T Nation

Differents Methods in One Routine

Hello CT,

What do you think about using different training methods in a training routine, for example :

  • back (HIT)
  • chest (layer)
  • legs (GVT)
  • shoulders (“basic bodybuilding way”)
  • arms (Gironda 8x8)
    This is just an example !

I ask this question for several reasons:

  1. GVT can be quickly boring

  2. Using the layer system several days in a row can be very hard for the CNS (at least for me)

  3. Because I like change!

Thank you !

My guess is you’re a 2A so go for it. Remember, everything works, but nothing works for a long time.
I’m a 2B, aka 3, with 2A tendencies, and see this as somewhat appealing—especially if I did one body part a day.

I do not know if I am more 2A or 2B … I appreciate the change but only if it is to get a better pump!
I’ve done 2 training session with the layer system two days in a row, it tired me (mentally and physically) for the whole week …

I mainly ask why coaches only have unique systems, why not mix training styles?
It may be a terrible idea to do that, I do not know …

I PERSONALLY would not do it nor recommend it.

I’m not saying that it won’t work.

If you train hard and do not exceed your capacity to recover everything will “work”. Doesn’t mean it will be optimal, but it willwork. And if doing a pathwork “program” like that is appealing to you and motivates you, go for it.

Why are coaches only using one “system”? Well they are not all doing that. Some of them are using many different training approaches in a program. BUT most of the “experts” or “elite coaches” do not use “ready-to-wear” ideologies… you won’t have a guy like Jim Wendler or John Meadows sit down when wirting their program and think “do I use GVT or GBC this week?”. It doesn’t mean that they won’t use high volume or or high density work. But when they do they build the workouts themsekves, they don’t use a system that already exist.

Furthermore most experts or coaches who have achieved a fair amount of success normally instinctively gravitate toward what 1) works great for them 2) motivates them.

Wendler is a 1A, he does better on low volume, low reps, heavy weights, not a lot of variation and the capacity to “beat the workout”. And these are the cornerstones of 5/3/1.

Meadows is a 2B and needs a huge pump, great mind-muscle connection, more volume andt training zones/technique that leads to a big lactic acid accumulation. And that’s how he trains and programs.

Furthermore, in our field most people need a “brand” to become popular/successful. Myself and Poliquin were two of the few who became successful while being generalists. When you built a brand to become successful going outside of the brand can have really negative effects: by trying to broaden your audience you can actually lose your base. An example is the old Muscle Media 2000 muscle magazine. It was the best mag 20-25 years ago. They add the best authors, cutting edge info, controversial articles (on steroids for example) but their reach was limited. When they tried to go mainstream they lost their following and didn’t gain the mainstream crowd and it dissapeared.

So coaches/experts tend to stick to what fit with their brand.

4 Likes

That’s not what I expected, as I think you’ve said type 3’s are drawn to 531 (which it seems like I mostly fall into). Is it that type 3’s are drawn to the minimalist style of 531, but might need to choose a variation with higher reps and volume?

Personally, as a scientist, I am always interested in reading your analysis. However, my personality is drawn to Dan John and Jim Wendler workout programs (which is expected based on your own write ups on neurotypes).

As an aside, I was just reading a Dan John article about coaching. He said often even the best coaches don’t do well on their own programs and this obviously extends to those of us who are non-professionals. Why? Because if one writes their own program and tries to follow it, they are overly tempted to keep changing it and questioning it. But if one were to follow one of your programs or a 531 program, the question of “why am I doing move X supersetting with move Y?” is easily answered with: “Because CT (or Wendler) says so, and they know what they’re doing.” From what I gather, you seem to not have this issue with your own training. I had learned years ago that whenever I put together a routine, I had a hard time sticking to it for this very reason.

1A and 3 have some elements in common in that they are rigid personalities, and don’t need/want much variations in training.

Let’s look at what are the ideal parameters for a 1A:

  • Focus on the big lifts
  • Very low volume
  • Low reps/heavy weights
  • “competitive” nature to the workouts
  • No need for variation as long as it’s possible to use more weight

These are all found in 5/3/1… the focus on big lifts is evident.

It has a super low volume on main work (only 1 main work set) and the assistance isn’t elevated either.

There is a focus on heavy weights and low reps.

The workouts are competitive in that the work set on the big is done as a max reps set…you use a certain load and you get as many reps as possble, and you try to beat to number of reps of the week… for example if you are on a week of “5” reps, and you are using 85% of your max and you get 6 reps, you “beat” the workout.

The elements that appeal to types 3 are the lack of variation, few exercises, and the fact that you know well in advance how much weight you will use. BUT it is mostly effective for an advanced type 3 as a more intermediate/beginner type 3 will do better with a lower weight/higher reps approach.

not true… I pretty much never followed a program. As a 2A I find programs to be too restrictive and it makes training no fun. I build a template but I can use a lot of variation within that template.

I’m a type1 a, but i hate following programs. I like to do my own thing. I can do the same main lift for ages, as long as the intensity is high, but after a couple of weeks i have to change assistance exercises. Especially since they are alot lighter and i find them boring. Am i definitely a 1a if i dont like to follow programs??

It’s not unusual. The fact that you can stick with the main lift forever if intensity is high is really 1A. Amnd the fact that you find assistance work boring is also very 1A. It’s not unlike Wendler (who is 1A) who only programs the main lift and assistance is “whatever”

3 Likes

@jibb
Are you doing this? I’d be curious to see what each day looks like.
I’d say DM me but…:man_shrugging:t2:

@believer423 currently not, I am traveling for my job so I can not train in my usual gym, but after I think to follow this plan or one in the same kind!
I’ll tell toi how I set up my training if you want ! (in 2 weeks)