Hypertrophy w/out Muscle Failure?

Bigger Stronger Leaner Competitive Bodybuilding
21

[quote]alin wrote:

[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)[/quote]

I like to vary the rep scheme but in my opinion 25 total reps not including warmups would be bare minimum. I prefer more for hypertrophy.

22

[quote]White Panther wrote:

[quote]alin wrote:

[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)[/quote]

I like to vary the rep scheme but in my opinion 25 total reps not including warmups would be bare minimum. I prefer more for hypertrophy.[/quote]

Cheers, buddy. Care to give us any figures for upper (25 is lower, I take it) range and different body parts, please?

23

Difficult Subject…

Although I am not actively training and have not been for over 10-yrs; over the last few months I have been looking at how Strength & Mass training has evolved, or rather if it has evolved over the last 10 yrs. For whatever reason my inquisitive nature led me to this site. I have read many articles and blogs which include some of those BLOGS that almost appears as ‘character assisnation’ towards Coach CT.

Entertaining? Possibly for a while, however I firmly believe as complicated as some of these Strength Routines appear, there is some truth in the how CT is presenting training methods to the community. Implicitly disregarding peoples opinion on marketing supplementation… CT knows his stuff - doesn’t he?

With regards to training to failure; other than certain lifts this is how I always trained… warmup (3 sets of jumps/ press-ups and 2 x feeling sets etc) and 1 set to failure, explosive positive and slow negatives and normally passed the point of positive failure… 3 exercise 3 x per week.

However Deadlift and Squats, I only ever trained to a target range and never went passed the specific number which at that time was 6. If I could get more reps I would stop and increase the weight slightly next time. My coach at the time was an IFBB pros father, Eddie Ellwood Senior.

I was squating arse to the floor 240 kilos (incl weight of bar/with a belt) and deadlifting 300 kilos (incl weight of bar)

Steroids - NO, Abs - by no means like a CK model but I was big, In fact 10-yrs on and I still struggle with short sleeve work shirts

It’s funny how I can recall so many of methods I used beween 1990 & 2003 that now appear to have ‘fancy’ names. Anyway my point is - I had big legs and a thick back from training without forcing failure, but I also had big arms; which incidentally we used to do a superset of Pull ups and Incline curl and then Dips & Overhead Extension machine… always to failure which included negative emphasis…

I have seen writings of Charles Poliquin describing this exact arm regime and explaining reasons why it is considered extremely efficient in stimulating growth… Failure ‘CP’ also recommends…

I stayed on the same routine for years periodically changing to Front Squats and Bent Over Rows - which I believe contradicts some releatively new findings…

Note: BLOG TIP 137 Charles Poliquin regarding training to failure… This guy makes sense right?

24

[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.

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.

[/quote]

People should listen to this guy a little more.

25

I used to go to failure on each set. I could only do that wtih 2 days on, 1 day rest. Regardless, the last portion of the week i was dead tired.

Now, i increased volume (25-30 sets+) and focused on mind body connection and good form- you’d be surprised how much you feel it when you arent focused on hitting failure due to heavy weights. By the last few sets i would hit failure from the build up of fatigue. Now I am not so tired at the end of the week.

26

[quote]Hitkiller 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.

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.

[/quote]

People should listen to this guy a little more.[/quote]Not really…

A great guy; a legend in his own right.

27

^^^^ I have to disagree with you. From my experience, I personally have benefited more from the implementation of the training methods and protocols used by Dorian Yates more than any other type of training. Granted not having used steroids I have to tailor this particular training style to suit myself and my own recovery abilities and that took a lot of time, trial and error, but I have reaped the rewards of training consistantly this way. For me it is the most efficient way to train. Sure this style of training is not for everybody, but I don’t think its fair to totally dismiss Dorian Yate’s views.

28

[quote]METAL2804 wrote:

[quote]Hitkiller 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.

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.

[/quote]

People should listen to this guy a little more.[/quote]Not really…

A great guy; a legend in his own right. I met with Dorian a number of years before he became Mr Olympia… he was doing a guest spot locally and was staying at a friends house in Horden/Peterlee…

Dorian was an extremely excessive steroid user…

Freaky genetics combined with the above; in my view dismisses Dorian from being able to give advise ‘based on his own experience & success’ regarding natural Strength & Mass training [/quote]

I could be wrong but didn’t DORIAN posted on the net his juices doses when he competed at maximum level ? I heard that they were well down level compared to average gym rat (on steroids).

29

[quote]buzza wrote:

[quote]METAL2804 wrote:

[quote]Hitkiller 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.

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.

[/quote]

People should listen to this guy a little more.[/quote]Not really…

A great guy; a legend in his own right. I met with Dorian a number of years before he became Mr Olympia… he was doing a guest spot locally and was staying at a friends house in Horden/Peterlee…

Dorian was an extremely excessive steroid user…

Freaky genetics combined with the above; in my view dismisses Dorian from being able to give advise ‘based on his own experience & success’ regarding natural Strength & Mass training [/quote]

I could be wrong but didn’t DORIAN posted on the net his juices doses when he competed at maximum level ? I heard that they were well down level compared to average gym rat (on steroids).

You are probably correct and I’m sure as Dorian’s career evolved he would have been advised on correct dosages, steroid cycling, growth hormone, insulin use and supplied with better drugs than he initially used. I’m sure that’s a topic that he could give advice on based on experience…but that’s something I have no interest in.

30

I think both have merits.

for example HST (hypertrophy specific training) has a massive following but so does doggcrapp and similar routines also, u can’t discount other people’s progress achieved through the way they did this.

in short "horses for courses, more than one way to skin a cat, etc, etc!!)

31

[quote]Hitkiller wrote:
^^^^ I have to disagree with you. From my experience, I personally have benefited more from the implementation of the training methods and protocols used by Dorian Yates more than any other type of training. Granted not having used steroids I have to tailor this particular training style to suit myself and my own recovery abilities and that took a lot of time, trial and error, but I have reaped the rewards of training consistantly this way. For me it is the most efficient way to train. Sure this style of training is not for everybody, but I don’t think its fair to totally dismiss Dorian Yate’s views.[/quote]

Respecting the ‘Subject’ of this blog. I have never trained any body part without going to positive failure or beyond… however I didn’t aim for failure on certain lifts and those body parts did not suffer. So - I am unable to present any information to support the total, not training to failure approach. There is much evidence to support the training to failure method, which I’m a firm believer in.

Dorian’s method of training doesn’t require a lot of trial and error as the protocol is clearly laid out. If you blindly copy his exercises and focus your efforts on the recovery (days off) around the routine this can’t possibly be the most effective or efficient way to train.

Why? A more effective/efficient method of training would allow you to focus on the big lift exercises more often. It’s essential for ‘natural trainers’ to focus on boosting Testosterone - isn’t it?

32

[quote]danchubbz wrote:
I think both have merits.

for example HST (hypertrophy specific training) has a massive following but so does doggcrapp and similar routines also, u can’t discount other people’s progress achieved through the way they did this.

in short "horses for courses, more than one way to skin a cat, etc, etc!!)

Ceteris paribus

[/quote]

33

Dorian used a high volume approach for most of his early career. Remember its more important to see how some one built themselves up as opposed to what they are doing now.

When some one (dorian) is incline pressing 455 for 8 perfect reps yes you only need one set. That’s extremely taxing. However most people do not have that “problem”. Also it is important to remember that at that point in his career he probably had a perfect mind muscle connection making that all out set very effective.

Sadly i feel a lot of people look to Dorian as an example to not work hard and put in the sets and time. Dorian could train that way because he reached that level.

34

[quote]danchubbz wrote:
I think both have merits.

for example HST (hypertrophy specific training) has a massive following but so does doggcrapp and similar routines also, u can’t discount other people’s progress achieved through the way they did this.

in short "horses for courses, more than one way to skin a cat, etc, etc!!)[/quote]Ceteris paribus

35

[quote]METAL2804 wrote:

[quote]Hitkiller wrote:
^^^^ I have to disagree with you. From my experience, I personally have benefited more from the implementation of the training methods and protocols used by Dorian Yates more than any other type of training. Granted not having used steroids I have to tailor this particular training style to suit myself and my own recovery abilities and that took a lot of time, trial and error, but I have reaped the rewards of training consistantly this way. For me it is the most efficient way to train. Sure this style of training is not for everybody, but I don’t think its fair to totally dismiss Dorian Yate’s views.[/quote]

Respecting the ‘Subject’ of this blog. I have never trained any body part without going to positive failure or beyond… however I didn’t aim for failure on certain lifts and those body parts did not suffer. So - I am unable to present any information to support the total, not training to failure approach. There is much evidence to support the training to failure method, which I’m a firm believer in.

Dorian’s method of training doesn’t require a lot of trial and error as the protocol is clearly laid out. If you blindly copy his exercises and focus your efforts on the recovery (days off) around the routine this can’t possibly be the most effective or efficient way to train.

Why? A more effective/efficient method of training would allow you to focus on the big lift exercises more often. It’s essential for ‘natural trainers’ to focus on boosting Testosterone - isn’t it?
[/quote]

One should never blindly copy his excersises, workouts, routines and protocols down to the letter, that would be silly. I have studied many variations principles and theories of high intensity training, (not just from Dorian) put it into practice and tailored it, and through trial and error, discovered which excersises I responded best to whilst incorporating the high intensity methods and techniques (on certain excersises) that suit me and my recovery abilities in order to keep progressing. This all took time. I keep a journal, I have done so for years, monitoring what works and what doesn’t. I hit each bodypart once every 7-9 days, I’m not losing any muscle on my rest days, because we all know muscle growth occurs outside the gym.

I agree with you with incorporating basic compound lifts that boost natural testosterone, but as you get bigger and more developed, one should be well aware that certain muscle groups respond better than others in terms of growth, therefore as a bodybuilder with an objective eye for symmetry balance and proportion, one should then begin to focus their efforts on the areas that are lagging, so focusing primarily on big lifts for overall growth at this time wouldn’t be all that effective, unless of course your focus is to be just basically big.

36

[quote]alin wrote:

[quote]White Panther wrote:

[quote]alin wrote:

[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)[/quote]

I like to vary the rep scheme but in my opinion 25 total reps not including warmups would be bare minimum. I prefer more for hypertrophy.[/quote]

Cheers, buddy. Care to give us any figures for upper (25 is lower, I take it) range and different body parts, please?[/quote]

There is a time and place for various approaches to training but IMHO if you are young and or skinny and want to get “Huge in a Hurry”
Stop being a wuss. Stop obsessing over minutia and debating theoretical bullshit. Choose a good basic routine that has worked for millions of others and don’t try to design one. Eat everything that isn’t nailed down and try to sleep 8 hrs a night. There will be plenty of time for tweaking after you’ve built a good base of size and strength.

37

[quote]White Panther wrote:

[quote]alin wrote:

[quote]White Panther wrote:

[quote]alin wrote:

[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)[/quote]

I like to vary the rep scheme but in my opinion 25 total reps not including warmups would be bare minimum. I prefer more for hypertrophy.[/quote]

Cheers, buddy. Care to give us any figures for upper (25 is lower, I take it) range and different body parts, please?[/quote]

There is a time and place for various approaches to training but IMHO if you are young and or skinny and want to get “Huge in a Hurry”
Stop being a wuss. Stop obsessing over minutia and debating theoretical bullshit. Choose a good basic routine that has worked for millions of others and don’t try to design one. Eat everything that isn’t nailed down and try to sleep 8 hrs a night. There will be plenty of time for tweaking after you’ve built a good base of size and strength.[/quote]

Eat everything that isn’t nailed down? Great theory if you want to look like a typical bloated, unhealthy, wide wasted fool… I doubt you are ‘huge’; therefore not in a position to preach to anyone.

38

[quote]Hitkiller wrote:

[quote]METAL2804 wrote:

[quote]Hitkiller wrote:
^^^^ I have to disagree with you. From my experience, I personally have benefited more from the implementation of the training methods and protocols used by Dorian Yates more than any other type of training. Granted not having used steroids I have to tailor this particular training style to suit myself and my own recovery abilities and that took a lot of time, trial and error, but I have reaped the rewards of training consistantly this way. For me it is the most efficient way to train. Sure this style of training is not for everybody, but I don’t think its fair to totally dismiss Dorian Yate’s views.[/quote]

Respecting the ‘Subject’ of this blog. I have never trained any body part without going to positive failure or beyond… however I didn’t aim for failure on certain lifts and those body parts did not suffer. So - I am unable to present any information to support the total, not training to failure approach. There is much evidence to support the training to failure method, which I’m a firm believer in.

Dorian’s method of training doesn’t require a lot of trial and error as the protocol is clearly laid out. If you blindly copy his exercises and focus your efforts on the recovery (days off) around the routine this can’t possibly be the most effective or efficient way to train.

Why? A more effective/efficient method of training would allow you to focus on the big lift exercises more often. It’s essential for ‘natural trainers’ to focus on boosting Testosterone - isn’t it?
[/quote]

One should never blindly copy his excersises, workouts, routines and protocols down to the letter, that would be silly. I have studied many variations principles and theories of high intensity training, (not just from Dorian) put it into practice and tailored it, and through trial and error, discovered which excersises I responded best to whilst incorporating the high intensity methods and techniques (on certain excersises) that suit me and my recovery abilities in order to keep progressing. This all took time. I keep a journal, I have done so for years, monitoring what works and what doesn’t. I hit each bodypart once every 7-9 days, I’m not losing any muscle on my rest days, because we all know muscle growth occurs outside the gym.

I agree with you with incorporating basic compound lifts that boost natural testosterone, but as you get bigger and more developed, one should be well aware that certain muscle groups respond better than others in terms of growth, therefore as a bodybuilder with an objective eye for symmetry balance and proportion, one should then begin to focus their efforts on the areas that are lagging, so focusing primarily on big lifts for overall growth at this time wouldn’t be all that effective, unless of course your focus is to be just basically big.

I always attempted to stimulate the majority of the body 3 times a week.I have never believed body parts require direct stimulus, even when lagging. There are enough variations of the big lifts that take care of an imbalances.

The only type of training I used to do ‘body part’ specific was to finish my pull-ups, dips or bench presses and with a post exhaustion exercise for the arms.

39

[quote]METAL2804 wrote:

[quote]White Panther wrote:

[quote]alin wrote:

[quote]White Panther wrote:

[quote]alin wrote:

[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)[/quote]

I like to vary the rep scheme but in my opinion 25 total reps not including warmups would be bare minimum. I prefer more for hypertrophy.[/quote]

Cheers, buddy. Care to give us any figures for upper (25 is lower, I take it) range and different body parts, please?[/quote]

There is a time and place for various approaches to training but IMHO if you are young and or skinny and want to get “Huge in a Hurry”
Stop being a wuss. Stop obsessing over minutia and debating theoretical bullshit. Choose a good basic routine that has worked for millions of others and don’t try to design one. Eat everything that isn’t nailed down and try to sleep 8 hrs a night. There will be plenty of time for tweaking after you’ve built a good base of size and strength.[/quote]

Eat everything that isn’t nailed down? Great theory if you want to look like a typical bloated, unhealthy, wide wasted fool… I doubt you are ‘huge’; therefore not in a position to preach to anyone.
[/quote]
Not preaching to anyone. Just a figure a speech meaning that if you want to grow you have to eat alot, no matter how dialed in your training is. Sorry if I came across as a prick. I’m new to posting on forums. Just trying to help anyone I can. And for the record I know I,m not huge. I weigh exactly 248 lbs with visible abs and veins. I don’t know my bodyfat percentage.

40

Dorian has his own gym focused on packing on muscle (not a commercial gym). In such an environment he will have been able to further understand what works, rather than what worked for him only. I think that counts.