I’ve recently been reading a few of Chad Waterbury’s articles and have been following his “Big Back, Big Chest, Real Fast” program. I’m about two weeks into the program and haven’t seen any results.
My main question is will Chad’s training principle of staying clear of muscle failure be more beneficial then going to muscle failure?
My understanding of hypertrophy is that you need to stress the muscle enough for it to tear, so that it can rebuild itself and grow bigger.
You don’t need to go to failure to hypertrophy.
Both types of training are beneficial and have there place.
CW is big on strength work and full body routines so going to failure on a CW routine is almost non existent.
I would also advise reading some of CT’s work.
I’ve actually been considering changing up my routine to involve some high intensity training work and training to failure.
So I would like to hear some other opinions.
[quote]Flurocity wrote:
I’m about two weeks into the program and haven’t seen any results.
[/quote]
/thread? If you’re going to commit yourself to a program, at least give it enough time to do whatever it is you believe it will do.
Word hard, be patient, eat a lot.
i almost never go to muscle failure
[quote]Flurocity wrote:
I’ve recently been reading a few of Chad Waterbury’s articles and have been following his “Big Back, Big Chest, Real Fast” program. I’m about two weeks into the program and haven’t seen any results.
[/quote]
2 weeks??
What’s with these kids today and their expectation of instant results without a proper foundation of work put in?
Stick with the program (any program) as prescribed. Keep progressing weekly with numbers (weight and reps). Eat like a man.
Come back in 2 months and tell us how it’s not working.
[quote]HolyMacaroni wrote:
i almost never go to muscle failure[/quote]
Thats because you dont known what failure is and cant fail in anything!!!
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
[quote]Flurocity wrote:
I’ve recently been reading a few of Chad Waterbury’s articles and have been following his “Big Back, Big Chest, Real Fast” program. I’m about two weeks into the program and haven’t seen any results.
[/quote]
2 weeks??
What’s with these kids today and their expectation of instant results without a proper foundation of work put in?
[/quote]
What else can you expect with all the magazines having adds like “… in just 10 days” and everything focused on getting instant results?
Even this CW program, look at the name… Big Back, Big chest, REAL FAST"
Nothing surprising here.
Nothing new to add, everyone else is right. 2 weeks? I can hardly guess what you expected to see in 2 weeks.
[quote]zraw wrote:
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
[quote]Flurocity wrote:
I’ve recently been reading a few of Chad Waterbury’s articles and have been following his “Big Back, Big Chest, Real Fast” program. I’m about two weeks into the program and haven’t seen any results.
[/quote]
2 weeks??
What’s with these kids today and their expectation of instant results without a proper foundation of work put in?
[/quote]
What else can you expect with all the magazines having adds like “… in just 10 days” and everything focused on getting instant results?
Even this CW program, look at the name… Big Back, Big chest, REAL FAST"
Nothing surprising here.[/quote]
True.
Chad shoulda called it “Big Back, Big chest, In Due Time…”
lol
There is just a big gap between what you should actually expect from programs/supplements and what the ads or marketing camping have you expect
And this site is just as guilty as others for this
Also, I highly suspect that a lot of the people starting a new supplement or a new program will often talk about it saying they saw huge gains in a very short time spawn to their friends/other people. I myself have been guilty of that in the past
I love Chads work. Great stuff. Not as good as Monty Python but a great comedian in his own right…
Some of my other favorite works of his have to include;
Add 20 pounds to your 1RM Today,
Total Body Split Training
and my all time favorite -
A Better Body Without Weights
Never fails to crack me up.
Thaaaaaanks Chad!
A sort of related point that might be worth discussion:
The OP brought to mind something MODOK said in the BBB thread: that programming is very much like religion in that you have to really believe in what you’re doing to really have it work for you.
I may be mistaken, but the OP seems like he’s just doing the routine based solely on the fact that it’s by [whomever] and makes certain promises or whatever. To me, I couldn’t fully commit to a program unless it made sense to me, whether the program is actually sensible or not. Understanding why you’re doing something is really important to actually committing to it.
So OP, if not training to failure doesn’t make a lick of sense to you at this point in your training journey, then do a program that involves failure training. If that ends up being better for you, then great. If it isn’t effective, then maybe your belief system will change. But do something that you believe in and understand, not something that caught your eye but doesn’t make sense to you.
OP- Not going to beat a dead horse as far as giving the program time goes. Even a month is a pretty small period of time when trying to build muscle. Take progress pics every 4-6 weeks and compare those to see if you’re making gains.
Also, make sure you have a grip on what you’re eating and are eating enough in terms of calories AND individual macros.
[quote]Flurocity wrote:
I’m about two weeks into the program and haven’t seen any results.
[/quote]
I need almost 8 weeks to understand if a training protocol works for me…
Enough reps, staying clear of failure + enough food + enough time = bigger muscles
Stimulation is key, not annihilation. The only person who can benefit from Mike Mentzer-esque HIT sets to complete failure all the time is the genetic superior on steroids. Go ahead and mix up your routine with it once in a great while but otherwise head lee haneys advice and don’t annihilate those muscles. I would add enough rest to white panthers equation
I haven’t gone to failure on rep training in several years (not counting occasional missed max attempts). I’ve put on lots of muscle.
It works. They both have their place. When you don’t train to failure you can train more often–and the higher frequency supplies a training stimulus that works very well for growth.
[quote]The3Commandments wrote:
A sort of related point that might be worth discussion:
The OP brought to mind something MODOK said in the BBB thread: that programming is very much like religion in that you have to really believe in what you’re doing to really have it work for you.
I may be mistaken, but the OP seems like he’s just doing the routine based solely on the fact that it’s by [whomever] and makes certain promises or whatever. To me, I couldn’t fully commit to a program unless it made sense to me, whether the program is actually sensible or not. Understanding why you’re doing something is really important to actually committing to it.
So OP, if not training to failure doesn’t make a lick of sense to you at this point in your training journey, then do a program that involves failure training. If that ends up being better for you, then great. If it isn’t effective, then maybe your belief system will change. But do something that you believe in and understand, not something that caught your eye but doesn’t make sense to you.[/quote]
I must have missed MODOK’s post so I’ll give you the credit - this is one of the best posts I’ve read on here recently.
I think there’s really something to this point. Do what you believe in and commit to it. If your heart’s not in it you’re not going to push yourself.
[quote]ElevenMag wrote:
Stimulation is key, not annihilation. The only person who can benefit from Mike Mentzer-esque HIT sets to complete failure all the time is the genetic superior on steroids. Go ahead and mix up your routine with it once in a great while but otherwise head lee haneys advice and don’t annihilate those muscles. I would add enough rest to white panthers equation[/quote]
Stimulate, not obliterate.
[quote]White Panther wrote:
Enough reps, staying clear of failure + enough food + enough time = bigger muscles[/quote]
Enough reps.
Waterbury advises around 25 total per body part/per session. Is that enough?
If I ramp up and do two top sets of say 6 or so, I’m well below 25. (Admittedly, I’ve done more than 25 including my warm up/ramp up sets)