 3 times a week?  By not doing so much volume that you can't train every couple of days.


----------



## Sandpig (Aug 16, 2014)

When I first started I grew like everyone does.

Then I basically stayed the same for twenty plus years.

Now in my late forties I'm making the best gains of my life.

In all these years I've tried everything. Arnolds, Mentzer's, DC etc.

What am I doing now? Well I was doing typical volume up untill a couple month's ago and now I'm doing Phil Hernon's low volume, high frequency.

Both have worked.

*What do I think is the difference? FOOD! I have learned that I need so much more food than I always believed was necessary.*

Not only am I getting in more calories but I make damn sure I go to bed at the same time every night and get up at the same time every morning. More or less.

I know this may not help with the original question but I think the #1 requirement is to make sure everything is done right not just the training.

Again this is my opinion on what has worked for me.


----------



## The Grim Repper (Aug 16, 2014)

^ Totally agree on that man.  You have to support the training stimulus with adequate nutrition and recovery.


----------



## chicken_hawk (Aug 16, 2014)

Lot's of good input gents and it looks like we are on the same page. In regards to recovery I realize there are different rates for each us based on specific situations and individual situations. However I am glad the point was raised as it brings me to one of my other pet peeves and that is COOKIE CUTTER PROGRAMS, if we are all different then how can one say that 5-3-1 works for everyone or JAY CUTLERS routine is the best? For some HIT works best, for others German Volume. 

Back on point, it's true I have not defined Volume of Intensity, but I can not as high volume is different for each individual also as a PLer there are programs that call for many sets well below failure which can not be compared with sets to failure. However, I do agree with you can either train long or hard and not only should those periods be cycled, but they are different for each of us.

That bring me to myself and the reason I asked this in the first place was in regards to myself. Having made the switch to PLing two years ago and having tried most popular cookie cutter routines, I have come to conclusion that most of them have too much volume or volume at a high intensity for me. I even had a pretty smart coach prescribe me a mild routine and it was more than I could recover from.

Now, what do I mean? I would go two or three weeks and start losing strength and had to struggle more and more to hit my numbers. Could I be a pussy? I suppose it's possible, but I think that it is several factors, one my age, things change after 40. Two, my job, I work with my hands in the hot sun each day before going in to the gym. And third, individual differences, combing one and two then adding to the fact I believe I am prone to lower volume.

All that to say, each one of us needs to find his own road, but as well change things using a planned approach based on those individual differences.

Hawk


----------



## VanillaMandingo (Sep 12, 2014)

chicken_hawk said:


> You actually make a few valid points, 1. The Noob effect 2. the body will adapt to whatever stress we submit it to. However, some people will respond better to a certain stressors better then others.
> 
> I suspect at this point that each person needs to find their own road like Magnus did. I also think that naturally heavier guys like myself who was made to be a linebacker or lineman respond to lower volume higher intensity....while the wide receiver body type will be better off to more volume...and they may actually be able to go bat out of hell for many sets and still recover. However,  that is a broad stereotype.
> 
> Hawk





This reminds me of a topic that I brought up on PM several years back. I asked if anybody felt that there was a relationship between the optimal training style somebody should do and their body type. I was surprised to not get much feedback as I recall.


----------



## chicken_hawk (Sep 13, 2014)

VanillaMandingo said:


> This reminds me of a topic that I brought up on PM several years back. I asked if anybody felt that there was a relationship between the optimal training style somebody should do and their body type. I was surprised to not get much feedback as I recall.



Well, unfortunately  9,877 members of a 10,000 member forum only want to know what dbol will make them huge and ripped while sitting on the couch. I and you on the other hand as well as the others in this thread have come to realize that AAS are just a piece of a larger puzzle.

Back to your point, I think stocky aka guys who are prone to be heavier are built for power and lower reps and therefore can't handle a ton of volume. While lean guys respond better to higher reps and more volume.

Hawk


----------



## VanillaMandingo (Oct 17, 2014)

Sorry, I have not been on in a while. I am very interested to see some research on this topic.


----------



## chicken_hawk (Oct 18, 2014)

VanillaMandingo said:


> Sorry, I have not been on in a while. I am very interested to see some research on this topic.



I think you will have to take that battle on yourself unfortunately bro. As I stated only about the 2 dozen who replied here actually think enough to be concerned with the topic. The others don't train hard enough to know the difference.

I see it in the gym ED. Guys on gear who have hardly changed in a year. On the other hand some of the bigger dudes at the gym take minimal gear but train and eat like animals. 

On a note actually related to the topic. Just yesterday, I talked to two different PLer's who along with me were discovering that less is more. One guy cut down to training 3X week from 4 and the other cut down his sets. I actually added a day, but cut down to just two exercises per session from four.

Hawk


----------



## Phoe2006 (Oct 18, 2014)

chicken_hawk said:


> I think you will have to take that battle on yourself unfortunately bro. As I stated only about the 2 dozen who replied here actually think enough to be concerned with the topic. The others don't train hard enough to know the difference.
> 
> I see it in the gym ED. Guys on gear who have hardly changed in a year. On the other hand some of the bigger dudes at the gym take minimal gear but train and eat like animals.
> 
> ...


Who doesn't work out hard enough? Lol


----------



## Phoe2006 (Oct 19, 2014)

On a side note currently only on a trt dose of prop and 5 ius split up in the day and keep getting good that I look better than I ever have

That being said I've never eaten this clean and healthy, can't wait to run a normal dose for me to see where it takes me


----------

