WTF is this 5x5 routine that is so popular ?

[VictorBR]

I never really looked into it ...Is this something that you do 5 reps per SET !!??? and 5 sets ?

Is that it ??

Are you people doing this trying to gain strenght ? powerlifters ?

Because if you are bodybuilders trying to INCREASE your MUSCLE SIZE , you should be doing between 8-12 reps ALWAYS . Jay cutler and most of the pros stay on the 8-10 rep range ALWAYS .

end rant .


Victor

 

[van_wilder]

I never really looked into it ...Is this something that you do 5 reps per SET !!??? and 5 sets ?

Is that it ??

Are you people doing this trying to gain strenght ? powerlifters ?

Because if you are bodybuilders trying to INCREASE your MUSCLE SIZE , you should be doing between 8-12 reps ALWAYS . Jay cutler and most of the pros stay on the 8-10 rep range ALWAYS .

end rant .


Victor

I don't know... some punk ass skinny kid that can't lift worth a shit posted it up...
http://www.elitefitness.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=281085




heh... i use it on and off with great results for both strength and size! (edited to make sure Needsize knows i was joking )
VW

 

[Joe Stenson]

Because if you are bodybuilders trying to INCREASE your MUSCLE SIZE , you should be doing between 8-12 reps ALWAYS . Jay cutler and most of the pros stay on the 8-10 rep range ALWAYS .

 

[Saint V]

I never really looked into it ...Is this something that you do 5 reps per SET !!??? and 5 sets ?

Is that it ??

Are you people doing this trying to gain strenght ? powerlifters ?

Because if you are bodybuilders trying to INCREASE your MUSCLE SIZE , you should be doing between 8-12 reps ALWAYS . Jay cutler and most of the pros stay on the 8-10 rep range ALWAYS .

end rant .


Victor

Ya ok So unless I use sets of 8-12 reps ALWAYS, I won't grow muscle? Cool. Got it.



Jackass!

 

[brooklynheight]

I

Because if you are bodybuilders trying to INCREASE your MUSCLE SIZE , you should be doing between 8-12 reps ALWAYS . Jay cutler and most of the

Victor

hahahahhahaha

 

[strangebrew]

Wow....

 

[locrian]

I never really looked into it ...Is this something that you do 5 reps per SET !!??? and 5 sets ?

Is that it ??

Are you people doing this trying to gain strenght ? powerlifters ?

Because if you are bodybuilders trying to INCREASE your MUSCLE SIZE , you should be doing between 8-12 reps ALWAYS . Jay cutler and most of the pros stay on the 8-10 rep range ALWAYS .

end rant .


Victor

i prefer higher reps for tri's, calves, and quads 15rep range usually. but changin rep range along with the routine is necessary for continued progress. so your statement is way off

 

[Joe Stenson]

I wonder if Victor personally knows all of these pros, or if he's just basing that bogus statement off of what he read in the most recent issue of Flex.

 

[Saint V]

I wonder if Victor personally knows all of these pros, or if he's just basing that bogus statement off of what he read in the most recent issue of Flex.

Of course he knows all of them. How else would he get so wise.

 

[Apexx]

I never really looked into it ...Is this something that you do 5 reps per SET !!??? and 5 sets ?

Is that it ??

Are you people doing this trying to gain strenght ? powerlifters ?

Because if you are bodybuilders trying to INCREASE your MUSCLE SIZE , you should be doing between 8-12 reps ALWAYS . Jay cutler and most of the pros stay on the 8-10 rep range ALWAYS .

end rant .


Victor

Bro, I think you need to rethink your post a little bit. Everyone is different. I respond best in the 6-8 rep range.

 

[Madcow2]

I guess everybody that's been really happy putting on 10-25lbs in 2 months (which seems pretty damn common around here) should diet back down and start again. I'll fire off some emails to some of the better strength coaches in the country and let them know that they have been bulking their athletes all wrong for the past 30 years and that all of that muscle needs to be turned back in immediately, preferably to Jay or yourself so that we can keep an account.

Anyway, in the meantime while you wait for them to all cut back down why not read this pretty comprehensive overview on training theory here. You'll know more than Jay pretty damn quick and get a better understanding of this stuff: http://forum.mesomorphosis.com/showthread.php?t=8500

 

[van_wilder]

Ya ok So unless I use sets of 8-12 reps ALWAYS, I won't grow muscle? Cool. Got it.



Jackass!

Why is everyone so jumpy on these boards lately??? why not explain your reasoning instead of just a negative response.

I think that the 8-12 rep range is critical for muscle hypertrophy, but i think that the shocking the muscle with new routines is most important. I like to employ a variety of routines and usually switch it up every 3 months or so.

The 5x5 have served to pack on both size and strength for me working at the lower rep range. I've also found an HST routine worked well for size, although i did find that my strength didn't shoot up as high as it did with a 5x5.

I've used many different routines and training styles and I personally feel that the specific routine that you use isn't as important as your intensity. You have to hit whichever muscle(s) you are working that particular day hard.... balls to the wall wether you're using light weight, heavy weight, doesn't matter.

Bottom line: 5 x 5 good, HST good, whatever else you're using is probably good... but more importantly are you training hard CONSISTENTLY over a long period of time. Change your routine often so you don't get bored and you shock your body.


VW

 

[van_wilder]

Bro, I think you need to rethink your post a little bit. Everyone is different. I respond best in the 6-8 rep range.

You are 100% right! everyone responds differently... I think what he's referring to is the textbook definition of hypertrophy training that has been popularized by training gurus like Bompa.

VW

 

[Slyder190]

5x5 = The most powerful I've ever been naturally. Nuf said.

 

[mekannik]

I've used many different routines and training styles and I personally feel that the specific routine that you use isn't as important as your intensity. You have to hit whichever muscle(s) you are working that particular day hard.... balls to the wall wether you're using light weight, heavy weight, doesn't matter.

Bottom line: 5 x 5 good, HST good, whatever else you're using is probably good... but more importantly are you training hard CONSISTENTLY over a long period of time. Change your routine often so you don't get bored and you shock your body.


VW

Good post. In my earlier years of training 5x5 worked good - for a certain time. Now I am finding good gains using 10x3, wave loads, and my personal favorite - the 1-6 routine.

The body adapts over time. Between boredom and physical adaptation we need different routines to elicit different responses. Your goals should determine your methods - not popular opinion. Or professional steroid monkeys.

 

[stilleto]

it is my belief, and plenty of others, that to gain size, you must gain strength.

 

[VictorBR]

it is my belief, and plenty of others, that to gain size, you must gain strength.

Good point thought , you can use this routine for a while to build some strenght but you should stick with 8-12 reps as your base .

All the people doing 5 x 5 that are getting results , pretty good I must say . congrats . That doesn't mean you wouldn't be getting better results by doing something different . LOL .

5x5 imo is good for powerlifters only , or like to use temporarily to build some strenght but to stick to it for a long time is stupid imo .

OH and btw - when taking 2 g of AAS a week , you can do 1 , 5 , 8 or 50 reps per set , you will still grow . So....


Victor






Victor

 

[VictorBR]

Good post. In my earlier years of training 5x5 worked good - for a certain time. Now I am finding good gains using 10x3, wave loads, and my personal favorite - the 1-6 routine.

The body adapts over time. Between boredom and physical adaptation we need different routines to elicit different responses. Your goals should determine your methods - not popular opinion. Or professional steroid monkeys.

>>>> Good point , you can change for a while because your body will adapt . But then again , you should always go back to 8-12 reps .

BTW - to the guy that asked if I know the pros , no I don't Jay Cutler but I DO KNOW some other pros that stick to 8-12 as their base . Is that enough for you ?


Victor

 

[VictorBR]

Of course he knows all of them. How else would he get so wise.

>> I am wiser than you that is for sure thought .


Victor

 

[VictorBR]

Why is everyone so jumpy on these boards lately??? why not explain your reasoning instead of just a negative response.

I think that the 8-12 rep range is critical for muscle hypertrophy

>>> that is what I was trying to say but most idiots couldn't understand .

You can chabge your routine sometimes but MOST of the time you better stick to 8-12 .

Your muscles will keep growing as long as you increase your weights and change your exercises . I don't really think you should change your reps that much .


Victor

 

[stilleto]

dude... even if the 5x5 was ONLY good for strength, you do understand that not everyone is a bodybuilder right?
some people just want to get stronger- it doesn't make them powerlifters OR not as smart as you.
i'm guessing you are under 20, correct?

 

[Madcow2]

>>>> Good point , you can change for a while because your body will adapt . But then again , you should always go back to 8-12 reps .

BTW - to the guy that asked if I know the pros , no I don't Jay Cutler but I DO KNOW some other pros that stick to 8-12 as their base . Is that enough for you ?


Victor

Back when I cared, I had discussions on training with multiple pro BBers. I worked closely with one for a while just as he was earning his card. Watched somewhere between 5-10 train for varying periods on a semi-regular basis (other than their size and strength, their training was remarkably similar to any one of the normal plateaued guys running around the gym - some of these guys might have even worked harder and had a better overall workout design). One thing is certain, supperior knowledge or application of training is not in any way a prerequisite for success in professional BBing (nutrition, structural genetics, discipline, a good dealer, and the genetics to respond very favorably to drugs and anciliaries are very important though). I can't remember a single conversation where it wasn't obvious within the first minute that they didn't have a clue with regards to training. I've seen uniformly bad results when these guys trained natural lifters. I've yet to see or meet a single one that I actually felt had a level of knowledge that would make him a decent high school coach in a weightroom.

Some of the worst information in the world comes from these guys - stuff so bad as to totally discredit them from even understanding basic training 101. Probably the best thing to do if one wants to build an impressive physique and would prefer not to live on drugs would be to ignore anything that comes out of these guys. You might miss a few odd bits of info (I'll give them the benefit of the doubt that they can produce something worthwhile) but you'll save yourself from heaps of bullshit and misinformation.

Here's a decent piece on different types of hypertrophy and how different rep ranges can work synergistically over a long training period with periods focusing on each. Should be a decent read and specifically addresses 5 sets of 5 and how all of this relates to bodybuilding.

TOPIC 6: DIFFERENT KINDS OF HYPERTROPHY

Hypertrophy: guys, i wrote this in responce to a question on the think muscle board... i thought it might be of interest to some of you here. if not, well no harm done i guess. there are basically 3 trainable factors involved in size and strength. sarcoplasmic hypertrophy... does not directly increase strength but can effect it by increasing tendon angle at the attachment. but of course increases size. sarcomere hypertrophy... increases contractile proteins in muscle thereby increasing strength directly and also size. neural effeciency... increase in the percentage of motor units that can be activated at any given time. no effect on size but increases strength. the training for each quality exists on sort of a continuim. training for sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is high volume and low intensity... like 10 sets of 10 for a muscle. training for sarcomere hypertrophy is med intensity and med volume... like 5 sets of 5 for a muscle. training for increased neural effeciency is high intensity and low volume... like 5 max effort singles for a given muscle. now, each style of training effects each muscle quality, but in different quantities. for example, 10 sets of 10 will result in a high degree of sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, some sarcomere hypertrophy, and little or no increase in neural effeciency. 5 sets of 5 will increase all 3 qualities, but will effect sarcomere hypertrophy the most. max effort singles will increase neural effeciency a great deal, but will have only a small effect on hypertrophy of the sarcomere, and little or no effect on sarcoplasmic hypertrophy. so no matter how you train, you are likely to get both bigger and stronger... but the degree to which each quality is increased depends on the training. as you get more advanced, the picture changes somewhat. for example, if a highly trained explosive athlete, like a shot-putter, did only workouts of 10 sets of 10 for a month, he would get hypertrophy of the sarcoplasm... but likely NO hypertrophy of the sarcomere and would likely LOSE neural effeciency, simply because he was so highly trainind in this quality beforehand that 10 sets of 10 would not be sufficient stimulus to even keep what neural effeciency he had. also... for a beginner, doing multiple singles would likely lead to some size increases. but for an advanced bodybuilder it would not be sufficient stimulus to keep the sarcoplamic hypertrophy already present. now, as far as whether training for one quality helps subsequent training for another quality, the answer is yes. for instance, an athlete who is only concerned with explosive strength will still train at times with higher reps and experience some sarcoplamic hypertrophy... this "supports" later gains in sarcomere hypertrophy and neural effeciency by building work capacity (sarcoplasmic hypertrophy adds the neccessary ingredients such as cappillaries to the muscle to support high work capacity later in the training cycle, so the athlete can do a higher volume of work). also, a bodybuilder who is only concerned with size will do most of his work with volumes and intensities of training which favor hypertrophy of both the sarcomere and the sarcoplasm. but heavy work done to increase neural effeciency will also help... the ability to activate more motor units during an all out effort will make the rest of his training more result producing and effecient. as far as how to "cycle" these different types of work during a training cycle... well at almost all times during a training cycle you should do at least SOME work on each quality... if you totally neglect some portion of the muscle you will lose performance in that quality. however, you should shift your concentration of work from the least important quality for your sport over time to the most important. in other words... a bodybuilder might begin training for a contest 6 months away with more high intensity work, and gradually shift the emphasis over the months to more med. and low intensity work. a strength athlete would do the opposite. hope this helped in some way.

 

[eat big]

Victor, think before you post. This thread deserves no more posts.

 

[mekannik]

>>>> Good point , you can change for a while because your body will adapt . But then again , you should always go back to 8-12 reps .

BTW - to the guy that asked if I know the pros , no I don't Jay Cutler but I DO KNOW some other pros that stick to 8-12 as their base . Is that enough for you ?


Victor

I appreciate your endorsement - but be careful of the absolutes you are espousing. With your allegiance to 8-12 reps as an absolute base, you are coming across much like Mike Menzter and his proteges who all believe HIT is the only way to train: That is it - end of discussion.

We already had one debacle on this training board with HIT'ers.

For what it is worth I like Ian King's take on sets/reps being related to your training age.

The whole article: http://www.t-nation.com/findArticle.do?article=171cheat

Here’s how Ian breaks it down:

If your main goal is muscle growth:
0-2 years of experience: 10-15 reps
3-6 years of experience: 8-12 reps
6-10 years of experience: 6-10 reps
>10 years of experience: 4-8 reps

If your main goal is maximal strength:
0-2 years of experience: 4-8 reps
3-6 years of experience: 3-6 reps
6-10 years of experience: 2-5 reps
>10 years of experience: 1-4 reps

And if you want the best of both worlds (size and strength):
0-2 years of experience: 6-12 reps
3-6 years of experience: 5-10 reps
6-10 years of experience: 4-8 reps
>10 years of experience: 3-6 reps

 

[Slyder190]

You know, some guys live by the method of 8-12 reps and see resulys from it for quite some time while making changes here and there. SOME guys. The guys I would say have great genetics. MOST guys do well on such routines and then plateau. To me, in this game, you MUST keep on learning and applying dif methods. I myself have always trained to failure using 6-12 reps and as high as 20 reps for legs. I've done this while eating 4000+ calories naturally. I got a lttle stronger, but put on more BF than muscle weight. I began reading the the theories of madcow and others along this same train of thought as far as training theories. After applying the 5x5 method (madcow's) I got incredibly stronger in a short period of time. I didn't get any bigger but I can also say that I was trying to stay to lean even while bulking as ny BF was about 7% roughly. I can't wait to try a different diet approach come fall with the 5x5 or DFHT. I can honestly say that madcow has converted me.

 

[ass_face]

I never really looked into it ...Is this something that you do 5 reps per SET !!??? and 5 sets ?

Is that it ??

Are you people doing this trying to gain strenght ? powerlifters ?

Because if you are bodybuilders trying to INCREASE your MUSCLE SIZE , you should be doing between 8-12 reps ALWAYS . Jay cutler and most of the pros stay on the 8-10 rep range ALWAYS .

end rant .


Victor

I think the 5x5 is a nice program, but I like to vary reps. 12-15, 8-10, 5-7. I usually stagger my training using this rep pattern. Causes you to hit more of your fibers.

 

[needsize]

wow, most of the mass I carry was built around the 5-8 rep range, I guess I must be a lot smaller than I thought I was

 

[blut wump]

Maybe you're just not as small as you'd like to be.

I've tried higher rep ranges and don't much like them. I'm usually either getting bored or fighting lactic acid. With lower ranges my muscles give out before I lose the will to live which is what it's all about for me.

 

[ass_face]

Maybe you're just not as small as you'd like to be.

I've tried higher rep ranges and don't much like them. I'm usually either getting bored or fighting lactic acid. With lower ranges my muscles give out before I lose the will to live which is what it's all about for me.

I read an interesting article... can't remember who wrote it... but it said whatever worked the least for you when you first started training, may be the best for you after 10 or more years of training. I used to grow like a weed with high reps when I first started training and 5x5 programs did nothing for me.... Now 14 years later, I train a lot with 5-7 reps and do much better. I think over time, we have to adapt. No rep range is really superior. They all have a place in achieving your goal.

 

[ScottK345]

So far the 5x5 method for me has worked the best, I am getting huge gains in size and how much weight I am putting up. Only thing I don't like about the program is squating 3 times a week but so far it has been paying off so no complaints.

 

[Joe Stenson]

Progressive overload and a caloric surplus is all that is needed for hypertrophy. This talk about having to do a certain number of reps to grow is absurd.

 

[van_wilder]

So far the 5x5 method for me has worked the best, I am getting huge gains in size and how much weight I am putting up. Only thing I don't like about the program is squating 3 times a week but so far it has been paying off so no complaints.

why are you squatting 3 times a week?
VW

 

[Joe Stenson]

why are you squatting 3 times a week?
VW

Isn't that what the program calls for?

 

[blut wump]

Isn't that what the program calls for?

Be more positive, bro.

The program is based around the squat as the main driving force. The three sessions, for squats, can be thought of as light, medium, heavy and, during that phase, getting the volume of squatting in is a big part of the program. You soon get to thinking of your squats as warmups of varying intensity and the results help you to like them even more.

 

[Tadow]

On this board, 5X5 is God.

Not that it's a bad program - but you guys should look at what you are saying before you just put off other people's ideas as insignificant. You are telling some people on this thread that they are idiots because they believe 8-12 reps is the "magic number." Then you go on to tell them that 5X5 is the "magic program." Seems a little two-faced to me.

A lot of the BASIC PRINCIPLES that madcow posts I really do believe are accurate. But where you go from some of these ideas to the major claim that 5X5 is the most efficient workout ever... I just don't see it. There have to be many other ways to apply that knowledge (dual-factor) into a program that isn't specifically 5X5 that would be just as effective.

Not to mention - wasn't there a Poll thread on the results that people on this very board got from using the 5X5 program? I don't recall seeing everyone's results showing size and strength gains.

I have no doubt that the 5X5 is a kick ass program for many people, and that the bullshit that the BB media engine pumps out is useless. But the trend lately around here is to tell anyone that doesn't use the 5X5 that they are an idiot wasting thier time - and unless you have been training with them, and seeing thier results, its just not fair to jump to that conclusion.

 

[van_wilder]

Isn't that what the program calls for?

I don't think so...what's your split look like?
VW

 

[Joe Stenson]

I don't think so...what's your split look like?
VW

I'm not doing the program, but blut wump just explained it. Look around at the main 5x5 thread or people's journals; they all have squats listed as the first exercise Mon/Wed/Fri. You just don't go balls-to-the-wall on each of the days.

 

[van_wilder]

I'm not doing the program, but blut wump just explained it. Look around at the main 5x5 thread or people's journals; they all have squats listed as the first exercise Mon/Wed/Fri. You just don't go balls-to-the-wall on each of the days.

hmmm...okay... i'm thinking of needsize's 5x5, i was under the impression that it did not involve that much squatting??
VW

 

[Joe Stenson]

hmmm...okay... i'm thinking of needsize's 5x5, i was under the impression that it did not involve that much squatting??
VW

Yeah sorry bro, that just hit me, and I realize where the confusion is coming from. You're thinking of Needsize's 5x5, but the new thing on this board is madcow's version.

 

[van_wilder]

Yeah sorry bro, that just hit me, and I realize where the confusion is coming from. You're thinking of Needsize's 5x5, but the new thing on this board is madcow's version.

Okay....my apologies then! I have only used Needsize's 5 x 5 so i can't comment on any other program! sorry for the confusion... I don't spend too much time over on this side of the board but i really should! I'm an idiot..

As for my opinion on the whole rep range, it remains the same as my previous post.
VW

 

[blut wump]

On this board, 5X5 is God.

Not that it's a bad program - but you guys should look at what you are saying before you just put off other people's ideas as insignificant. You are telling some people on this thread that they are idiots because they believe 8-12 reps is the "magic number." Then you go on to tell them that 5X5 is the "magic program." Seems a little two-faced to me.

A lot of the BASIC PRINCIPLES that madcow posts I really do believe are accurate. But where you go from some of these ideas to the major claim that 5X5 is the most efficient workout ever... I just don't see it. There have to be many other ways to apply that knowledge (dual-factor) into a program that isn't specifically 5X5 that would be just as effective.

Not to mention - wasn't there a Poll thread on the results that people on this very board got from using the 5X5 program? I don't recall seeing everyone's results showing size and strength gains.

I have no doubt that the 5X5 is a kick ass program for many people, and that the bullshit that the BB media engine pumps out is useless. But the trend lately around here is to tell anyone that doesn't use the 5X5 that they are an idiot wasting thier time - and unless you have been training with them, and seeing thier results, its just not fair to jump to that conclusion.

Here's an example of someone using the principles to devise their own routine in a higher rep-range with good results.
http://www.elitefitness.com/forum/showpost.php?p=4906052&postcount=566

As you rightly say, the madcow 5x5 is just one possible program. It's certainly a good one from my own experience but there are other dual factor programs around. Probably as many as there are coaches, not to mention that after your first run of the program you tend to start customizing to your own ends anyway.

I think there are a lot of good links on the table of contents page of the madcow program which, at the least, can offer an eye-opener to anyone who is used to using the BB magazines as a source of routines and workouts. There's a lot of good reading in there even if you don't like the program.
http://www.elitefitness.com/forum/showpost.php?p=4491869&postcount=1

 

[Madcow2]

On this board, 5X5 is God.

Not that it's a bad program - but you guys should look at what you are saying before you just put off other people's ideas as insignificant. You are telling some people on this thread that they are idiots because they believe 8-12 reps is the "magic number." Then you go on to tell them that 5X5 is the "magic program." Seems a little two-faced to me.

I don't think anybody is claiming 5x5 is God. The original poster trashed the set/rep scheme and said it was inappropriate for hypertrophy - others have simply stated their results. For most people the periodized Starr program is their first time using something that's well put together. There's no magic, it's just a really solid program for improving the core lifts in a viable range for hypertrophy. It allows for a lot more productive workload than most have ever used work drives adaptation and the periodization deals with the limitations to work imposed by the CNS.

As far as how good it is...well, honestly I've never seen another program any better at adding muscle to a broad range of lifters (it's no accident that this thing has been in use for so long and components appear in programs for novices through some of the finest athletes around). That doesn't mean there aren't programs just as good using different methods and rep ranges and that doesn't mean that one of these might not work better for a given individual. I just haven't seen one applied to a broad base that gets better results. That's why I posted it here, it always gets results, it breaks a lot of the voodoo BBing myths, and presents a very easy to understand example of dual factor theory implemented.

A lot of the BASIC PRINCIPLES that madcow posts I really do believe are accurate. But where you go from some of these ideas to the major claim that 5X5 is the most efficient workout ever... I just don't see it. There have to be many other ways to apply that knowledge (dual-factor) into a program that isn't specifically 5X5 that would be just as effective.

This is something I've been constantly trying to encourage, several of these appear in my TOC. Hell, most of what I post there now isn't concerned with the Starr 5x5 at all. DFHT is one of them, Smolov is another, I know I've touched on Korte's 3x3, Westside, and HST (although I didn't link them because they don't exactly need promotion). Specifically to the piece I posted above on different types of hypetrophy and the synergy between training in different rep ranges, I try to encourage people interested in mass to try HST or DFHT after a period of 5x5 work (the periodized covers down to triplies) in order to let some of this neural efficiency build into higher rep ranges which I feel would be very effective for a BBer. DC would probably work for this too although I don't have a good enough understanding of it to endorse it and think the emphasis around failure shouldn't be carried for too long.

My efforts are really more to present good effective training and demonstrate how to implement it and design more macro level training programs around a specific individual. This isn't about the 5x5, it's about education and helping people achieve their goals. Look at the journals and results accross the board they are pretty great with everyone experiencing major strength gains and everyone getting serious hypertrophy a lot in the 15-30lbs in 4 months or 2 cycles. Those on cutting diets, trying to maintain weight and not add, or simply not able to eat enough calories and not gaining either fat or muscle (i.e. no caloric surplus present) not withstanding but even these guys have all gotten a lot stronger.

Not to mention - wasn't there a Poll thread on the results that people on this very board got from using the 5X5 program? I don't recall seeing everyone's results showing size and strength gains.

The poll originated February 2003. I first started posting about this program in the beginning of 2005 with the main thread originating Feb 2005. Make whatever call you want on that. It's not like 5x5 isn't a popular set and rep range with many other programs using it. Also, let's face it - a lot of people are morons. I've caught 16 year old 130lbers over at BBing.com gearing up to use the periodized version - absolutely rediculous. They need to lift and eat. Believe me, people can and will screw everything up and there's a reason the word musclehead exists.

I have no doubt that the 5X5 is a kick ass program for many people, and that the bullshit that the BB media engine pumps out is useless. But the trend lately around here is to tell anyone that doesn't use the 5X5 that they are an idiot wasting thier time - and unless you have been training with them, and seeing thier results, its just not fair to jump to that conclusion.

I'll have to look more closely but I really haven't seen that and if I had, I'd discourage it pretty strongly. I really think it's just a case of providing someone with a pretty solid program to get bigger and stronger that is obviously working pretty well accross everyone. In all honesty, it's rare that you get a cookie cutter program that can accomplish this - although to be fair I do have it setup not to kill anyone and also provide a novice version which is more of an intermediate and not a beginners program. I guess I should probably make a beginner program sometime but in all honesty they can buy www.startingstrength.com, learn the lifts, and that will take them through the first year or so. Rippetoe generally gets 30lbs on a novice in the first 4 months as a standard so rather than a bottle of Pill Factor X endorsed by Joe Jerkoff they can put their $25 into something that will serve them a lifetime and get them into great shape.

 

[Tadow]

Hey Madcow

Didn't mean that post towards you in any specific way. It was more of a general observation on the attitude on this board. I don't have a lot of posts but you can see by my start date that I have been reading for a while.

I respect the amount of time and effort you have put into helping people here. It's obvious that you go above and beyond to help people accomplish thier goals.

This is something I've been constantly trying to encourage, several of these appear in my TOC. Hell, most of what I post there now isn't concerned with the Starr 5x5 at all. DFHT is one of them, Smolov is another, I know I've touched on Korte's 3x3, Westside, and HST (although I didn't link them because they don't exactly need promotion). Specifically to the piece I posted above on different types of hypetrophy and the synergy between training in different rep ranges, I try to encourage people interested in mass to try HST or DFHT after a period of 5x5 work (the periodized covers down to triplies) in order to let some of this neural efficiency build into higher rep ranges which I feel would be very effective for a BBer. DC would probably work for this too although I don't have a good enough understanding of it to endorse it and think the emphasis around failure shouldn't be carried for too long.

My efforts are really more to present good effective training and demonstrate how to implement it and design more macro level training programs around a specific individual. This isn't about the 5x5, it's about education and helping people achieve their goals. Look at the journals and results accross the board they are pretty great with everyone experiencing major strength gains and everyone getting serious hypertrophy a lot in the 15-30lbs in 4 months or 2 cycles. Those on cutting diets, trying to maintain weight and not add, or simply not able to eat enough calories and not gaining either fat or muscle (i.e. no caloric surplus present) not withstanding but even these guys have all gotten a lot stronger.

Glad to see that you agree in theory with some of what I said. Like I mentioned before, my post wansn't a personal attack on you or your programs. It just seems to me that people around here are so stuck on the 5X5 that they don't seem willing to adapt and tweak things to find out what works best for themselves. They don't seem to realize that you can still utilize dual-factor training in a system different than the specific 5X5 that has become so popular.

 

[Madcow2]

Hey Madcow

Didn't mean that post towards you in any specific way. It was more of a general observation on the attitude on this board. I don't have a lot of posts but you can see by my start date that I have been reading for a while.

Believe me, I didn't take it that way at all - and you presented it well so the thought never entered my mind. You brought up a lot of good points and it was worth the time, not just to respond to you but to put some thoughts down so that others might benefit (it helps to break out the quotes though and that seems to make it more of a personal response than intended. Plus, I had to point out that the poll predates this program's appearance on this board by 2 years as there's always confusion and to be honest, so many programs use a similar set and rep scheme in some way or another that it's just a general confusing way to refer to the program. I've been trying to use Bill Starr 5x5 or some such just because this program isn't nearly so famous in BBing as it is in strength and conditioning.

It's funny, when I first put that program on here, everyone wanted to change it and make it a 3 day split (which is impossible) or butcher it in one way or another. I was always pointing out that those who have completed it rarely ever want to mess with it and generally love it, now'a'days it seems like many are afraid to add a set of curls or some such (probably an exageration but it illustrates the reversal in attitudes).

 

[blut wump]

Give me a break. Most people are going onto the 5x5 because the standard stuff has stopped working. Adapting and tweaking within normal BB paramters has failed to break plateaus and the 5x5 has come to the rescue. Once anyone has done the program they realise that they can tweak it to their heart's content. Like madcow just explained, the 5x5 is simply an excellent general purpose dual-factor program. He's made this clear many times and gives links to other DF programs in his TOC.

 

[Quadsweeps Sister]

...."Why can't we all just get alooooong???"


__________________
Mythicwrld

"We deceive ourselves when we fancy that only weakness needs support. Strength needs it far more."

 

[psychedout]

The 5x5 worked excellent for me. I kept virtually all my mass while dieting naturally as well as added some strength. In the past I usually had a big problem with loosing mass while dieting, but not with this program. My joints also never felt better on it.

There is a lot more to training than going balls to walls to failure week in and week out. Single-factor bullshit like that may get you somewhere in the first 2 years of training, but after that it's all in the drugs. When you take juice it magnifies the stimulus by so much that you can grow of virtually anything.

More importantly than the actually 5x5 rep scheme though, is the principles behind it. I think most anabolic board guys don't really understand progressive overload and deconditioning. I certainly thought I did about 6 months ago but was shown the light and can now see much better.

I have since move onto an HST based program and just finished my 4th week. It uses many rep ranges 15's,10's,5's, & 3's, yet is still based on the same principles as the 5x5. Bottom line is that its the principles behind it -- and the 5x5/HST probably have more science backing it up than any other programs that I am aware of.

 

[Joe Stenson]

The poll originated February 2003. I first started posting about this program in the beginning of 2005 with the main thread originating Feb 2005. Make whatever call you want on that.

I pointed this out already, but let's make the distinction clear. The original 5x5 people talked about on this board was presented by Needsize. Yours is something quite different.

 

[needsize]

I pointed this out already, but let's make the distinction clear. The original 5x5 people talked about on this board was presented by Needsize. Yours is something quite different.

thats why we need separate names, my version has proven very effective, but frankly I am more impressed with what I am reading about madcow's version

 

[Singleton]

training for sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is high volume and low intensity... like 10 sets of 10 for a muscle.

What is low intensity? So if I want sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, I could do say,

10x10 @ 30% 10rm?

Or

10x10 @ 40% 10rm?


That could be a really big difference in total load. The tonnage on the second one is 333% more! I think this type of thing is going to be very delicate. I've never done something like that. I would like to try, but I'm scared I'll get it wrong and overtrain.

Please advise. And do provide refs, if you can

 

[Guinness5.0]

thats why we need separate names, my version has proven very effective, but frankly I am more impressed with what I am reading about madcow's version

If I understand right, you pretty much intuitively figured out that gradually increasing the weights then backing them off after a while and starting to ramp them again was effective. That's pretty damn impressive IMHO.

 

[JL_204]

If I understand right, you pretty much intuitively figured out that gradually increasing the weights then backing them off after a while and starting to ramp them again was effective. That's pretty damn impressive IMHO.

I think alot of people do this to an extent. They feel like they're at the brink of overtraining and they take a week off. The only difference is volume/intesity/frequency are outta wack whick makes for a shittier deload.

 

[Guinness5.0]

I think alot of people do this to an extent. They feel like they're at the brink of overtraining and they take a week off. The only difference is volume/intesity/frequency are outta wack whick makes for a shittier deload.

Yeah but I'd still be pounding away, ALWAYS trying to go heavy, ALWAYS going to failure if it wasn't for reading this board. I'm not stupid but I think it would take me quite some time to see a pattern with taking time off and coming back stronger. Like most seem to do I stalled out and jumped on some juice thinking I'd hit my "genetic limits". I jsut thought it was worth showing needsize some props for figuring something out that I wouldn't have on my own.

 

[JL_204]

Yeah but I'd still be pounding away, ALWAYS trying to go heavy, ALWAYS going to failure if it wasn't for reading this board. I'm not stupid but I think it would take me quite some time to see a pattern with taking time off and coming back stronger. Like most seem to do I stalled out and jumped on some juice thinking I'd hit my "genetic limits". I jsut thought it was worth showing needsize some props for figuring something out that I wouldn't have on my own.

Yeah, i hear what your saying bro, he does deserve props.
I was the same way as you before coming to this site. This forum has alot of damn knowledge floating around compared to other boards ive been to.

 

[Madcow2]

thats why we need separate names, my version has proven very effective, but frankly I am more impressed with what I am reading about madcow's version

Core lifts in a good volume/rep range, progressive overload, a consistent plan and methodology, backing off and beginning again after strength peaks (i.e. precedes onset of overtraining) - your program is a good one, it's going to be damn hard to screw it up and not get bigger or stronger. You should be proud that you made it especially coming from a pure BBing setting which doesn't really expose one to much of the training world. It's as good as anything else out there that I've come accross and certainly head and shoulders above most of the garbage that passes for training. If everybody in the gym used this, it would solve the vast majority of their problems. It's not as big a departure from the Starr 5x5 as you might think, it's just a matter of making room so to speak.

I played no part in the Starr 5x5 or any of the periodization stuff. It's all Starr, Rippetoe, Pendlay, Kilgore, etc...I guess I added the 3x per week intensity/deload but that was more as a one off for a specific individual who I knew had a good tolerance for workload and just seemed to work for a lot of guys and add a much bigger emphasis on strength and neural efficiency which could be used later when one transfered to a higher rep range or back into the volume. This probably caused more issues and confusion than anything else so I can't really quantify this as a contribution, that said, it's brutal for many but it works if managed correctly.

Anyway I'll go into some of the differences and give you an idea on where the gains and strength are coming from relative to a standard 3 day split bodypart 1x per week linear protocol, this is pretty important for experienced lifters so it's definitely relevant for someone like yourself.

The biggest differences are going to be the pure focus on the core lifts and through management of fatigue, the ability to train them with higher workloads and frequency. Muscles respond to workload and fatigue is the limiting factor in the ability to apply more stimulus. So when you manage fatigue you are creating the opportunity to do much more work over a period than you would if there was no active management over a long linear period (fatigue can be disipated quickly, much faster than fitness (gains) and you can tolerate a lot more work over a limited period than an infinite one i.e. what is tolerable for 3 weeks is much greater than what is tolerable for 10 weeks - over the same 10 weeks a periodized management of fatigue will allow much higher average workloads).

So anyway, now you have greater workload and you can divide this with greater frequency and perform the big lifts that matter a lot more often. Adaptation and specificity go hand in hand - you adapt to what you train for so the more you train for something (within tolerable limits) the more your body will try to accomodate it - naturally you choose the big lifts that develop the entire body like the squat, row, etc... This greater frequency allows the body to build skill and accomodate the specific movement (a la getting better at it - it's damn hard to get better at something you do 1x per week - the body and CNS just don't adapt as well to the movement regardless of the amount of work you do simply because it's so infrequent - or when you are trying to do 20 different exercises as most BBers seem to shotgun into their programs), so you add the benefits of this aspect too. Now you get better at the Class A exercises by training them more often and with much higher loads. These are the exercises that matter and they drive gains over the entire body.

So in a sense, it's not really very different - it just makes room for a lot more work. Periodization allows bigger workloads and this excess is spent purely on the core lifts, performing them as often as possible and pushing yourself into record territory on a pretty frequent basis. This is going to increase capacity in the core lifts in a huge way, obviously this is going to result in a lot of muscle. It's basically the same program as yours but the periodization allows it to do what you really want to do but often can't when you are experienced and training in a linear manner - pound the core lifts as often as possible for a lot of volume and waste as little recovery as possible on the stuff that doesn't really matter.

So on the one hand it might appear very different but in reality the aim and underlying method are exactly the same. The periodized Starr 5x5 takes advantage of dual factor theory and periodization to make room for a lot more work and frequency - something that would plunge someone into overtraining fairly quickly were it not setup to account properly for this. It's not like this is in any way common in BBing or understood even though it's very common just about everywhere else. What at first seems night and day, boils down to one or two point really. Anyway, I hope that helps a bit.

 

[Joe Stenson]

thats why we need separate names, my version has proven very effective, but frankly I am more impressed with what I am reading about madcow's version

I used yours bro back in the day and loved it. That was back when I thought muscles should only be hit once/week though. So yeah, yours is definitely a solid program, but the more I look at madcow's the more I like it.

That's really the biggest difference between your program and madcow's. While many people still don't do it, I think it's becoming more and more accepted that hitting a muscle group multiple times/week is going to yield optimal results; you just need to compensate by lowering volume and/or intensity in each workout.

 

[Quadsweeps Sister]

The 5x5 worked excellent for me. I kept virtually all my mass while dieting naturally as well as added some strength. In the past I usually had a big problem with loosing mass while dieting, but not with this program. My joints also never felt better on it.

There is a lot more to training than going balls to walls to failure week in and week out. Single-factor bullshit like that may get you somewhere in the first 2 years of training, but after that it's all in the drugs. When you take juice it magnifies the stimulus by so much that you can grow of virtually anything.

More importantly than the actually 5x5 rep scheme though, is the principles behind it. I think most anabolic board guys don't really understand progressive overload and deconditioning. I certainly thought I did about 6 months ago but was shown the light and can now see much better.

I have since move onto an HST based program and just finished my 4th week. It uses many rep ranges 15's,10's,5's, & 3's, yet is still based on the same principles as the 5x5. Bottom line is that its the principles behind it -- and the 5x5/HST probably have more science backing it up than any other programs that I am aware of.

I think your statement about the 'many rep ranges...' is right on. Its true when anabolics are involved growth will come generally (if eating and training are appropriate), but the 'change up' is sometimes what a body needs. Louie from Westside said to me so many times, he likes to have his athletes continually do different exercises - albeit based or founded upon the same principles. It's also good to keep things interesting and fresh so you can remain motivated mentally and on the upside get progressive physical gains. Finding what works best for each of us is a constant goal we are all probably trying to achieve.
__________________
Mythicwrld

"We deceive ourselves when we fancy that only weakness needs support. Strength needs it far more."

 

[needsize]

thanks guys, it is a program that I made back in the day, actually never having heard of the bill starr version, or any other, so that being considered, it has been a solid program that has put a very large amount of strength and size on me
But at the same time, its taken me as far I can get, I was a fairly solid 260lbs at 5'8", could deadlift 550 x 6 and squat ass to the floor 500 x 5, all totally raw, so it and its variations have served me well. but now I have a top trainer who is also an IFBB pro in my corner, and her stuff is nothing like I have ever seen before

 

[Madcow2]

but now I have a top trainer who is also an IFBB pro in my corner, and her stuff is nothing like I have ever seen before

Best of luck with it. I've not been impressed with the training knowledge of any IFBB pro and if this is something that you've never seen before just go into it with eyes open. I've spoken with more than a few and basically don't even want to know anymore.

A decent illustrative story, I was a trainer at a commercial gym a long time back when a pro was earning his card worked there in the same capacity. He looked great but the results of his clients were piss poor. He had been training this one guy for 3 years - guy had decent genetics too and I know I could pack muscle on him with no problem but wasn't progressing and carried a decent amount of fat (so cals weren't the issue, more the machines and bullshit structure of the training). This guy's friend (who was much smaller and worse structure for lifting) joins the gym at his prodding and I wind up setting him up on a program and working with him. So like 3 months go by and I put a lot of weight on this guy - had him pulling deads and squatting, he was really loving his progress (he'd ask me about his friend's training but I just kept my mouth shut and it didn't take long for him to figure it out on his own). They go out one night and they realize that the guy I train isn't smaller anymore but can't even get into the other guy's jacket which he was putting on by accident. The dude gets so pissed off he jumps on the juice a week later (and then obviously his program started working for him).

So - seeing this guy's results, seeing the training of a number of Pros, speaking with a decent amount on training theory (kind of a bummer of a conversation) - I've kind of held the opinion that supperior training knowledge is not a requirement to becoming a pro BBer. Granted it doesn't hurt but when you have no performance criteria other than hypertrophy and can administer as much as you want without restriction you can simply take enough to make sure whatever you are doing will work. Nutrition, structural genetics, discipline, goal setting, planning, execution, genetics to respond well to anabolics and anciliaries, and a good source seem to be the most important factors and as long as some form of reasonable weight training is present, that seems to be enough.

Just my take on ProBBing.

 

[stilleto]

it is my belief, and plenty of others, that to gain size, you must gain strength.

tom treutlin, listen up.
i just saw my red k from you that says "not true", so let me give you a little english lesson before you finish high school.
when a sentence starts with "IT IS MY BELIEF", that means that ONLY I can refute it, since ONLY I know what i believe.
you see how that makes sense?
now, its a lot like when a bunch of mods are sick of your bullshit, and we all say to eachother "I want tom gone", we are mearly stating what each of us WANTS, not necessarily what will happen if tom grows up.

 

[Tom Treutlein]

victorbr, you had one good arguement on the diet board months ago, which stated that caloric excess was all that mattered for gaining or losing weight. Despite the fact that so many people opposed you, you stuck by your belief. It was good to see you weren't swayed so easily by the conventional bullshit people spew like seperating carbs and fats, or cutting off carbs after a certain time.

What I don't understand is, why are you being influenced by these pro bodybuilder's bullshit now? To say 8-12 reps is ideal for hypertrophy is a bold statement. Perhaps to need to read up more on what causes hypertrophy. There are four main principles that Bryan Haycock, founder of HST, came up with after compiling tons of peer-reviewed studies. They are as follows:

1. Mechanical Load: Basically, lifting weights. Placing the muscle under stress. Simple and obvious.

2. Frequency: The more frequent your bouts of training, the better. Frequency is a severely underrated aspect of adding mass. I'm not going into details on this if I don't need to.

3. Progressive Load: The weights must move in an upward trend over time. Contrary to popular belief, this doesn't mean one needs tons of strength in order to grow. Of course, should one gain strength, chances are they'll grow. However, lifting submaxial weights time and again, avoiding failure, will work just as nicely. You can milk a lot of growth out of lower weights than more people think.

4. Strategic Deconditioning/Time Off: Bryan coined the term, and it kind've pisses me off, but I guess it makes sense. You don't just take off when you feel like it, but you do so in a "strategic manner". The whole point is so your muscles decondition themselves and will again be affected by lower loads. This has to do with the RBE or Repeated Bout Effect that has been viewed time and again as a real thing. Studies have been done supporting its presence, and if you read up on it, it should make sense.

Okay, too much typing. Food time.

 

[psychedout]

Listen to Tom. He really knows his HST principles. I'll expand on number 2 in a second (not courtesy of me however).

 

[psychedout]

Courtesy of Calkid


2) Frequency Potentially the most controversial, so I'll be spending a lot of time on it.

The various growth factors initiated by training all peak at around 24 hours post-workout, and than fall back to baseline by 48 hours. (2, 3, 4, and especially 6, 7) Typically, programs will sacrifice training frequency for the ability to add volume. This is counterproductive if your goal is to have bigger muscles. Given the average split of once/week, this means one will spend two days growing and five days maintaining muscle size without adding to it. This has been confirmed in the lab. One study compared the effects of a volume of weight training performed all on one day of the week to the same volume spread across three days of the week. The thrice-per-week group saw greater muscle gains as well as strength gains over 40% greater than the once-per-week group.(5)
This can also seem counterintuitive, as muscle soreness and strength often do not recover after a mere two days. In actuality, neither of those factors (soreness or voluntary strength) is related to muscle growth.

The ability to recover one's strength is directly related to muscle failure. Training to failure directly inhibits voluntary strength. Basically, training to failure fries your nerves (not the technical term ) and prevents them from being able to contract the muscles for long periods of time. So when one trains to failure and then waits until strength is recovered to train a muscle again, oftentimes the muscle has long recovered and is waiting for the nervous system to catch up.
This means that sometimes, with HST, you will be training through soreness. This is totally okay! Soreness is not harmful, and people generally find that training a sore muscle will cause the soreness to stop.


References:
1) Warren GL, Hayes DA, Lowe DA, Armstrong RB. Mechanical factors in the initiation of eccentric contraction-induced injury in rat soleus muscle. J Physiol. 1993 May;464:457-75
2) Nosaka K, Clarkson P.M. Muscle damage following repeated bouts of high force eccentric exercise. Med. Sci. Sports Exrc., 27(9):1263-1269,1995
3) Smith LL., Fuylmer MG., Holbert D., McCammon MR., Houmard JA., Frazer DD., Nsien E., Isreal RG. The impact of repeated bout of eccentric exercise on muscular strength, muscle soreness and creatine kinase. Br J Sp Med 28(4):267-271, 1994
4) T.C. Chen, Taipei Physical Education College, and S.S. Hsieh, FACSM,. The effects of a seven-day repeated eccentric training on recovery from muscle damage. Med. Sci. Sports Exrc. 31(5 Supp) pp. S71, 1999
5) McLester JR., Bishop P., & Guilliams M. Comparison of 1 and 3 day per week of equal volume resistance training in experienced subjects. Med. Sci. Sports Exrc. 31(5 Supp) pp.S117 1999
6)MacDougall JD, Gibala MJ, Tarnopolsky MA, MacDonald JR, Interisano SA, Yarasheski KE. The time course for elevated muscle protein synthesis following heavy resistance exercise.
Can J Appl Physiol. 1995 Dec;20(4):480-6.
7)Phillips, S. M., K. D. Tipton, A. Aarsland, S. E. Wolf, and R. R. Wolfe. Mixed muscle protein synthesis and breakdown after resistance exercise in humans. Am. J. Physiol. 273 (Endocrinol. Metab. 36): E99-E107, 1997

 

[needsize]

madcow, the trainer is Laura Binetti, she is pretty much known as the top trainer in this area, her guys always finish in the top 3.
She trains a ton of people I know, one guy, last year i watched him go from 230-288lbs in a year(still had abs at that weight), and was on stage for his first show at just under 240lbs, which is huge. So her contest training is bang on, but her offseason stuff is even better

 

[Madcow2]

Never heard of her (which means nothing because the last time I followed BBing at all was a decade ago - although I did watch the Arnold on INHD because I like my HDTV and it happened to be on ). If she's having success with a range of others that's something then, especially if she is talented at adding muscle and retaining it while preping for a contest. I didn't mean to sound like a downer, but I've been categorically unimpressed with Pro training in the past so many times over the years but that certainly doesn't mean that an individual might not have a lot to offer specifically around getting in shape for contests which is something unique to BBing competition. If it works and works consistently, pay attention and learn about it. Maybe you adopt that style or maybe you eventually borrow what you like and integrate it into your own system. Either way it sounds as if she gets results accross a number of people on a consistent basis (that's generally an indicator of something working) so that alone makes it worth your time.

 

[needsize]

I'm with you as far as not being impressed by a lot of pros, many just seem to rely on genetics, which the rest of us dont have that luxury. This one really knows her stuff though, her physique is definitely impressive to say the least, but what I've seen her do with others is what impresses me the most

 

[WalkingBeast]

There is a lot more to training than going balls to walls to failure week in and week out. Single-factor bullshit like that may get you somewhere in the first 2 years of training, but after that it's all in the drugs. When you take juice it magnifies the stimulus by so much that you can grow of virtually anything.

Worked well enough for me! No drugs yet. Now Im just trying to get back to where I was, as in the signature and avatar. Ive been training over 10 years and nothing special about my genetics. Takes me very long to grow. Considering where I started Ive gained 9 inches on my arms with failure training. For me 5x5 only helped me gain back some lost strength from an injury, but after that it was my old routine that brought me above and beyond (strength and size wise). My tolerance is too high, I need much more abuse to grow or strengthen. I wasnt meant to grow, but that doesnt mean shit when you push yourself beyond limits and force that shit. KILL THAT SHIT!!

 

[WalkingBeast]

As was said, alot of it comes from intensity and forcing a routine to work. Of course with a completely worthless routine, that would only go so far. I dont like to have any doubts in my mind whether or not I pushed myself as hard as I could. Id rather go out training this way.

 

[Tom Treutlein]

You weren't meant to grow? Unless you mean that as in you've reached your genetic potential, it's an odd thing to say. I know of your fucked up stomach and such, but to say you "weren't meant to grow" seems a little misguided.

Either way, you've got a lot of dedication, and you put forth with a lot of gusto. It's impressive, to say the least. Still, I think if you took a severely long time off (3-4 months), your muscles would decondition a ton, thus making you susceptible to lighter loads and much less volume, which would allow you a new shot at hypertrophy without killing all your time.

Then again, you like that, don't you?

 

[WalkingBeast]

You weren't meant to grow? Unless you mean that as in you've reached your genetic potential, it's an odd thing to say. I know of your fucked up stomach and such, but to say you "weren't meant to grow" seems a little misguided.

Either way, you've got a lot of dedication, and you put forth with a lot of gusto. It's impressive, to say the least. Still, I think if you took a severely long time off (3-4 months), your muscles would decondition a ton, thus making you susceptible to lighter loads and much less volume, which would allow you a new shot at hypertrophy without killing all your time.

Then again, you like that, don't you?

ThanX brother!! All I mean by "not meant to grow" is its very difficult for me to get any amount of growth and just as hard to maintain. I dont believe that genetic potential is something that can truly ever be determined. With or without drugs. Yea, I just got off a 5 month lay off and Im plenty "deconditioned". Ill be training differently for a while since I dont have much choice at the moment. If I push too hard Ill fuck myself up once again. Ruptured disks as I mentioned before. So, we'll see how this deconditioning works out. Since Ill be testing it out unintentionally. Its an interesting theory.

 

[van_wilder]

tom treutlin, listen up.
i just saw my red k from you that says "not true", so let me give you a little english lesson before you finish high school.
when a sentence starts with "IT IS MY BELIEF", that means that ONLY I can refute it, since ONLY I know what i believe.
you see how that makes sense?
now, its a lot like when a bunch of mods are sick of your bullshit, and we all say to eachother "I want tom gone", we are mearly stating what each of us WANTS, not necessarily what will happen if tom grows up.

Agreed he hit me with RED too... Tom.. you are truly an ass. Big fucking deal you've managed to cut and paste a bunch of info from the HST website. That is all you've brought to this and that is only one opinion of what an effective hypertrophy program constists of. There are many others... you're ignorance in this fact surprises me. You are not even worth the time it has taken me to write this so I'm out of this thread. Hopefully you get banned.
VW

 

[Tom Treutlein]

People are such fucking babies. This is too much!

 

[stilleto]

enjoy your timeout tom. come back when you have patients and can have an adult conversation like the other good people here. there is a ton of useful info here. some you will agree with and follow and some you won't- thats why its a discussion board and not a list of rules.

 

[cwc73]

This thread makes me laugh. I mean come one guys. IT has everything that is SO typical of EF in it. Alas, let me explain.

1. Some guy--maybe a somewhat newb--comes in and makes a statement that is LAW and works for EVERYONE. Ok, everyone bashed it enough. Bottom line, everyone is different. Not everyone is going to respond to 8-12 rep range well.

2. Tommy T coming in and writing a book on HST and how great it is. Oh, and I do really like it. Tom's a smart guy and knows his shit.

3. MC HAmmer backing up his 5X5 routine with like a million links and qoutes. No flame here bro. I love your help, and the 5x5 is going great. You're the man on here bro!

4. WalkingBeast coming in and wanting to "Kill some shit"! I mean Intensity is this guys middle name.

5. And MOST IMPORTANT: I LOVE YOU GUYS AND EF!

 

[lavi]

This thread makes me laugh. I mean come one guys. IT has everything that is SO typical of EF in it. Alas, let me explain.

1. Some guy--maybe a somewhat newb--comes in and makes a statement that is LAW and works for EVERYONE. Ok, everyone bashed it enough. Bottom line, everyone is different. Not everyone is going to respond to 8-12 rep range well.

2. Tommy T coming in and writing a book on HST and how great it is. Oh, and I do really like it. Tom's a smart guy and knows his shit.

3. MC HAmmer backing up his 5X5 routine with like a million links and qoutes. No flame here bro. I love your help, and the 5x5 is going great. You're the man on here bro!

4. WalkingBeast coming in and wanting to "Kill some shit"! I mean Intensity is this guys middle name.

5. And MOST IMPORTANT: I LOVE YOU GUYS AND EF!

lol so true man

 

[Guinness5.0]

It's the "Training Forum All-Stars" thread

 

[Tweakle]

99% of people have no clue what works for themselves so it's beyond me why they think they'll know what works for anyone else.

unless I was an experienced trainer with the years of knowledge of someone like DC it would be beyond gay to claim I knew what worked for anyone else, let alone what they 'had' to do

(aimed at the original poster ))

 

[WalkingBeast]

This thread makes me laugh. I mean come one guys. IT has everything that is SO typical of EF in it. Alas, let me explain.

1. Some guy--maybe a somewhat newb--comes in and makes a statement that is LAW and works for EVERYONE. Ok, everyone bashed it enough. Bottom line, everyone is different. Not everyone is going to respond to 8-12 rep range well.

2. Tommy T coming in and writing a book on HST and how great it is. Oh, and I do really like it. Tom's a smart guy and knows his shit.

3. MC HAmmer backing up his 5X5 routine with like a million links and qoutes. No flame here bro. I love your help, and the 5x5 is going great. You're the man on here bro!

4. WalkingBeast coming in and wanting to "Kill some shit"! I mean Intensity is this guys middle name.

5. And MOST IMPORTANT: I LOVE YOU GUYS AND EF!

ThanX brother!! Much appreciated! Yea I agree with you and tweakle. No one can advise someone else on what will work for them, especially on a forum. You need to burn your own path through experimentation,hard training and eating. Many people want someone to do it for them. This is a very individual venture. This is not some "team sport". Trying different routines and methods is really the only way to find what works optimal for you. Im convinced Ill never find the true optimal training method even for myself. Its impossible to know. I will make sure however to train fucking hard and eat as much as I can consume. Atleast if I do these things I wont go out wondering how it would feel, or what would my results be like, if I pushed myself to the limits. Id rather just do it then think about it. If I dont push myself as far as possible, then the obsession tears me up inside and my mind tells me Im fucking weak. Id rather go in the gym and abuse myself then deal with that type of shit. Atleast then I have some type of weapon to use against the voices in my fuckin head. KILL THAT SHIT!!

 

[big4life]

Sorry, but there is no one perfect program out there for everyone. I prefer a 5x5 program, or a variation of it, and it works for me and my goals, even when my goals have changed. Like most people here will tell you, just because it works for them doesn't mean it will work for you. You have to find a program that you like, and adjust it to fit you.

 

[PatBateman3]

^ for more good discussion