T Nation

Best Mass Program?

[quote]MJ - Cartwright wrote:
Paul. You may feel its too much volume, but this program has worked wonders for me.
You have to bear in mind the human body only adapt’s when presented with sufficient stresses, also I used to train with more exercise’s than this.
There is logic to my plan. In that each exercise is selected to target a specific area of a muscle/muscle group, for example.
Back -
*Pull Ups - Using a slightly wider than shoulder width grip, this targets the upper lat fibres and help expand the shoulder girdle.
*Bent Over Rows - Using an overhand grip, drawing in to the navel, targeting the mid lat and creating thickness in the lats, Rhomboids, Lower Trap’s & Teres Major/Minor.
*One Arm Rows - Using the hammer grip, Drawing in to the hip, thus targeting the lower lat, also this exercise stretches the lat, which reacts better to being pre-stretched.
*Lat Pulldowns - Only Use these to completely fry the upper fibres of the lats, where I use the widest grip possible, pulling down to the front, 1.5" from the chest.
*Seated Cable Rows - Due to the Scapular Retraction, the Lower Traps, Rhomboids and Lats are worked, which as with pulldowns I use to toast the back.
*Inverted Rows - Personally think that everyone should include these as they work the entire back region, besides after the workout I can usually only knock out 4/5 per set.
So hopefully you can understand my thinking.
Thanks for the response Paul.

MJ-Cartwright
Fitness Instructor and Strength Coach
Pontypridd South Wales[/quote]

Program looks good, if you respond well to high reps/volume. More a slow twitch type a guy hey. Bet you glad you found what works for you 100%. Still, your body would love a lower volume routine every 4-6 weeks,even if the reps are a bit higher for you(6-8 or 8-10).

Personally anything above 8 reps for me is a bit of a waste for me for the primary and secondary moves. Isolation may be a bit higher…I have recently found that I make better progress under this rep range and my accumulation phase will be made up of reps no higher than this.

GJ

That is true for the most part for a lot of people, I find that when I do higher weight, lower volume, I gain strength no end but i simply do not grow, great as a powerlifter but considering im going through a Hypertrophy phase, alas higher weight & lower volume is no good for gaining size.

Yeah its taken me quite a while to create a program that actually causes growth,.
Its very peculiar actually GJ, My body loves power exercises in the low rep range, which would suggest im more Type IIa yet to induce growth I require much more volume.
I have a theory though,
When I lift a weight in the Strength rep range eg.
Bent Over Rows
Weight used 120Kg for 4 x 6 = 2280Kg Total
So the total weight used for 24 Reps equals 2280Kg.
Weight used 60Kg for E.G 5 x 12 = 3600Kg Total
So the total weight used for 60 Reps equals 3600Kg.
I just feel that its more about total weight used that makes the difference and thus causes growth. Just a theory but would like to know what everyone thinks about that.

MJ-Cartwright
Fitness Instructor and Strength Coach
Pontypridd South Wales

[quote]MJ - Cartwright wrote:
That is true for the most part for a lot of people, I find that when I do higher weight, lower volume, I gain strength no end but i simply do not grow, great as a powerlifter but considering im going through a Hypertrophy phase, alas higher weight & lower volume is no good for gaining size.
Yeah its taken me quite a while to create a program that actually causes growth,.
Its very peculiar actually GJ, My body loves power exercises in the low rep range, which would suggest im more Type IIa yet to induce growth I require much more volume.
I have a theory though,
When I lift a weight in the Strength rep range eg.
Bent Over Rows
Weight used 120Kg for 4 x 6 = 2280Kg Total
So the total weight used for 24 Reps equals 2280Kg.
Weight used 60Kg for E.G 5 x 12 = 3600Kg Total
So the total weight used for 60 Reps equals 3600Kg.
I just feel that its more about total weight used that makes the difference and thus causes growth. Just a theory but would like to know what everyone thinks about that.

MJ-Cartwright
Fitness Instructor and Strength Coach
Pontypridd South Wales[/quote]

Ah, now that is a decent theory. I too would like to hear more on this. Never really looked at it this way, nor have I done these calcs. I have tried implenting the force production relationship - Scott Abel. F = m x a. So the more force you produce, by lifting X amount the fastest, the more muscle mass should be gained. BUT when I have simply lifted as much weight as possible, for a given tempo, even if the concetric was slow in reality, but I was trying to explode, I still made gains…??

I have found that I have responded best to all of Poliquins and Thibs theories on weight training and diet overall.

GJ

I agree that if a weight requires a force production of ‘1’ and force used is ‘1.5’ the muscles and more importantly the central nervous system adapts more readily to handing heavier weights.

Hence why isometrics work to increase strength, even though the weight lifted may be beyond a current one rep max, the body will slowly adapt over time, seeing as the human body doesnt know or care about what it is your lifting, just the fact your attempting to lift it means that it is a necessity and will over time supply the strength and force exertion to lift the weight.

On the Thibs & Poliquin front. I would hope so, they are thought of as two of the best coaches in the world and have between them spent many years at highly respected facilities and universities while working with some of the best sports scientists, kinesiogists and physical therapists, in the hope of better understanding the way in which the human body reacts to any given stress.

MJ-Cartwright
Fitness Instructor and Strength Coach
Pontypridd South Wales

[quote]MJ - Cartwright wrote:

Weight used 120Kg for 4 x 6 = 2280Kg Total
So the total weight used for 24 Reps equals 2280Kg.
Weight used 60Kg for E.G 5 x 12 = 3600Kg Total
So the total weight used for 60 Reps equals 3600Kg.
I just feel that its more about total weight used that makes the difference and thus causes growth. Just a theory but would like to know what everyone thinks about that.

MJ-Cartwright
Fitness Instructor and Strength Coach
Pontypridd South Wales[/quote]

The data has been quite clear for some time now. Hypetrophy is a function of volume and your example is a perfect example of that.

An even simpler example is :

Using a 1RM of 100kg

10 sets of 10 reps at 60kg = 6000kg
10 sets of 1 rep at 100kg = 1000kg

[quote]MJ - Cartwright wrote:
I agree that if a weight requires a force production of ‘1’ and force used is ‘1.5’ the muscles and more importantly the central nervous system adapts more readily to handing heavier weights. Hence why isometrics work to increase strength, even though the weight lifted may be beyond a current one rep max, the body will slowly adapt over time, seeing as the human body doesnt know or care about what it is your lifting, just the fact your attempting to lift it means that it is a necessity and will over time supply the strength and force exertion to lift the weight.

On the Thibs & Poliquin front. I would hope so, they are thought of as two of the best coaches in the world and have between them spent many years at highly respected facilities and universities while working with some of the best sports scientists, kinesiogists and physical therapists, in the hope of better understanding the way in which the human body reacts to any given stress.

MJ-Cartwright
Fitness Instructor and Strength Coach
Pontypridd South Wales[/quote]

I know all too well, and have seen the proof, in terms of results, whilst following their recommendations.

Funny thing is, there are a few ppl here that DON’T thinkg much of them, for some reason??

Oh well, you get that.

GJ

Well could’nt have put it better myself.
Its a very simple thing and yet so many people manage to get it so badly wrong.
Great show of German Volume Training :slight_smile:
Great Program when done correctly.
Thanks for the post Stockzy

MJ-Cartwright
Fitness Instructor and Strength Coach
Pontypridd South Wales

Cant imagine why people dont regard them as the best of the best.
They are paid thousands of dollars to train some of the most well known athletes and personalities in the world.
For example.
If you could afford to buy a Ferrari, You wouldnt go and buy a second hand Nissan.

MJ-Cartwright
Fitness Instructor and Strength Coach
Pontypridd South Wales

[quote]MJ - Cartwright wrote:
Cant imagine why people dont regard them as the best of the best.
They are paid thousands of dollars to train some of the most well known athletes and personalities in the world.
For example.
If you could afford to buy a Ferrari, You wouldnt go and buy a second hand Nissan.

MJ-Cartwright
Fitness Instructor and Strength Coach
Pontypridd South Wales[/quote]

It’s great to chat to someone both logical AND open minded.

These forums are losing this type of member.

GJ

Back at you GJ. It just makes sense to be open minded, which I guess is open mindedness in its self :slight_smile:
Typically the average forum poster with the exception of the pros and a few high ranking members EG. Prof X etc

They are just people who believe the best program is what is in this months copy of FLEX or Muscle & Fitness. Nothing against these publications but just feel that its mantra because its Dexter ‘The Blade’ Jackson’s plan or what ever, even though he’s a professional and only trains with no day job and is on more steroids than an entire cancer ward.

[[I will say I have nothing against cancer wards that was just me ranting on. I also have nothing but respect to ‘The Blade’]] I just feel that ‘Joe Average’ feels that because it works for Dex’ Its bound to work for them. Which 99times out of 100 it just WONT.
Get over it.

MJ-Cartwright
Fitness Instructor and Strength Coach
Pontypridd South Wales

[quote]MJ - Cartwright wrote:
Back at you GJ. It just makes sense to be open minded, which I guess is open mindedness in its self :slight_smile:
Typically the average forum poster with the exception of the pros and a few high ranking members EG. Prof X etc

They are just people who believe the best program is what is in this months copy of FLEX or Muscle & Fitness. Nothing against these publications but just feel that its mantra because its Dexter ‘The Blade’ Jackson’s plan or what ever, even though he’s a professional and only trains with no day job and is on more steroids than an entire cancer ward. [/quote] First off, most Mag articles are ghost written nonsense.
Secondly, all of them forgot the mention that very damn few pros do straight sets. That makes the difference between a high-volume routine and an actual bb routine used by a pro… [quote]

[[I will say I have nothing against cancer wards that was just me ranting on. I also have nothing but respect to ‘The Blade’]] I just feel that ‘Joe Average’ feels that because it works for Dex’ Its bound to work for them. Which 99times out of 100 it just WONT.
Get over it.[/quote] The thing is, Dex doesn’t do a ton of straight sets, contrary to what most people think who read the mags… Would be quite difficult to get very strong on such a routine for most, including most pros. Hence it’s not done.
Your super-high volume routine is closer to the flex-mag stuff than to the routines actually used by the majority of big people out there… Not that I mean that in a derogatory way, but I’m a bit surprised at one high-volume guy bashing other high-volume routines…

Secondly… If you do a ton of volume, then yes, you’ll likely need quite a bit of gear to get strong enough to actually reach an impressive size… And genetics play another role in that, but presuming that Dex is on “more steroids than an entire cancer ward”, come on now… We’ve been through all this shit a thousand times on this forum, it doesn’t have to happen again. [quote]

MJ-Cartwright
Fitness Instructor and Strength Coach
Pontypridd South Wales[/quote]

Edit: You’re also using infinitely more volume than any Pro I’ve ever met or watched train…

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
MJ - Cartwright wrote:
Back at you GJ. It just makes sense to be open minded, which I guess is open mindedness in its self :slight_smile:
Typically the average forum poster with the exception of the pros and a few high ranking members EG. Prof X etc

They are just people who believe the best program is what is in this months copy of FLEX or Muscle & Fitness. Nothing against these publications but just feel that its mantra because its Dexter ‘The Blade’ Jackson’s plan or what ever, even though he’s a professional and only trains with no day job and is on more steroids than an entire cancer ward. First off, most Mag articles are ghost written nonsense.
Secondly, all of them forgot the mention that very damn few pros do straight sets. That makes the difference between a high-volume routine and an actual bb routine used by a pro…

[[I will say I have nothing against cancer wards that was just me ranting on. I also have nothing but respect to ‘The Blade’]] I just feel that ‘Joe Average’ feels that because it works for Dex’ Its bound to work for them. Which 99times out of 100 it just WONT.
Get over it. The thing is, Dex doesn’t do a ton of straight sets, contrary to what most people think who read the mags… Would be quite difficult to get very strong on such a routine for most, including most pros. Hence it’s not done.
Your super-high volume routine is closer to the flex-mag stuff than to the routines actually used by the majority of big people out there… Not that I mean that in a derogatory way, but I’m a bit surprised at one high-volume guy bashing other high-volume routines…

Secondly… If you do a ton of volume, then yes, you’ll likely need quite a bit of gear to get strong enough to actually reach an impressive size… And genetics play another role in that, but presuming that Dex is on “more steroids than an entire cancer ward”, come on now… We’ve been through all this shit a thousand times on this forum, it doesn’t have to happen again.

MJ-Cartwright
Fitness Instructor and Strength Coach
Pontypridd South Wales

Edit: You’re also using infinitely more volume than any Pro I’ve ever met or watched train…
[/quote]

You are so nice. I can’t do that. Not one bad word in the whole thing. How the fuck do you do that?

[quote]Professor X wrote:
You are so nice. I can’t do that. Not one bad word in the whole thing. How the fuck do you do that?[/quote]

He claims to be adapting the American way, but doesn’t add the arrogance and pompousness required in his posts yet. He’ll learn in due time.

I must stress that my rant wasnt aimed at Dexter, Just the whole notion of ‘because it worked for [insert pro] it will work for me’ I feel it very untoward. Yes my workouts are high volume but I dont do anything ‘out of the ordinary’ such as drop sets, 21’s or tri-sets. I just keep my workouts simple and with enough volume to give me the growth I strive for.
My main aggrevance is that various publications due give training programs from ‘such and such’ pro bodybuilder and sometimes gives a diet plan for the pro in question. But does not tell what steroids have aided the bodybuilder in gaining his size. [Although to do such a thing would of course undermine the large percentage of the populus who do see steroids as a bad part of society]
Once again I wish to point out that I have nothing against Dexter ‘The Blade’ Jackson and have nothing against people who take steroids, even though it does sound as such.

MJ-Cartwright
Fitness Instructor and Strength Coach
Pontypridd South Wales

I get about 175 reps per body part when I train…so on any given day i’m pushing 350 reps. and it’s helped me put on weight…but then again, so has super low-rep programs too.

i think all that matters is that you push yourself.

[quote]MJ - Cartwright wrote:
I must stress that my rant wasnt aimed at Dexter, Just the whole notion of ‘because it worked for [insert pro] it will work for me’ I feel it very untoward. Yes my workouts are high volume but I dont do anything ‘out of the ordinary’ such as drop sets, 21’s or tri-sets. I just keep my workouts simple and with enough volume to give me the growth I strive for.
My main aggrevance is that various publications due give training programs from ‘such and such’ pro bodybuilder and sometimes gives a diet plan for the pro in question. But does not tell what steroids have aided the bodybuilder in gaining his size. [Although to do such a thing would of course undermine the large percentage of the populus who do see steroids as a bad part of society]
Once again I wish to point out that I have nothing against Dexter ‘The Blade’ Jackson and have nothing against people who take steroids, even though it does sound as such.

MJ-Cartwright
Fitness Instructor and Strength Coach
Pontypridd South Wales[/quote]

most of the training programs written by authors have far more supersets, drop-sets and other intensity techniques than the actual training workouts of most pro’s. GVT? 10 sets of 10 reps? is that not high volume to you? compare that to a pro’s typical workout of about 3 exercises for a body part worked up to a single set to failure. which one is going to be ‘more volume’?

do you not think that many authors and coatches use the same appeal of ‘this guy is “the best in the world” so his program MUST be the latest secret to big muscle size and if I follow his program to the letter i will get mind boggling results’.

and isn’t this what almost every pro bodybuilder’s workouts are like as well? i havent seen a single pro who does out of the ordinary ‘high tech’ stuff… except for the rare occasion coughcharlesglasscough.

you train in the ways that give you progress. every pro’s workouts have evolved via adding and subtracting the elements that either give or don’t give progress. if you are not progressing on a workout then change it. if someone is using a pro’s workout… or an author’s special program… and not making progress, yest believes he will magically transform into a mucular brute… then who/what is really to blame apart from the person’s own idiocy?

[quote]MJ - Cartwright wrote:
My personal program [written by me].
Stats -

  • Height 6ft
  • Weight 196lbs
  • Body fat 11.2%
  • Chest 44"
  • Arms 17.5"
  • Waist 33"
  • Quads 28"
  • Calves 16.5"

Monday/Day one
Back

  • Pull Ups - 4 x A
  • Bent Over Rows - 6 x 15, 15, 12, 10, 8, 6
  • One Arm DB Rows - 4 x 12, 12, 10, 8
  • Lat Pulldowns - 4 x 15, 15, 12, 12
  • Seated Cable Rows - 4 x 15, 15, 12, 12
  • Inverted Rows - 4 x A

Tuesday/Day two
Chest

  • Inc DB Press - 6 x 15, 15, 12, 12, 10, 8
  • HS Flat Press - 4 x 15, 12, 10, 8
  • Flat Bench Press - 4 x 12, 12, 10, 8
  • Dec Smith Bench - 4 x 15, 15, 15, 12
  • Bodyweight Dips - 4 x A
  • Flat Cable Flye’s - 4 x 20, 20, 15, 15

Wednesday/Day three
Hamstrings and Calves
*Romanian Deadlift - 6 x 20, 20, 15, 15, 12, 12
*Laying Hamstring Curls - 4 x 20, 20, 20, 15
*Seated Hamstring Curls - 4 x 20, 20, 20, 15
*Natural Glute Ham Raise - 3 x A
*Barbell Calf Raises - 5 x 50, 40, 30, 20, 10
*Calf Press - 4 x 30, 20, 20, 10
*Donkey Calf [BW] - 1 x A

Thursday/Day four
Shoulders
*Seated DB Shoulder Press - 6 x 20, 15, 15, 12, 10, 8
*Military Press - 4 x 12, 12, 10, 8
*HS Shoulder Press - 4 x 15, 15, 12, 12
*DB Lateral Raises - 2 x 15, 15
*DB Front Raises - 2 x 15, 15
*DB Reverse Flyes - 2 x 15, 15

Friday/Day five
Arms
*CG Bench Press - 6 x 20, 15, 15, 12, 10, 8
*Skullcrushers - 4 x 20, 15, 12, 8
*Parallel Bar Pushdowns - 4 x 15, 12, 12, 10
*Diamond Pushups - 2 x A
*Close Hammer Grip Chins - 4 x A
*Barbell Curls - 4 x 15, 12, 12, 10
*Dumbbell Hammer Curls - 4 x 15, 12, 12, 10
*EZ Reverse Preacher Curls - 4 x 12, 12, 12, 10
*Wrist Curls - 3 x 20, 20, 20
*Wrist Roller - 3 x 5, 5, 5

Saturday/Day six
Quadriceps and Calves
*Leg Extensions - 2 x 30
*Leg Press - 6 x 20, 20, 15, 15, 10, 10
*Back Squats - 4 x 20, 20, 10, 8
*Reverse Hack Machine Squat - 4 x 20, 15, 10, 10
*Leg Extensions - 2 x 30
*Barbell Calf Raises - 5 x 20, 20, 10, 10, 10
*Calf Press - 4 x 20, 20, 10, 10
*Donkey Calf [BW] - 1 x A

Sunday/Day seven
OFF

MJ-Cartwright
Fitness Instructor and Strength Coach
Pontypridd South Wales[/quote]

i just saw this. you train with this much volume and yet you rattle on about how ludicrous the routine’s in the Flex mags are?

do YOU take steroids?

To answer your question. Im not on steroids. I just have a large recovery potential.

MJ-Cartwright
Fitness Instructor and Strength Coach
Pontypridd South Wales

[quote]MJ - Cartwright wrote:
To answer your question. Im not on steroids. I just have a large recovery potential.

MJ-Cartwright
Fitness Instructor and Strength Coach
Pontypridd South Wales [/quote]

So I can get some perspective, how much lean mass do you plan to put on over the next year?
High volume generally doesn’t work well for me. Plus, I crave the intensity of trying to beat the logbook on relatively few working sets.

I would be more than happy to gain around ten pounds/four kilograms in the next twelve months.
I personally tend to find that when im training in the [[on the whole]] 6-12 rep range, I increase strength with relative ease, but do not increase muscle mass and do not stay as ‘lean’ as usual where as when I train with the program I have outlined, I do gain considerably more muscle.
Thanks for the intersest giterdone.

MJ-Cartwright
Fitness Instructor and Strength Coach
Pontypridd South Wales