Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
J
JohnyJuice
Guest
i normally do the first 2 sets for a pump, the last 2 till failure
supersizeme
New member
I see no pilates or spinning in this routine. I also don't see any type of ribbon twirling. All three of these combined have taken my physique to uncharted territories.
60 reps per bodypart is assinine,
Not really, when you look at the principle it imparts upon the trainee.
I guarantee that 60 one rep maxes, compensating for the slight drop in weight, is NOT an ideal way to train.
Of course not, which is why no one will do 60 one rep maxes. Not that you would be able to without total loss of mental focus. Hence the beauty of the system. If you start trying one rep maxes, you will get to set 10 and be burnt out. Thus unable to finish the other 50 reps of anything. So therefore, you defeated yourself.
Neither is doing 60 reps with a 100rm weight.
Again, this is not the point. If you did attempt one set of 60 reps. Average trainees would get to 20 reps and drop the weight from lactic acid build up. Thus making them incorporate additional sets in the program if they wanted to hit 60 reps. Even doing a baby weight for 60 reps is counter productive. As I said, you must make EACH REP COUNT. That does not mean one rep max sets. If you got to 40 reps and bullshitted around, you defeated yourself. The program is not about it working for you, but rather you working for it.
60 reps on a 2/4 tempo = 360 seconds or six minutes of TUT.
Again, if you can do 60 reps in one set, obviously you are NOT making each rep count. And defeating the purpose here.
That might be overtraining to you and undertraining to me.....it still falls back to volume whether it be counting reps or sets or both.
Counting sets is insignificant to judging muscle stimulation. Do 4 sets work for you? With a dedicated spotter, I can make them work for me. Does 40 sets work for you? I incorporate volume training rather often. I often do 30-40 sets of side laterals over the course of a DVD playing. Do I go balls to the wall and strain for that last rep? No. Or else I would never complete 40 sets. With low to moderate intensity - not enough to break my concentration of following along with the movie - when the movie is over, my delts are pumped and bursting. Was the muscle stimulated? Yes. Was the principle of counting sets a factor in muscle stimulation? No.
The article mentions 19 setsfor back being too much if going to failure.....my question is why would you NOT go to failure on each set?
You answered your own question right there. Think about it.... if you did go to muscle failure on each set - chances are you would NOT need 19 of them would you? I was using his listed 19 sets as an example. If you want to shoot for 19 sets for back and still stay with under the zone of over training.. you could not do 19 sets of complete muscle failure at 6 reps could you? Instead, in order to get 19 sets (just for upper back as mentioned) and still not over train, some of those sets will not be all out effort would it?
See, results on that system is 100% based on how well you listen to your body and train accordingly.
Not really, when you look at the principle it imparts upon the trainee.
I guarantee that 60 one rep maxes, compensating for the slight drop in weight, is NOT an ideal way to train.
Of course not, which is why no one will do 60 one rep maxes. Not that you would be able to without total loss of mental focus. Hence the beauty of the system. If you start trying one rep maxes, you will get to set 10 and be burnt out. Thus unable to finish the other 50 reps of anything. So therefore, you defeated yourself.
Neither is doing 60 reps with a 100rm weight.
Again, this is not the point. If you did attempt one set of 60 reps. Average trainees would get to 20 reps and drop the weight from lactic acid build up. Thus making them incorporate additional sets in the program if they wanted to hit 60 reps. Even doing a baby weight for 60 reps is counter productive. As I said, you must make EACH REP COUNT. That does not mean one rep max sets. If you got to 40 reps and bullshitted around, you defeated yourself. The program is not about it working for you, but rather you working for it.
60 reps on a 2/4 tempo = 360 seconds or six minutes of TUT.
Again, if you can do 60 reps in one set, obviously you are NOT making each rep count. And defeating the purpose here.
That might be overtraining to you and undertraining to me.....it still falls back to volume whether it be counting reps or sets or both.
Counting sets is insignificant to judging muscle stimulation. Do 4 sets work for you? With a dedicated spotter, I can make them work for me. Does 40 sets work for you? I incorporate volume training rather often. I often do 30-40 sets of side laterals over the course of a DVD playing. Do I go balls to the wall and strain for that last rep? No. Or else I would never complete 40 sets. With low to moderate intensity - not enough to break my concentration of following along with the movie - when the movie is over, my delts are pumped and bursting. Was the muscle stimulated? Yes. Was the principle of counting sets a factor in muscle stimulation? No.
The article mentions 19 setsfor back being too much if going to failure.....my question is why would you NOT go to failure on each set?
You answered your own question right there. Think about it.... if you did go to muscle failure on each set - chances are you would NOT need 19 of them would you? I was using his listed 19 sets as an example. If you want to shoot for 19 sets for back and still stay with under the zone of over training.. you could not do 19 sets of complete muscle failure at 6 reps could you? Instead, in order to get 19 sets (just for upper back as mentioned) and still not over train, some of those sets will not be all out effort would it?
See, results on that system is 100% based on how well you listen to your body and train accordingly.
J
JohnyJuice
Guest
O.K. i really need to get one of you fools to train me sometime. Damnit. i wish i had some fuckers at my gym i could learn from. Well, i must be doing something right. i have oput on 80lbs in 3 years.
J
JohnyJuice
Guest
Re: Re: What do you think of my routine (mods, please dont move this)
True. i will post it over there too.JOKER47 said:
I'm on the Training board...you know ME...
B True
B True
Bigsatan13
New member
I was going to ask how long you were doing this and if you see progress?
T
The Shadow
Guest
B]Not really, when you look at the principle it imparts upon the trainee.[/B]
how so??
imparts what exactly??
in what type of way that any other "sysytem" will not do?
I guarantee that 60 one rep maxes, compensating for the slight drop in weight, is NOT an ideal way to train.
Of course not, which is why no one will do 60 one rep maxes. Not that you would be able to without total loss of mental focus. Hence the beauty of the system. If you start trying one rep maxes, you will get to set 10 and be burnt out. Thus unable to finish the other 50 reps of anything. So therefore, you defeated yourself.
the original text said do 60 reps....you say 60 mini one rep maxes are too much....why??
You are forcing 60 reps to fit every person - again 60 is just a randon munber - you have not shown a single shred of data to support 60 being the "zen" number......I could just as easily say do 50 reps...the same priniples you have stated would apply in the same way.....therefore the 60 reps total is meaningless......
Neither is doing 60 reps with a 100rm weight.
Again, this is not the point. If you did attempt one set of 60 reps. Average trainees would get to 20 reps and drop the weight from lactic acid build up. Thus making them incorporate additional sets in the program if they wanted to hit 60 reps. Even doing a baby weight for 60 reps is counter productive. As I said, you must make EACH REP COUNT. That does not mean one rep max sets. If you got to 40 reps and bullshitted around, you defeated yourself. The program is not about it working for you, but rather you working for it.
....not necessarily true. So....lets say I do 50 reps and made "every one count"...I can't do anymore as I have trained to utter exhaustion over x number of sets......how id that less productive than doing the same over 60 reps??? It isn't.....
60 reps on a 2/4 tempo = 360 seconds or six minutes of TUT.
Again, if you can do 60 reps in one set, obviously you are NOT making each rep count. And defeating the purpose here.
I didn't say 6 minutes over ONE set...I said the total TUT is 6 minutes.....no matter how many sets.
That might be overtraining to you and undertraining to me.....it still falls back to volume whether it be counting reps or sets or both.
Counting sets is insignificant to judging muscle stimulation. Do 4 sets work for you? With a dedicated spotter, I can make them work for me. Does 40 sets work for you? I incorporate volume training rather often. I often do 30-40 sets of side laterals over the course of a DVD playing. Do I go balls to the wall and strain for that last rep? No. Or else I would never complete 40 sets. With low to moderate intensity - not enough to break my concentration of following along with the movie - when the movie is over, my delts are pumped and bursting. Was the muscle stimulated? Yes. Was the principle of counting sets a factor in muscle stimulation? No.
The same exact argument can be made about counting reps as well.....but.....if you DO indeeed do 40 sets of laterals...I assume you do a sets of 1-2 reps and then stop to keep the Holy Grail of 60 reps?? Even with low intensity, this is similar in principle to the example I gave of doing 60 reps with a 100rm weight......very low intensity w/o going to failure.....so you have just stated contradictory ideas.
The article mentions 19 sets for back being too much if going to failure.....my question is why would you NOT go to failure on each set?
You answered your own question right there. Think about it.... if you did go to muscle failure on each set - chances are you would NOT need 19 of them would you? I was using his listed 19 sets as an example. If you want to shoot for 19 sets for back and still stay with under the zone of over training.. you could not do 19 sets of complete muscle failure at 6 reps could you? Instead, in order to get 19 sets (just for upper back as mentioned) and still not over train, some of those sets will not be all out effort would it?
He could do 19 sets of a 3 reps and still not overtrain according to your philosophy......couldn't he? Make very rep count......???
See, results on that system is 100% based on how well you listen to your body and train accordingly.
No the system is based on using a single parameter to judge its effectiveness for everyone...and that is an impossibility.
The system, as I understand it, says do 60 reps broken up over however many sets and you have cooked the muscle.
Justify why, based on what you have listed, why the rep total MUST be 60 reps...why not 50, 55 or even 59???
btw - looking at the original routine.......and even going by a 60 rep principle, you have to admit that the progam jj listed is one that he wil overtain from.....count the reps.
how so??
imparts what exactly??
in what type of way that any other "sysytem" will not do?
I guarantee that 60 one rep maxes, compensating for the slight drop in weight, is NOT an ideal way to train.
Of course not, which is why no one will do 60 one rep maxes. Not that you would be able to without total loss of mental focus. Hence the beauty of the system. If you start trying one rep maxes, you will get to set 10 and be burnt out. Thus unable to finish the other 50 reps of anything. So therefore, you defeated yourself.
the original text said do 60 reps....you say 60 mini one rep maxes are too much....why??
You are forcing 60 reps to fit every person - again 60 is just a randon munber - you have not shown a single shred of data to support 60 being the "zen" number......I could just as easily say do 50 reps...the same priniples you have stated would apply in the same way.....therefore the 60 reps total is meaningless......
Neither is doing 60 reps with a 100rm weight.
Again, this is not the point. If you did attempt one set of 60 reps. Average trainees would get to 20 reps and drop the weight from lactic acid build up. Thus making them incorporate additional sets in the program if they wanted to hit 60 reps. Even doing a baby weight for 60 reps is counter productive. As I said, you must make EACH REP COUNT. That does not mean one rep max sets. If you got to 40 reps and bullshitted around, you defeated yourself. The program is not about it working for you, but rather you working for it.
....not necessarily true. So....lets say I do 50 reps and made "every one count"...I can't do anymore as I have trained to utter exhaustion over x number of sets......how id that less productive than doing the same over 60 reps??? It isn't.....
60 reps on a 2/4 tempo = 360 seconds or six minutes of TUT.
Again, if you can do 60 reps in one set, obviously you are NOT making each rep count. And defeating the purpose here.
I didn't say 6 minutes over ONE set...I said the total TUT is 6 minutes.....no matter how many sets.
That might be overtraining to you and undertraining to me.....it still falls back to volume whether it be counting reps or sets or both.
Counting sets is insignificant to judging muscle stimulation. Do 4 sets work for you? With a dedicated spotter, I can make them work for me. Does 40 sets work for you? I incorporate volume training rather often. I often do 30-40 sets of side laterals over the course of a DVD playing. Do I go balls to the wall and strain for that last rep? No. Or else I would never complete 40 sets. With low to moderate intensity - not enough to break my concentration of following along with the movie - when the movie is over, my delts are pumped and bursting. Was the muscle stimulated? Yes. Was the principle of counting sets a factor in muscle stimulation? No.
The same exact argument can be made about counting reps as well.....but.....if you DO indeeed do 40 sets of laterals...I assume you do a sets of 1-2 reps and then stop to keep the Holy Grail of 60 reps?? Even with low intensity, this is similar in principle to the example I gave of doing 60 reps with a 100rm weight......very low intensity w/o going to failure.....so you have just stated contradictory ideas.
The article mentions 19 sets for back being too much if going to failure.....my question is why would you NOT go to failure on each set?
You answered your own question right there. Think about it.... if you did go to muscle failure on each set - chances are you would NOT need 19 of them would you? I was using his listed 19 sets as an example. If you want to shoot for 19 sets for back and still stay with under the zone of over training.. you could not do 19 sets of complete muscle failure at 6 reps could you? Instead, in order to get 19 sets (just for upper back as mentioned) and still not over train, some of those sets will not be all out effort would it?
He could do 19 sets of a 3 reps and still not overtrain according to your philosophy......couldn't he? Make very rep count......???
See, results on that system is 100% based on how well you listen to your body and train accordingly.
No the system is based on using a single parameter to judge its effectiveness for everyone...and that is an impossibility.
The system, as I understand it, says do 60 reps broken up over however many sets and you have cooked the muscle.
Justify why, based on what you have listed, why the rep total MUST be 60 reps...why not 50, 55 or even 59???
btw - looking at the original routine.......and even going by a 60 rep principle, you have to admit that the progam jj listed is one that he wil overtain from.....count the reps.
T
The Shadow
Guest
One more thing:
60 reps with a one second concentric and a one second eccentric = 120 seconds of TUT or work..
2 seconds up and down = 240 seconds TUT
most trainess do a 5 second rep - so that is 300 seconds worth of work.
etc......according to the 60 rep deal....these scenarios are equalvalent.....all done with proper care....none to failure...mind into every rep......trainees will get identical results, genetics, etc all being equal?
yes or no?
60 reps with a one second concentric and a one second eccentric = 120 seconds of TUT or work..
2 seconds up and down = 240 seconds TUT
most trainess do a 5 second rep - so that is 300 seconds worth of work.
etc......according to the 60 rep deal....these scenarios are equalvalent.....all done with proper care....none to failure...mind into every rep......trainees will get identical results, genetics, etc all being equal?
yes or no?
Similar threads
