lifting question

What's the best way to go about it for overall performance increase?

A)
1 warm up set
3 sets of 10-15 reps of the same weight for every set
increasing the weight load by 2-5 pounds every week

OR

B)
1 warm up set
3 sets of 10-15 reps with increasing amount of weight each set
increasing the weight load by 2-5 pounds every week

On Jul 25, 3:42*pm, mikemcn...@eastlink.ca (michaelmcneil) wrote:
> What's the best way to go about it for overall performance increase?
>
> A)
> 1 warm up set
> 3 sets of 10-15 reps of the same weight for every set
> increasing the weight load by 2-5 pounds every week
>
> OR
>
> B)
> 1 warm up set
> 3 sets of 10-15 reps with increasing amount of weight each set
> increasing the weight load by 2-5 pounds every week


C) Do 3 different exercises:

1. Do a pyramid of 8 x 6 x 4, with the set of 8 at 60% of your max,
the set of 6 at 70% of your max, and the set of 4 at 80% of your max.
Always try to do 5 on the last set, but expect to do 4.

2. Follow this with 3 sets of 8 at 50-60% of your max, paying close
attention to form. You should be able to complete the each set, but
the last one will be pretty hard.

Once you can do 5 reps on the last set of the pyramid, you'll know to
increase the weight by 10lbs the next week. For me, it takes about 3-4
weeks before increasing the weight.

3. I usually end with some sort of isolation exercise, mainly to make
sure that I completely fatigue the primary muscle. For example, on
chest day I do bench press, bench press, then dumbell flyes as the
isolation exercise.

I've used this routine for about a year and a half, and it has helped
me to increase my bench press from 195 to over 400lbs. I've been able
to increase my squat to somewhere around 600lbs (I haven't maxed in
squats in a very long time, so I don't know what it would be, but I
can do 4 reps of 525 pretty easily).

I NEVER recommend doing more than 10 reps of anything at once. I used
to do this, but then damaged a tendon in my shoulder from it that's
taken months to heal. Now, I rarely do more than 8 reps on anything
other than ab-work.

"michaelmcneil" <mikemcneil@eastlink.ca> wrote in message
news:488b2c23.1668296@news.eastlink.ca...
> What's the best way to go about it for overall performance increase?

There is no such thing. "Performance" must be specific to something.

> A)
> 1 warm up set
> 3 sets of 10-15 reps of the same weight for every set
> increasing the weight load by 2-5 pounds every week
>
> OR
>
> B)
> 1 warm up set
> 3 sets of 10-15 reps with increasing amount of weight each set
> increasing the weight load by 2-5 pounds every week

Neither will do much for you, IMHO.

Your choice B makes little sense to me - why would you add weight as
your fatigue increases? If anything, use more on the first set and
decrease as you go to accommodate fatigue. Given the choice, I would
have to pick A.

I vote for choice C - do 6-9 sets of 5. It will get you the same total
reps but you'll be able to use a heavier weight and thus get stronger.
Your form will be better because the sets are shorter and thus decrease
your risk of injury. You can adjust the rest period between sets to
suit goals of strength, hypertrophy, or some combination thereof. I
recommend, after your warmup set, you use the most weight for the first
set, decrease a little for the second set, then decrease again for the
third set and keep that weight for all the rest.

There are problems with choice C. It is more work because the weight is
heavier, which is why most people won't do it. The heavier weight will
point out flaws in your technique, another reason why people won't do
it, under the misguided assumption that if their technique won't let
them move a heavy weight, moving a light one with bad technique is OK -
it's not. It will take longer, yet another reason why people won't do
it. It will yield better results, but most people don't care about the
results, only about the workout.

-S-
http://www.kbnj.com

michaelmcneil wrote:

> What's the best way to go about it for overall performance increase?

Just learn how to talk to women.

> A)
> 1 warm up set
> 3 sets of 10-15 reps of the same weight for every set

A bit high rep, but not bad if you are starting.

> increasing the weight load by 2-5 pounds every week

For how many weeks?

> OR
>
> B)
> 1 warm up set
> 3 sets of 10-15 reps with increasing amount of weight each set
> increasing the weight load by 2-5 pounds every week

Am I supposed to spot the difference? After all those beers? Oh, you
bastard, I got it now.

Well, same weight is simpler. You just put the plates on the bar and can
chat bunnies in between sets instead of making adjustments. And seriously,
by doing the same weight you will lift more poundage with your three sets,
so three sets with the same weight will be more taxing. If it is a good
thing or a bad one is hard to tell. It depends how often and how hard you
train.

--
Andrzej Rosa

Steve Freides wrote:

> "michaelmcneil" <mikemcneil@eastlink.ca> wrote in message
> news:488b2c23.1668296@news.eastlink.ca...
[...]
> There are problems with choice C. It is more work because the weight is
> heavier, which is why most people won't do it.

Sure. It's just for the chosen ones.

> The heavier weight will
> point out flaws in your technique, another reason why people won't do
> it,

I mean for the chosen among the chosen ones.

> under the misguided assumption that if their technique won't let
> them move a heavy weight, moving a light one with bad technique is OK -
> it's not. It will take longer, yet another reason why people won't do
> it.

Oh gee, for the really chosen, fine? For those who are so chosen, that
nobody even seen them, OK?

Oh my. It's a routine for Ninjas!

> It will yield better results, but most people don't care about the
> results, only about the workout.

Ninjas care. That's why they rule, man.

--
Andrzej Rosa

Jason Carlton wrote:

> I've used this routine for about a year and a half, and it has helped
> me to increase my bench press from 195 to over 400lbs. I've been able
> to increase my squat to somewhere around 600lbs

My deepest apologies Jason, but if it was you who asked if speed in lifting
matters, I wrote bollocks. I'm really not sure if it was you (easy to
answeer, hard to recall to whom exactly), but if you are at the 400/600
level, speed matters. Now, where you want to go depends mostly on what you
want most. Lifting slow lets you use less weight and still overload
muscles sufficiently, lifting fast lets you lift more. Depending what you
want, higher numbers or lower chances of arthritic joints, should tell you
where to go. Bodybuilders tend to go with slower and lighter weights as
the age, powerlifters tend to retire.

Now, what powerlifters think is fast really isn't. Oly lifters don't have
so much problems with arthritis, and I can easily give a bad advice again,
just because I have to make assumptions, which sometimes must be wrong, it
seems.

--
Andrzej Rosa

Steve Freides wrote:
> "michaelmcneil" <mikemcneil@eastlink.ca> wrote in message
> news:488b2c23.1668296@news.eastlink.ca...
>> What's the best way to go about it for overall performance increase?
>
> There is no such thing. "Performance" must be specific to something.
>

>
> I vote for choice C - do 6-9 sets of 5. It will get you the same total
> reps but you'll be able to use a heavier weight and thus get stronger.
> Your form will be better because the sets are shorter and thus decrease
> your risk of injury. You can adjust the rest period between sets to
> suit goals of strength, hypertrophy, or some combination thereof. I
> recommend, after your warmup set, you use the most weight for the first
> set, decrease a little for the second set, then decrease again for the
> third set and keep that weight for all the rest.
>

> http://www.kbnj.com
>
>

Would the above be suitable for hypertrophy, say with approximately
1 minute rest between sets? Thanks.

"Ray" <Ray@Acmenet.com> wrote in message
news:c_6dnZavTofTLhfVnZ2dnUVZ8vydnZ2d@bt.com...
> Steve Freides wrote:
>> "michaelmcneil" <mikemcneil@eastlink.ca> wrote in message
>> news:488b2c23.1668296@news.eastlink.ca...
>>> What's the best way to go about it for overall performance increase?
>>
>> There is no such thing. "Performance" must be specific to something.
>>
>
>>
>> I vote for choice C - do 6-9 sets of 5. It will get you the same
>> total reps but you'll be able to use a heavier weight and thus get
>> stronger. Your form will be better because the sets are shorter and
>> thus decrease your risk of injury. You can adjust the rest period
>> between sets to suit goals of strength, hypertrophy, or some
>> combination thereof. I recommend, after your warmup set, you use the
>> most weight for the first set, decrease a little for the second set,
>> then decrease again for the third set and keep that weight for all
>> the rest.
>>
>
>> http://www.kbnj.com
>>
>>
>
> Would the above be suitable for hypertrophy, say with approximately
> 1 minute rest between sets? Thanks.

Yes, absolutely. Short rests for hypertrophy, long rests for pure
strength. You will find a similar program in Pavel Tsatsouline's "Power
To The People!" in which he recommends up to 20 sets of 5 using the
weight scheme outlined above - heavy first, a bit lighter second, then
third and remaining sets with slightly lighter still and on short rests.
PTP is mostly about getting stronger without hypertrophy but it does
include this program as well. If memory serves, the recommendation is
to take longer rests after the first two sets but then use shorter rests
for the rest.

NB: If you use a heavy weight, even long rests might lead to hypertrophy
if training volume is high enough.

-S-
http://www.kbnj.com

In article <an4ql5-tvl.ln1@bakters.bandit.home>,
Andrzej Rosa <bakters@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > A)
> > 1 warm up set
> > 3 sets of 10-15 reps of the same weight for every set
>
> A bit high rep, but not bad if you are starting.

I agree. My range is 8 to 10. If I can't do at least 8, I decrease the
weight. If I can do more than 10, I increase it.
--
Peace! Om

"Human nature seems to be to control other people
until they put their foot down." -- Stephan Rothstein

> > * *Would the above be suitable for hypertrophy, say with approximately
> > 1 * minute rest between sets? Thanks.
>
> Yes, absolutely. *Short rests for hypertrophy, long rests for pure
> strength. *You will find a similar program in Pavel Tsatsouline's "Power
> To The People!" in which he recommends up to 20 sets of 5 using the
> weight scheme outlined above - heavy first, a bit lighter second, then
> third and remaining sets with slightly lighter still and on short rests.
> PTP is mostly about getting stronger without hypertrophy but it does
> include this program as well. *If memory serves, the recommendation is
> to take longer rests after the first two sets but then use shorter rests
> for the rest.
>
> NB: If you use a heavy weight, even long rests might lead to hypertrophy
> if training volume is high enough.


How do you guys define "short rest" or "long rest"? I've been resting
for 3 - 3 1/2 minutes between sets, but I'm concerned that although
I'm lifting more and more weight, my overall size is pretty much the
same as it was when I benched half of what I do now.

Jason Carlton wrote:
>>> Would the above be suitable for hypertrophy, say with approximately
>>> 1 minute rest between sets? Thanks.
>> Yes, absolutely. Short rests for hypertrophy, long rests for pure
>> strength. You will find a similar program in Pavel Tsatsouline's "Power
>> To The People!" in which he recommends up to 20 sets of 5 using the
>> weight scheme outlined above - heavy first, a bit lighter second, then
>> third and remaining sets with slightly lighter still and on short rests.
>> PTP is mostly about getting stronger without hypertrophy but it does
>> include this program as well. If memory serves, the recommendation is
>> to take longer rests after the first two sets but then use shorter rests
>> for the rest.
>>
>> NB: If you use a heavy weight, even long rests might lead to hypertrophy
>> if training volume is high enough.
>
>
> How do you guys define "short rest" or "long rest"? I've been resting
> for 3 - 3 1/2 minutes between sets, but I'm concerned that although
> I'm lifting more and more weight, my overall size is pretty much the
> same as it was when I benched half of what I do now.


Of course it depends on your goals but I use short rests, say 60-75
seconds for many lifts but when I do deadlifts and I take longer, maybe
3 minutes or more but then again I don't do deadlifts for hypertrophy.
And at the end of the day I mix things up to suit my "feel" on the day.

I think that for most people, the nuances discussed at times while
interesting only help with a minute proportion of the variance in gains.
Just lifting things,on a very regular basis, with progressive
overload is all that that is required for most.

Bob

On Jul 29, 3:25*am, Jason Carlton <jwcarl...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]

> How do you guys define "short rest" or "long rest"? I've been resting
> for 3 - 3 1/2 minutes between sets, but I'm concerned that although
> I'm lifting more and more weight, my overall size is pretty much the
> same as it was when I benched half of what I do now.

Google Max-OT. That system recommends 3 to 4 minutes between sets.

And what? You're benching double what you had been benching but your
chest hasn't grown at all? That's interesting.

--

On Jul 29, 5:04*am, Bob Volkmer <m...@volkmer.biz> wrote:
> Jason Carlton wrote:
> >>> * *Would the above be suitable for hypertrophy, say with approximately
> >>> 1 * minute rest between sets? Thanks.
> >> Yes, absolutely. *Short rests for hypertrophy, long rests for pure
> >> strength. *You will find a similar program in Pavel Tsatsouline's "Power
> >> To The People!" in which he recommends up to 20 sets of 5 using the
> >> weight scheme outlined above - heavy first, a bit lighter second, then
> >> third and remaining sets with slightly lighter still and on short rests.
> >> PTP is mostly about getting stronger without hypertrophy but it does
> >> include this program as well. *If memory serves, the recommendation is
> >> to take longer rests after the first two sets but then use shorter rests
> >> for the rest.
>
> >> NB: If you use a heavy weight, even long rests might lead to hypertrophy
> >> if training volume is high enough.
>
> > How do you guys define "short rest" or "long rest"? I've been resting
> > for 3 - 3 1/2 minutes between sets, but I'm concerned that although
> > I'm lifting more and more weight, my overall size is pretty much the
> > same as it was when I benched half of what I do now.
>
> Of course it depends on your goals but I use short rests, say 60-75
> seconds for many lifts but when I do deadlifts and I take longer, maybe
> 3 minutes or more but then again I don't do deadlifts for hypertrophy.

I'm doing lots of compound movements currently and have been resting
until I feel I'm ready to go or full recovered. Not watching the
clock, but I'm almost sure it's at least three minutes between sets.

> And at the end of the day I mix things up to suit my "feel" on the day.

Same here. If my knees are bothering me then I'll skip cardio or do
the bike over the treadmill. I might give myself an extra day's rest
before tackling another squat workout.

> I think that for most people, the nuances discussed at times while
> interesting only help with a minute proportion of the variance in gains.

Agreed.

> * *Just lifting things,on a very regular basis, with progressive
> overload is all that that is required for most.

And X2 on that sentiment as well.

> Bob

--

"Jason Carlton"

How do you guys define "short rest" or "long rest"? I've been resting
for 3 - 3 1/2 minutes between sets, but I'm concerned that although
I'm lifting more and more weight, my overall size is pretty much the
same as it was when I benched half of what I do now.

Jason, I use a heart rate monitor.
I rest until my heart rate is down to about 60-65. I run it up to about
90-98 when I lift.'
I run it up to 115-139 when I cycle three times a week and keep it there for
22 minutes none stop!!

Burr

"Curt" <curtjames@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7adc46e0-3b9f-4d48-8717-af89fb328cd4@34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 29, 3:25 am, Jason Carlton <jwcarl...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]

> How do you guys define "short rest" or "long rest"? I've been resting
> for 3 - 3 1/2 minutes between sets, but I'm concerned that although
> I'm lifting more and more weight, my overall size is pretty much the
> same as it was when I benched half of what I do now.

Google Max-OT. That system recommends 3 to 4 minutes between sets.

And what? You're benching double what you had been benching but your
chest hasn't grown at all? That's interesting.

--

The bar weights 45# UNLESS IT'S THE BODY BUILDERS BAR AT 25 POUNDS.
Maybe he put weights on the bar

Burr

"Burr" <pitzradio@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:YNCdnVx--Or2bRPVnZ2dnUVZ_tHinZ2d@earthlink.com...
>
> "Curt" <curtjames@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:7adc46e0-3b9f-4d48-8717-af89fb328cd4@34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 29, 3:25 am, Jason Carlton <jwcarl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]
>
>> How do you guys define "short rest" or "long rest"? I've been resting
>> for 3 - 3 1/2 minutes between sets, but I'm concerned that although
>> I'm lifting more and more weight, my overall size is pretty much the
>> same as it was when I benched half of what I do now.
>
> Google Max-OT. That system recommends 3 to 4 minutes between sets.
>
> And what? You're benching double what you had been benching but your
> chest hasn't grown at all? That's interesting.
>
> --
>
> The bar weights 45# UNLESS IT'S THE BODY BUILDERS BAR AT 25 POUNDS.
> Maybe he put weights on the bar
>
> Burr
IIRC he's benching more than double his bodyweight.

"Jason Carlton" <jwcarlton@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:199ad928-2f2d-4f85-8597-32d7797b401a@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> > Would the above be suitable for hypertrophy, say with approximately
> > 1 minute rest between sets? Thanks.
>
> Yes, absolutely. Short rests for hypertrophy, long rests for pure
> strength. You will find a similar program in Pavel Tsatsouline's
> "Power
> To The People!" in which he recommends up to 20 sets of 5 using the
> weight scheme outlined above - heavy first, a bit lighter second, then
> third and remaining sets with slightly lighter still and on short
> rests.
> PTP is mostly about getting stronger without hypertrophy but it does
> include this program as well. If memory serves, the recommendation is
> to take longer rests after the first two sets but then use shorter
> rests
> for the rest.
>
> NB: If you use a heavy weight, even long rests might lead to
> hypertrophy
> if training volume is high enough.


How do you guys define "short rest" or "long rest"? I've been resting
for 3 - 3 1/2 minutes between sets, but I'm concerned that although
I'm lifting more and more weight, my overall size is pretty much the
same as it was when I benched half of what I do now.

******************
Long rest is 3 minutes or longer, short is usually :30-1:00.

-S-
http://www.kbnj.com

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008, Curt wrote:

> On Jul 29, 3:25*am, Jason Carlton <jwcarl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]
>
>> How do you guys define "short rest" or "long rest"? I've been resting
>> for 3 - 3 1/2 minutes between sets, but I'm concerned that although
>> I'm lifting more and more weight, my overall size is pretty much the
>> same as it was when I benched half of what I do now.
>
> Google Max-OT. That system recommends 3 to 4 minutes between sets.
>
> And what? You're benching double what you had been benching but your
> chest hasn't grown at all? That's interesting.

Reckon the dude is so powerful, the universal gravitational constant
decreases in his presence.

tom

--
Interesting, but possibly aimed at madmen. -- Charlie Brooker, on
Torchwood

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008, Curt wrote:

> On Jul 29, 5:04*am, Bob Volkmer <m...@volkmer.biz> wrote:
>> Jason Carlton wrote:
>>
>>>>> Would the above be suitable for hypertrophy, say with approximately
>>>>> 1 minute rest between sets? Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, absolutely. *Short rests for hypertrophy, long rests for pure
>>>> strength. NB: If you use a heavy weight, even long rests might lead
>>>> to hypertrophy if training volume is high enough.
>>>
>>> How do you guys define "short rest" or "long rest"? I've been resting
>>> for 3 - 3 1/2 minutes between sets,
>>
>> Of course it depends on your goals but I use short rests, say 60-75
>> seconds for many lifts but when I do deadlifts and I take longer, maybe
>> 3 minutes or more but then again I don't do deadlifts for hypertrophy.
>
> I'm doing lots of compound movements currently and have been resting
> until I feel I'm ready to go or full recovered. Not watching the clock,
> but I'm almost sure it's at least three minutes between sets.

Same here. I do watch the clock, and i plan my rests as being three
minutes. However, once i've factored in the time it takes to get into
position, pick the weights up, take a deep breath, ogle some bunnies,
adjust my trousers, etc, it's probably a leetle bit more.

>> * *Just lifting things,on a very regular basis, with progressive
>> overload is all that that is required for most.
>
> And X2 on that sentiment as well.

Yup. This is what i've always done, and i've got bigger and stronger doing
it.

We used to talk about sarcoplasmic and myofibrillar hypertrophy, and how
different regimes tilted you towards each; high reps for the former, low
for the latter. Does the amount of rest also have an impact on that?

tom

--
Interesting, but possibly aimed at madmen. -- Charlie Brooker, on
Torchwood

"Burr" <pitzra...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> "Curt" <curtja...@gmail.com> wrote
> Jason Carlton <jwcarl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]
>
> > > How do you guys define "short rest" or
> > > "long rest"? I've been resting for 3 - 3 1/2
> > > minutes between sets, but I'm concerned
> > > that although I'm lifting more and more weight,
> > > my overall size is pretty much the same as it
> > > was when I benched half of what I do now.
>
> > Google Max-OT. That system recommends
> > 3 to 4 minutes between sets.
>
> > And what? You're benching double what you
> > had been benching but your chest hasn't
> > grown at all? That's interesting.
>
> The bar weights 45# UNLESS IT'S THE BODY
> BUILDERS BAR AT 25 POUNDS.
> Maybe he put weights on the bar

lmao! I didn't think of that. Very funny, Burr. You solved the
riddle, but I'm betting that Jason Carlton was benching more than 25
pounds and then "jumped" to 50. lol

Oh, "Happy Birthday!"

> Burr

--

On Jul 29, 12:24*pm, Tom Anderson <t...@urchin.earth.li> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jul 2008, Curt wrote:
> > On Jul 29, 3:25*am, Jason Carlton <jwcarl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > [...]
>
> >> <snip> although I'm lifting more and more weight, my overall
> >> size is pretty much the same as it was when I benched half
> >> of what I do now.
[...]

> > And what? You're benching double what you had been benching
> > but your chest hasn't grown at all? That's interesting.
>
> Reckon the dude is so powerful, the universal gravitational constant
> decreases in his presence.

You bodybuilding scientist you!

--

On Jul 29, 12:32*pm, Tom Anderson <t...@urchin.earth.li> wrote:
[...]

> i plan my rests as being three minutes. However, once i've
> factored in the time it takes to get into position, pick the
> weights up, take a deep breath,


> ogle some bunnies,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> adjust my trousers, etc, it's probably a leetle bit more.

heh

Well, if there's an "ogle some bunnies" factor then I'll have to
recalculate my rest periods.

I'm appropriate in every way and would never speak of women in less
than an entirely chivalrous manner, however there are these two OTHER
guys - dare I say PIGS - in the gym who are constantly ogling the
bunnies. Again, not me and no one I know, but these two OTHER guys
were overheard having the following conversation:

Pig 1: (pointing at target bunny) "Would you do her?"
Pig 2: "Man, I'm an old guy. My standards aren't like yours. I'd bend
any woman in this gym over."

Some men, I tell you. It's just so disrespectul. Tut tut.

> >> * *Just lifting things,on a very regular basis, with progressive
> >> overload is all that that is required for most.
>
> > And X2 on that sentiment as well.
>
> Yup. This is what i've always done, and i've got bigger and
> stronger doing it.

X3, too. Stronger equals bigger. It's all relative though. Some
lifters are naturally stronger to begin. The stronger = bigger holds
true across these differences or variable strength levels from lifter
to lifter, I believe. In other words, a guy who is benching 115 will
be bigger once he's lifting 145 just as the guy who jumps from 315 to
405. Their size may not increase at the same rate, but each will be
bigger once their stronger.

Greater strength comes before size, right, Tom?

But as Jason Carlton seems to demonstrate there might be some
"saturation point" (for lack of a better - or accurate - word) so that
even if he has doubled his weight lifted he might not grow. Perhaps he
needs to triple his strength (or double plus .000001%) to have that
corresponding size increase kick in.

> We used to talk about sarcoplasmic and myofibrillar hypertrophy, and how
> different regimes tilted you towards each; high reps for the former, low
> for the latter. Does the amount of rest also have an impact on that?
>
> tom

Bodybuilding scientists! Run!! Run! Scary vocab alert!!!
AAIIIIIIEEEEEE!!!!!

--

"Tom Anderson" <twic@urchin.earth.li> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.64.0807291724380.9165@urchin.earth .li...
> On Tue, 29 Jul 2008, Curt wrote:
>
>> On Jul 29, 5:04 am, Bob Volkmer <m...@volkmer.biz> wrote:
>>> Jason Carlton wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> Would the above be suitable for hypertrophy, say with
>>>>>> approximately
>>>>>> 1 minute rest between sets? Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, absolutely. Short rests for hypertrophy, long rests for pure
>>>>> strength. NB: If you use a heavy weight, even long rests might
>>>>> lead
>>>>> to hypertrophy if training volume is high enough.
>>>>
>>>> How do you guys define "short rest" or "long rest"? I've been
>>>> resting
>>>> for 3 - 3 1/2 minutes between sets,
>>>
>>> Of course it depends on your goals but I use short rests, say 60-75
>>> seconds for many lifts but when I do deadlifts and I take longer,
>>> maybe
>>> 3 minutes or more but then again I don't do deadlifts for
>>> hypertrophy.
>>
>> I'm doing lots of compound movements currently and have been resting
>> until I feel I'm ready to go or full recovered. Not watching the
>> clock,
>> but I'm almost sure it's at least three minutes between sets.
>
> Same here. I do watch the clock, and i plan my rests as being three
> minutes. However, once i've factored in the time it takes to get into
> position, pick the weights up, take a deep breath, ogle some bunnies,
> adjust my trousers, etc, it's probably a leetle bit more.
>
>>> Just lifting things,on a very regular basis, with progressive
>>> overload is all that that is required for most.
>>
>> And X2 on that sentiment as well.
>
> Yup. This is what i've always done, and i've got bigger and stronger
> doing
> it.
>
> We used to talk about sarcoplasmic and myofibrillar hypertrophy, and
> how
> different regimes tilted you towards each; high reps for the former,
> low
> for the latter. Does the amount of rest also have an impact on that?

Yes, but it's importnat to remember that high reps are associated with
lighter weights than low reps - so is it the rest periods or is it the
weight used or is it the reps? IOW, there are quite a few variables
here.

-S-
http://www.kbnj.com


> tom
>
> --
> Interesting, but possibly aimed at madmen. -- Charlie Brooker, on
> Torchwood

Tom Anderson wrote:

> On Tue, 29 Jul 2008, Curt wrote:
>
>> On Jul 29, 5:04Â*am, Bob Volkmer <m...@volkmer.biz> wrote:
>>> Jason Carlton wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> Would the above be suitable for hypertrophy, say with approximately
>>>>>> 1 minute rest between sets? Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, absolutely. Â*Short rests for hypertrophy, long rests for pure
>>>>> strength. NB: If you use a heavy weight, even long rests might lead
>>>>> to hypertrophy if training volume is high enough.
>>>>
>>>> How do you guys define "short rest" or "long rest"? I've been resting
>>>> for 3 - 3 1/2 minutes between sets,
>>>
>>> Of course it depends on your goals but I use short rests, say 60-75
>>> seconds for many lifts but when I do deadlifts and I take longer, maybe
>>> 3 minutes or more but then again I don't do deadlifts for hypertrophy.
>>
>> I'm doing lots of compound movements currently and have been resting
>> until I feel I'm ready to go or full recovered. Not watching the clock,
>> but I'm almost sure it's at least three minutes between sets.
>
> Same here. I do watch the clock, and i plan my rests as being three
> minutes. However, once i've factored in the time it takes to get into
> position, pick the weights up, take a deep breath, ogle some bunnies,
> adjust my trousers, etc, it's probably a leetle bit more.
>
>>> Just lifting things,on a very regular basis, with progressive
>>> overload is all that that is required for most.
>>
>> And X2 on that sentiment as well.
>
> Yup. This is what i've always done, and i've got bigger and stronger doing
> it.
>
> We used to talk about sarcoplasmic and myofibrillar hypertrophy, and how
> different regimes tilted you towards each; high reps for the former, low
> for the latter. Does the amount of rest also have an impact on that?

We don't really know on what exactly (as I'm skeptical about the accuracy of
this model), but yes.

--
Andrzej Rosa

Curt wrote:

> On Jul 29, 12:32Â*pm, Tom Anderson <t...@urchin.earth.li> wrote:
> [...]
>
>> i plan my rests as being three minutes. However, once i've
>> factored in the time it takes to get into position, pick the
>> weights up, take a deep breath,
>
>
>> ogle some bunnies,
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>> adjust my trousers, etc, it's probably a leetle bit more.
>
> heh
>
> Well, if there's an "ogle some bunnies" factor then I'll have to
> recalculate my rest periods.
>
> I'm appropriate in every way and would never speak of women in less
> than an entirely chivalrous manner,

You just wrote that you don't get any. Sorry. ;-)

> however there are these two OTHER
> guys - dare I say PIGS - in the gym who are constantly ogling the
> bunnies. Again, not me and no one I know, but these two OTHER guys
> were overheard having the following conversation:
>
> Pig 1: (pointing at target bunny) "Would you do her?"
> Pig 2: "Man, I'm an old guy. My standards aren't like yours. I'd bend
> any woman in this gym over."
>
> Some men, I tell you. It's just so disrespectul. Tut tut.

What is so disrespectful? Wanting to have sex with a pretty woman? Damn
you guys, you are totally pussified over there.

>> >> Just lifting things,on a very regular basis, with progressive
>> >> overload is all that that is required for most.
>>
>> > And X2 on that sentiment as well.
>>
>> Yup. This is what i've always done, and i've got bigger and
>> stronger doing it.
>
> X3, too. Stronger equals bigger.

As long as you make a silent assumption that your training protocol doesn't
change. But you could get stronger while getting smaller. Actually every
strength athlete peeking before a competition while making weight managed
to do it once or twice. Or you could get bigger while losing strength.
All it takes is to make appropriate change to the way you train.

> It's all relative though. Some
> lifters are naturally stronger to begin. The stronger = bigger holds
> true across these differences or variable strength levels from lifter
> to lifter, I believe. In other words, a guy who is benching 115 will
> be bigger once he's lifting 145 just as the guy who jumps from 315 to
> 405. Their size may not increase at the same rate, but each will be
> bigger once their stronger.

Well, Jason wrote that he doubled his bench without getting visibly bigger.
I believe him.

> Greater strength comes before size, right, Tom?
>
> But as Jason Carlton seems to demonstrate there might be some
> "saturation point" (for lack of a better - or accurate - word) so that
> even if he has doubled his weight lifted he might not grow. Perhaps he
> needs to triple his strength (or double plus .000001%) to have that
> corresponding size increase kick in.

Do you try to write that sooner or later he will "inevitably" become twice
bigger? If so, I strongly doubt it.

But he could get a bit (maybe substantially) bigger rather easily now. All
it would take would be to switch back to his old protocol. Though he
would gain size while losing strength, I'm afraid. ;-)

[...]
--
Andrzej Rosa

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008, Curt wrote:

> On Jul 29, 12:32*pm, Tom Anderson <t...@urchin.earth.li> wrote:
> [...]
>
>>>> * *Just lifting things,on a very regular basis, with progressive
>>>> overload is all that that is required for most.
>>
>>> And X2 on that sentiment as well.
>>
>> Yup. This is what i've always done, and i've got bigger and
>> stronger doing it.
>
> X3, too. Stronger equals bigger. It's all relative though. Some lifters
> are naturally stronger to begin. The stronger = bigger holds true across
> these differences or variable strength levels from lifter to lifter, I
> believe. In other words, a guy who is benching 115 will be bigger once
> he's lifting 145 just as the guy who jumps from 315 to 405. Their size
> may not increase at the same rate, but each will be bigger once their
> stronger.
>
> Greater strength comes before size, right, Tom?

I dunno lol. At the same time, i would have thought.

> But as Jason Carlton seems to demonstrate there might be some
> "saturation point" (for lack of a better - or accurate - word) so that
> even if he has doubled his weight lifted he might not grow. Perhaps he
> needs to triple his strength (or double plus .000001%) to have that
> corresponding size increase kick in.

You reckon? I think either he has got bigger, but not noticed, or he's
into the fabled zone of neuromuscular training, where you get stronger
without getting bigger. If it's the latter case, maybe he could try higher
reps and eating more pies. But honestly, i know shit all about this.

tom

--
DO NOT WANT!

> But he could get a bit (maybe substantially) bigger rather easily now. All
> it would take would be to switch back to his old protocol. Though he
> would gain size while losing strength, I'm afraid. ;-)

I originally started lifting with the intent of gaining bulk, but then
the numbers started becoming more interesting when I found myself
going a lot higher than I ever could before. So I'm really not sure
what my goal is at this point; size or strength? I don't expect to be
in a fist-fight anytime soon, so I guess size is my current goal.

When you say "switch back to [my] old protocol," can you be more
specific? I went from a 42" chest to a 46" chest inside of 6 months,
increasing my bench from 185x4 to 245x4 (this is doing a pyramid of 8
reps, then 6 reps, then 4 reps, with 245lbs on the last set of 4
reps). But last Monday, my bench was 345x4 at the end of the pyramid,
and I'll be increasing to 355x4 next week, but my chest is still 46".

I've wondered about a "saturation point," too (or I would have said
"genetic limit"), just because in high school my chest was 46", too.
I've been increasing my protein to 1g per pound of body weight with
the hopes that it will make a difference, but if it's made a
difference then it's in density instead of bulk.

> > > And what? You're benching double what you
> > > had been benching but your chest hasn't
> > > grown at all? That's interesting.
>
> > The bar weights 45# UNLESS IT'S THE BODY
> > BUILDERS BAR AT 25 POUNDS.
> > Maybe he put weights on the bar
>
> lmao! I didn't think of that. Very funny, Burr. You solved the
> riddle, but I'm betting that Jason Carlton was benching more than 25
> pounds and then "jumped" to 50. lol

LOL Yeah, I might have jumped a little more than from 25 to 50 :-)

I actually noticed the largest gain when I first started working out.
I didn't have a bench, and was just doing calisthenics, focusing on
push-ups, pull-ups, and high-rep squats. I don't know if you guys will
remember, but I had severed my left hand about 9 years ago, and so I
was getting back into lifting but didn't want to damage my hand.

When I started, I had a 42" chest, and from push-ups alone I jumped to
44" in no time. But I was doing 3 sets of 100 push-ups, and started
having shoulder pain, which is why I invested in a bench press (lower
reps = less joint pain). From there, I went from benching 195 to 245
inside of a few months, and got my chest up to 46".

From there, though, I haven't really seen any change at all. At one
point I assumed that I must be overtraining, so I cut out bent-over
rows and dumbbell flyes, and since I hadn't had any gains in my arms
at all then I cut out curls for awhile, too (which I just recently
added back in). But after 2 or 3 months of mainly focusing on bench
and squats, and significantly increasing my protein, I still haven't
seen any gain in size... at all. I mean, not even 1/16"!


> IIRC he's benching more than double his bodyweight.

I hadn't thought about it, but yeah, I guess you're right. I haven't
maxed in a month or so, but my last bench with an 8-6-4 pyramid had
345 on the set of 4, and next week I'll increase it to 355x4. The last
time I benched I did 405, so in theory I should be able to bench
around 415 or more right now.

I'm weighing in at 185, with a much higher bodyfat % than I want.
That's another thread, though! :-)

"Jason Carlton"
>
>> IIRC he's benching more than double his bodyweight.
>
> I hadn't thought about it, but yeah, I guess you're right. I haven't
> maxed in a month or so, but my last bench with an 8-6-4 pyramid had
> 345 on the set of 4, and next week I'll increase it to 355x4. The last
> time I benched I did 405, so in theory I should be able to bench
> around 415 or more right now.
>
> I'm weighing in at 185, with a much higher bodyfat % than I want.
> That's another thread, though! :-)

WoW, I ain't messing with that big guy.

You're doing good Jason, how old are you?

Did they put your hand back on?

Burr

> WoW, I ain't messing with that big guy.

Yeah, right! At 5' 4, I'm hardly what you'd call intimidating. Plus, I
have surprisingly small arms in comparison to my chest and shoulders
(15 1/2" upper arms), so IMO I look more like a chimpanzee than a body
builder :-)


> You're doing good Jason, how old are you?

I'll be 33 in a little over 3 weeks. But I've always found bench press
to be easy to work with; probably because I started doing push-ups
when I was 13, and used to do 100 every night before bed (long before
I had ever heard of resistance training, sets, etc).


> Did they put your hand back on?

They did, although at the time they told me that it would be
completely unusable, and gave me the option of putting on a hook,
instead! That was literally the scariest thing I had ever heard in my
life. But after a year of physical therapy, with my hand strapped to
my chest, I ended up a lot better off than they had predicted.

For the most part, people can't tell that I'm anything but normal
until I show them. My left pinky is about 1/2 the size of my right
pinky, and my knuckles are messed up so that I can't quite make a
fist; not that it would matter, because the muscle on the outside of
my hand (the gripping muscle) was just about completely removed. This
makes some exercises pretty complicated, because I can only grip with
my index and middle finger. Like with bench press, if I put my hands
1/2" wider than normal, my left hand will slide down the bar while
I'm pressing and there's nothing I can do about it.

> > NB: If you use a heavy weight, even long rests might lead to
> > hypertrophy
> > if training volume is high enough.
>
> How do you guys define "short rest" or "long rest"? I've been resting
> for 3 - 3 1/2 minutes between sets, but I'm concerned that although
> I'm lifting more and more weight, my overall size is pretty much the
> same as it was when I benched half of what I do now.
>
> ******************
> Long rest is 3 minutes or longer, short is usually :30-1:00.

Do you guys think that doing 3 sets of 6 with a 1-minute rest would
stimulate growth more than an 8-6-4 pyramid with a 3+ minute rest? It
would be with lighter weight, obviously; probably 315 (which I would
usually do 8 times in the pyramid), but maybe less if the short rest
has a significant impact.

On Jul 29, 7:16*pm, Jason Carlton <jwcarl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > But he could get a bit (maybe substantially) bigger rather easily now. *All
> > it would take would be to switch back to his old protocol. * Though he
> > would gain size while losing strength, I'm afraid. *;-)
>
> I originally started lifting with the intent of gaining bulk, but then
> the numbers started becoming more interesting when I found myself
> going a lot higher than I ever could before. So I'm really not sure
> what my goal is at this point; size or strength? I don't expect to be
> in a fist-fight anytime soon, so I guess size is my current goal.
>
> When you say "switch back to [my] old protocol," can you be more
> specific? I went from a 42" chest to a 46" chest inside of 6 months,
> increasing my bench from 185x4 to 245x4 (this is