Dr Darden,
Just finished reading the bodyfat breakthrough and it seems that 30/30/30 is excellent for size and fat loss. Does one of these have an advantage over the other for building muscle size if fat loss is not a priority?? For pure size would you go with 30/30/30 or 30/10/30?
I don’t have any experience by which to compare the two protocols. But I will observe that the ratio of eccentric to concentric work is a lot higher with the 30/10/30 protocol.
So…
30/30/30 = 2:1 negative to positive, 60 seconds total negative
30/10 reps (@ 1/2 cadence)/30 = 8:1 negative to positive, 80 seconds total negative
1 Like
I Did the Math and noticed the same thing. But I assume there are other factors involved.
No doubt. But since both are described as negative emphasized, I’m surprised it hasn’t been discussed very much.
My opinion is that alternating 30-30-30 and 30-10-30 would probably better than doing either one exclusively. But having stated that, my favorite is 30-10-30.
1 Like
Would you alternate then as an A/B workout. Or do a period of time with one then switch it up?
Either of those approaches will work.
Hi kyushomaster,
Read my other posts. I’m alternating 30-30-30 with 30-10-30 and “normal”, two days a week in approx a 10 day cycle.
Now about 4-5 weeks in, I maintain my initial observations. 30-30-30 is where you increase the load/weight and 30-10-30 is slightly behind in terms of load, but is the cadence to manifest your achievements. And yes, I still make a steady progress, having increased weights or reps on a majority of excercises. That being said, 30-10-30 is where hypertrophy is happening. Though easily overdone, you need more rest on 30-10-30, which is why I started out my cycle in the first place.