so working each body part 1/week really works?

[guldukat]

Once again there are just far too many variables to take into account when it comes to recovery. You have to go by the way your body feels and your progress under your own unique circumstances.

I think Casual means to say that the variables are accounted for when he's talking about hitting ea/ bodypart once weekly; i.e., the studies he's cited that recovery is fixed, that volume is minimal, that you don't go overboard on intensity, etc.

Personally, after a hi intensity, relatively high volume workout, I would want to wait 6 / 7 days before working that muscle group again. Therefore, I would opt for 7 for practicality.

Absolutely. With any kind of volume plus "high intensity," hitting something more than once a week is going to be awfully rough.

With reduced volume training such as DC, I can just about get away with the 3 sessions every two weeks, but have to say that even with this my CNS starts to get overloaded after a month or so.

For me, 2x or 3 x per week just would not give me the recovery time AND THEN THE GROWTH TIME that I need

Well, for that month, if you were getting stronger, you probably had ample recovery time.

I think it's important to make the distinction between what's ideal for relatively short periods--push, back off, push, back off--and what's good for the very long-term.

If someone planned to do very hard work on a bodypart, even with minimal volume, for 3x week for weeks on end, they are going to burn out. Fast.

I don't think Casual is suggesting that. As a HST advocate, his 3x weekly bodypart hits aren't all balls to the wall as I understand it. That's not to say they're not hard...but I don't think HST has you at your maximum output for a real long time.

You pays the money, you takes the choice…

PS I would not necessarily consider the “fastest” way to gain as being the “best” way to gain, this is a marathon not a sprint, and you need to look at the long term!

That's true, though I see it more as a long series of sprints followed by walking real slow

It is very important to look at the big picture, though, and I think some of you guys are missing Casual's point about that. He's not suggesting that a bodypart can be trained hard 3x/wk. for long periods. To be sure, not nearly as long as one could train that bodypart just once a week.

But is it possible to do that and to grow faster for short periods? Yes. And that would be ideal if you meet a certain no. of circumstances (very low volume particularly). But you don't do it long-term, at least with any routine I've ever heard of (DC, HST).

 

[guldukat]

I hit each body part once a week, I train with intensity and with a fair amount of volume. If you were to train the way I do, except hit each body part 2x or 3x a week you would be overtraining. It's easy for someone who trains like a pussy to hit each bodypart 3x a week because there workouts are so pathetic it takes them no time at all to recover.

Im guessing your the latter casualbb.

Don't be a hater bro!

Casual never said he did a fair amount of volume for each bodypart that many times per week, or that he's training at his maximum throughout, for that matter. You're not addressing his argument, just attacking his person.

 

[casualbb]

Thanks for coming to my defense, guldukat.

It's easy for someone who trains like a pussy to hit each bodypart 3x a week because there workouts are so pathetic it takes them no time at all to recover.

Im guessing your the latter casualbb.

Neglecting the insult, this actually brings up an interesting point. Apparently if someone trains with low volume and/or intensity, they're a "pussy." I think one of the main reasons this whole "intensity" myth persists is because it makes guys feel macho.

That's true, though I see it more as a long series of sprints followed by walking real slow

I like that analogy it's very dual-factor, which the more I learn about the more I agree with.

-casual

 

[BlkWS6]

Casual I have a question for you and don't take this as a flame. Do you (or under the guidelines of your program) believe that strength gains don't equate to gains in size? If you answer yes to this then you can just skip the rest Im about to write.......

Well I was looking at your PR's (congrats by the way) but Im a little confused. I like to think that a gain in strength will most likely lead some gains in size. Now you claim that the program you do is a very fast way to gain size, yet I saw that it took you 6 weeks to move up 10lbs on your SLDL. What is the deal with that? Im not trying to start a pissing contest by any means, but on the 5x5(point here is only that the 5x5 calls for training the muscle 1x a week just using it as an example) 10lb weight increases are made within two weeks. Like I said if you think there is no correlation between getting stronger and getting bigger then none of this makes sense, but if you do think a correlation does exist, don't you think that the approach you are taking is in fact NOT the fastest way to growth if it entails making a 10lb jump in 6weeks. Perhaps you have other variables going into that weight progression that Im not aware of, but it just seems that is an awfully long time to make the 10lb jump.

 

[RusPA81]

In 5X5 you make a 10 pound gain in lifts from a minimal wieght in 2 weeks...

The technique itself says to start very low so ofcourse you will go up 10 pounds and still eb under your previous max. DC has you going up 10+ pounds on lifts ABOVE your previous max.

But it doesnt have you start at a low weight. I started the 5x5 at 295 which was the heaviest I could do and made it up to 350 in 3 months with very little stalling.

 

[NEWcb38ac]

In 5X5 you make a 10 pound gain in lifts from a minimal wieght in 2 weeks...

The technique itself says to start very low so ofcourse you will go up 10 pounds and still eb under your previous max. DC has you going up 10+ pounds on lifts ABOVE your previous max.

 

[BlkWS6]

DC DEFINITELY requires an initial drop in weight similiar to a 5x5. If you are repping out 315lbs on bench and not following a more strict negative like DC calls for (I know I know he just says controlled now and not 4-6sec) you for sure are going to drop your weight. I did do DC training for a little while, and I had to drop my initial weights so it is no different then the 5x5 in that nature.


And like Ruspa said you dont have to drop to a considerably lower weight on the 5x5 to start. You just have to make sure you pick a weight that you can get all 5x5 for.

 

[casualbb]

No, I don't believe strength = size and I also expect to add another 10 pounds tomorrow to make it 20 total.

The army analogy has been made a bunch of times.

The sheer amount of muscle one has is the size of their "army." Strength training in essence makes your "army" capable of fielding more men. So say your army is 800 men strong, but can only field 200 at once. Strength training could raise that to 300 or even 400, all without size gains. Or similarly, one could train to increase the army's size without increasing the number of men it can field. All programs do both to varying degrees.

As to my PR's (thanks btw), for like 2/3 of my exercises I made PR's by about 5-10% of the total weight. Looked at that way, even for a program that has zero focus on strength that's not bad.

-casual

 

[BlkWS6]

Originally posted by casualbb
No, I don't believe strength = size and I also expect to add another 10 pounds tomorrow to make it 20 total.

The army analogy has been made a bunch of times.

The sheer amount of muscle one has is the size of their "army." Strength training in essence makes your "army" capable of fielding more men. So say your army is 800 men strong, but can only field 200 at once. Strength training could raise that to 300 or even 400, all without size gains. Or similarly, one could train to increase the army's size without increasing the number of men it can field. All programs do both to varying degrees.

As to my PR's (thanks btw), for like 2/3 of my exercises I made PR's by about 5-10% of the total weight. Looked at that way, even for a program that has zero focus on strength that's not bad.

-casual

Right on man, that is what I wanted to know. I think I often confuse your program with what I know of DC training. And if my memory serves me right, DC often vouches for the strength = size debate.

 

[nanotitan]

Hmm... "Making guys feel macho"... That is very interesting. Might those be the kind of guys that, say, put pictures of guns in their avatars to look macho as well?

To all of you training your body parts once a week:

If it is working, great, that's what it's all about. If you want your training to work even better, please try giving this some thought. By now, you have learned from experience that because of the way you workout you need a week to recover. Nobody need question that. Now, have you researched what causes you to require this 7 day recovery period? And, are you sure you need to train the way you do to produce gains?

If you could pinpoint what is it that creates the need for a 7 day recovery period and eliminate it from your training while still leaving elements that increase muscle and strength, what would you be left with?

You would be left with a training program that increases muscle and strength while allowing you to train a muscle possibly 2-3 times a week.

Now, taking into consideration that you would have changed your workout, what would you have to consider in order to choose between 1xweek and 2-3xweek training? Well, net results, of course.

Let's say you are able to increase your squat weight by 4-6 pounds every week with one of your regular 1xweek workouts. Now, let's say that with your modified 'improved-recovery-time' workouts you only able to add 2-3 pounds to your squat each session. That would be bad until you consider that you can now squat 3xweek. This means that in that 7 day period you have added 6-9 pounds to your squat. Much better.

Does it work as mechanically as that? No.

How will you know how much you can gain from a "modified 'improved-recovery-time' workout" versus your regular 1xweek workout? By trying it. And HST seems like a good place to start.

You say you've tried training 2xweek and you burned out?

My opinion? You didn't eliminate the factors that caused you to require a 7 day recovery period in the first place. I believe training to failure and too much volume per session resulting in excessive accumulation of fatigue to be the prime suspects for this.

Bottom line, I don't claim to be an expert on anything but I honestly believe that you too can grow 2-3 times a week if you tweak your training towards it.

BTW, I train WSB. That means, among other things, training muscles 2xweek (though working on finding a way to effectively train them 3xweek). Added 120lbs. to my deadlift in 6 months. That is all.