Is 14 sets for back too much?

[SteelWeaver]

I know, I know, I'm like a dog with a bone on this, but let's hear it - do you really think this is too much? what's the max you'd do for back? What about other parts?

 

[SteelWeaver]

For hypertrophy, to failure.

 

[Gladiola]

um, what do you mean by 'back'? 14 sets altogether for erector spinae, lats, rhomboids, traps, rear delt, AND rotator cuff is actually not much at all.

But 14 sets of 12 reps of the SAME exercise - um, that might be a problem. Now that I've done sets of either triples or 5-6, after 8 reps I'm

 

[vinylgroover]

SW,

I stick to around 10. I do 2 x pull-ups 2 x pull-downs, 3 x barbell rows 3 x t-bar rows and i'm happy with that. I do 4 sets of deadlifts on leg day, but i consider deadlifts an 'overall' mass builder not just back.

I guess alot depends on what exercises you do. If i used cables for the bulk of my work which many do, i could do 30 sets and still feel like i haven't worked out.

If you're doing pull-ups, one arm rows, t-bars, barbell rows and deadlifts all out, you should feel stuffed after 10-12 sets.

 

[MS]

Like Gladiola said, what are you calling "back"? And why are you so insistant on an exact answer. There is a time and place for high volume work in hypertophic training, and there is a time and place for low volume. So your question, as posed, does't make sense.

 

[SteelWeaver]

There's something extremely odd about htis thread - it keeps floating back up to the top of the board when the last poster was later than other threads up there - very weird indeed. Do poll threads get bumped if people only vote on them, not post?

Anyway - what am I calling back? Just lats, rhomboids and erectors. With traps it would be more sets.

OK, what I USED to do, until a couple of weeks ago:

Deadlifts x5 (sets)
Pull-ups (well, static hangs, since I'm so weak) x 2
bb rows x3
pull-downs x2
one-arm db rows x2

Deads in the 5-7 rep range, the rest in the 7-10 rep range

I've cut it to 9 or 10 now, plus 3 for traps.

MS, could you tell me WHEN and WHERE the times and places are for high or low volume? This is my problem, and what nobody has been very specific on - I don't know this stuff - I just want to learn. I'm OK with mixing and matching my training if I can see reasonable objectives and goals for what I'm doing. I didn't seem to gain much with traditional periodisation - but maybe I was doing it wrong, or maybe my sense of "gain" is skewed ... I was following textbook recommendations. I DID find out that Fred Hatfield's microcycles are WAY too high volume for me, but have mostly been prodding around in the dark since then. Being on a diet all the time doesn't help. I intend to explore a lot of different training styles next year. But in the meantime, what are you calling "high" volume, and what is "low". And what are the likely times/goals one would use these?

THIS is what I need to know, not an EXACT answer - I need the framework, the rationale, then filling in the pieces is easy, right?

 

[vinylgroover]

Looks good to me Steelweaver. It's always going to be hard for you to 'gain' if you are constantly dieting. It's not to say you need to blow up like a blimp in order to put on muscle, but you do need to cut your body some slack.

IMO, you shouldn't cycle high volume/low volume. Rather, you should be cycling heavy/light. ie 6 week heavy cycle followed by 4 week light or any other combination you choose.

I stand to be corrected, but i don't understand how simply changing the number of sets performed (which is what i understand by the term volume) will provide any benefit.

The exercises you include in your back work also provide a tremendous amount of stimulation to your rear delts. Pull-ups, barbell rows and one-arm rows stress your rear delts as well, so no need to go overboard on rear delt work.

 

[MS]

SteelWeaver, have you ever looked at/tried HST? It spells it all out for you and works well on the whole (no, I don't work for the company that markets HST). But that's for AFTER your show. No hypertrophy is gonna happen between now and then!

 

[SteelWeaver]

Actually, I printed out the entire HST programme earlier this year (my god, it's huge), and was thinking about following it, but then Arioch helped me design a programme, so I put it on the back-burner. Also, a bunch of guys on the training board were raving about it, which I took to be a sign that it was faddish. As well as the fact that simply colouring in the blocks is not my style - if I don't feel ownership/creation, I am naturally wary - which is probably silly .... but anyway - it just seemed to me to make so much more sense to learn WHAT the basic building blocks are, and HOW and WHY to use them, then use those tools to design my OWN thing. I mean, isn't that how the learning process works?

If I'm gonna be in this for life, I'd jolly well better know how it works, nuts and bolts up, not just follow a cookie cutter programme, right?

HOWEVER - I completely understand why you suggested that - the process of learning involves modelling first .... I should know this.

Indeed, if, in your experience, it works, I am all for trying it

 

[MS]

I don't really know what you mean about colouring in blocks, or a huge programme. I'm talking about the spirit of HST. The 'inventor' of the concept has plenty of references for you to read if you really want to understand the "how" of it. Quite simply I was meaning a type of periodization that actually targets hypertrophy as opposed to the majority of periodization programmes that target strength increases. If you wait to understand everything before you even try it to see if it works, you'll never be at the cutting edge of anything.

So what did this huge programme with colored blocks look like??