T Nation

Surge Recovery Pre/Peri-WO

What was this protocol? I remember there being an article on it and I cannot find it.

I don’t remember the article but the basic approach is 2 or 3 scoops pre-workout, and typically 2 scoops post-workout is fine when having used an individually-optimal amount preworkout. But 3 scoops is an option here also.

It’s better in my opinion to start the Surge 15-20 minutes before the workout, having about a scoop’s worth of the drink at that time, and then in the workout itself consume about 3 scoops worth, if having the carb tolerance for that. This can be in the first half of the workout, or throughout. Basically, at any given time, if feeling there’s a good amount of fluid in the stomach already then there’s no reason to have more at that moment, but on feeling the stomach become emptier, have some more.

On the carb tolerance part, this is very simple: If you’ve noticed a problem already in this regard, then see what works for you. If you’ve never noticed a carb problem, then there’s no need to puzzle out whether you have one. Just go ahead and try the larger amounts.

Here’s the article.

Here’s a followup thread: http://tnation.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/diet_performance_nutrition_supplements/the_doubledose_surge_project

I would recommend the newer Anaconda formula for peri nutrition personally. As Bill can probably attest to it’s very much further along than Surge Recovery.

Or use Surge Workout Fuel for sports/cycling. Just my thoughts.

Yes, Anaconda can enable much more intensive training, and an individual who has trained hard, consistently and well for some time and is at the point of no longer making fast gains will find a very major difference between what he can achieve with Anaconda versus the above Surge Recovery approach.

But in many instances that’s not the case: the situation is not so challenging and excellent results can be had without “the big gun” so to speak.

Basically, although personally I’m very enthusiastic about finding the very best (to the knowledge of the day, which is always increasing) methods and materials, I work to keep in mind that very often people can get great results in more economical ways, or following older protocols that worked well in the past and actually still will work just as well today.

This also is related to personality type I think. I saw someone criticizing CT for bashing or disdaining his old programs, which the person liked. (I mean “criticizing” in an entirely appropriate sense: everything should be open to thoughtful question.) The person posting felt that these programs worked very well and still worked as well as they always did. So why disdain them now?

Well, there’s a point there, and I tend to have the same kind of thought about how old programs if ever valid still retain their validity. But I think it’s personality type. Some, for any of many possible reasons or drives, really need for what they are doing or advocating to be the absolute best, and anything else now seems unsuitable!

For my own work I have to admit an emotional tendency to the same thing, but applying reason to it, most times I’ll see that while the new way may be better overall or in some circumstances, in most cases the old is still just as good, in absolute terms, as it ever was.

The exception of course is if we learn from new information that actually it doesn’t work as well as previously thought. Sometimes that is so. But in this instance, there’s no such new information, but rather, continued favorable results. It’s a valid method still, though as you say, it’s not at the top end of what we now know.

Also, not everyone can budget for an Anaconda or a combined Anaconda / MAG-10 / Surge Workout Fuel protocol, and there also those who absolutely could, who are spending much more than this on frivolous things, but just aren’t going to do it, but will use a very economical approach. So I try to cover the bases for people’s different needs, preferences, and available resources.

However, it is a shame when a person who really cares about training results, who really would see a very significantly better result from following the best possible protocol, and absolutely does have the money based on blowing much more than this on frivolous things, chooses instead the frivolous things and cheaps out on his workout nutrition. But it is not as if anyone except the person himself can do anything about that, and by no means am I assuming or suggesting that that is the case for the OP. It does happen though, all too often.

I agree 100% and I remember the discussion of CTs older methods.

Old methods still work, What worked for Arnold, still works for us today. You make a very good point, especially that some aren’t willing to spend the money for Anaconda over say Surge Recovery.

I did make some assumptions about AlterEgo ( being a level 5 and a member since 2005, he’s probably at the point where Anaconda may benefit him better than Surge Recovery).

Perhaps I should do a comparison between Anaconda, Anaconda + MAG-10, and Surge Recovery in a few weeks once I change lifting styles. Obviously I would need to account for the initial program change and becoming acclimated to it. Then perhaps maybe I can do a 8 workout challenge with each. So roughly 2 weeks ( for the big training sessions ).

Or I may, knowing how much I love Anaconda and MAG-10, stick with it :slight_smile:

You could do it for fun, but the result seems rather a foregone conclusion, at least if training about as hard as your optimum with the Anaconda and MAG-10, as the benefits are quite clear. Of course, there’s always the matter of making sure for oneself, which is always important.

And perhaps there would be a serious value in that while I do expect you’d find the SR-only protocol to be not as good, it would be a demonstration that you’re not dependent on having the absolute cutting edge, but can still do well in the gym “on your own” so to speak. It can be a positive psychologically to know that one can still do well - not the best possible, but still well - even when not having the most advanced materials available.

Thanks both for your response. I have been on Anaconda and Mag -10 and even tried Indigo for a while there. Yet Bill is right in that it is not in the budget for me anymore to continue with such a high threshold of supplementation purchase.

I had remembered that article Chris posted a long time ago, so thank you for getting that for me. I have always loved surge Recovery and have seen great results with it. Just wanted to combine my latest knowledge with peri workout with it and knew that article would be a refresher on how it was carried out.

I wonder what a combo of Surge Workout Fuel combined with MAG-10 peri- workout and then post slam MAG-10 again?? Thing with SWF alone is that there is no protein with it to sip on during training, hence why I was wanting to go the Surge Recovery avenue. Anyways, that was just a thought…

I have high confidence that that would work well.

There are proven specific protocols and naturally these are specifically recommended; there are also ingredients which do their jobs extremely well and if combined reasonably can be expected to work well, as with your idea.

As an off-the-cuff estimation, if I were doing it personally I expect I would use 4 scoops of MAG-10 and 2 scoops of Surge Workout Fuel; or more preferably 5 and 1.5 scoops, respectively.

The benefit, which is very considerable, of the citrulline malate in Anaconda would be lost, however. (Just to name what I think is the largest loss.) However my expectation is that the protocol would still deserve being rated as excellent.

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
I have high confidence that that would work well.

There are proven specific protocols and naturally these are specifically recommended; there are also ingredients which do their jobs extremely well and if combined reasonably can be expected to work well, as with your idea.

As an off-the-cuff estimation, if I were doing it personally I expect I would use 4 scoops of MAG-10 and 2 scoops of Surge Workout Fuel; or more preferably 5 and 1.5 scoops, respectively.

The benefit, which is very considerable, of the citrulline malate in Anaconda would be lost, however. (Just to name what I think is the largest loss.) However my expectation is that the protocol would still deserve being rated as excellent. [/quote]

Would you say Surge Recovery protocol maybe better or just as good as what you just proposed?

Nope. Quite good for the training most do and for their situation, but not as good as the above MAG-10 / Surge Workout Fuel combination.

There is substantial difference between the casein hydrolysate of the MAG-10 versus the whey hydolysate of Surge Recovery (the casein hydrolysate has far higher di and tripeptide content, and also even where the body’s own enzymes further hydrolyze the whey hydrolysate, the resulting di and tripeptide profile is different due to the different sources.)

While I haven’t tried the above exact combination with Surge Workout Fuel (from almost the start, I very many times did combine Surge Workout Fuel with Anaconda, or with Anaconda plus MAG-10) even comparing to MAG-10 alone I would prefer that to the above Surge Recovery protocol. However, personally, and as with many, more carbs do help, so I have no doubt that adding Surge Workout Fuel to MAG-10 would be an improvement over MAG-10 alone for me and for most. So therefore it would almost have to be better than Surge Recovery alone, as above.

While on the subject of different combinations that aren’t specifically recommended, there’s also the method of using Surge Recovery as the added carb source to Anaconda, MAG-10, or the combination of the two.

Prior to carbs being included in Anaconda and MAG-10, I’ve done this a lot, with fine results but for one thing: the resulting high osmolality gave a big belly during the workout and for some time after.

(High osmolality results from having a very large number of molecules per liter of solution. Glucose contributes a great deal of osmolality since each gram has far more molecules than does each gram of say highly branched cyclic dextrin.)

Surge Recovery itself doesn’t have overly high osmolality because the contributors besides glucose are relatively minor. However, because casein hydrolysate has high content of fairly small molecules, once you provide a suitably high amounts of this and of electrolytes as well, as well as further ingredients, you don’t have room (so to speak) for glucose. So while nutritionally I got excellent results from that combination, there was the bloat problem and this still would be true today. The use of highly branched cyclic dextrin in the newer versions of Anaconda and MAG-10 completely solves that issue.

Yeah that protocol, although good, still will end up being almost as pricey as Anaconda and MAG-10. Any other things I could combine in Surge Recovery that would enhance it…other than creatine of course?

Combining BCAA tri-peptides in the Surge Recovery??

Actually, as tremendously interesting a product as the leucine peptides are, they are more expensive than MAG-10 or Anaconda. I cannot speak from experience with them. Presently, and unfortunately for some time, I’m dealing with an injury issue that’s been keeping my training at a more moderated level. (It is however pretty clearly on the path to complete recovery.) So I’ve felt that while that’s been the case, I neither personally need that level of supplementation, nor could necessarily discern the difference.

Tim very generously provides me with any Biotest supplement at no cost, but I don’t believe in wasting his money – the raw material is very expensive: it is not free for him to give me! So I don’t personally use what at the moment I can’t get benefit from, and unfortunately the injury had already happened prior to the leucine peptides becoming available. So I can’t say for myself on them.

I would recommend, as cost is an issue, going with the above Surge Recovery approach, or if there is some room for increase, a modification of the SR approach.

As with Anaconda and MAG-10, the more water is used for the mixture, the better, up to about 1.5 to 2 liters.

If it’s reasonable for you to spend somewhat more than that, but not spend as much as the “best we know” protocol, then a very rational way to do it would be to split the difference, so to speak.

At one end, we have say 5 scoops of Surge Recovery. 62.5 g protein (yes, not a direct comparison as it’s a different type, but broadly speaking), 110 g carbs, 1575 mg electrolytes if I’ve added correctly.

At the other hand, we have a protocol such as 3 scoops Anaconda, 2 scoops MAG-10, 1 scoop Surge Workout Fuel. This totals 50 g protein (but actually more effective), 110 g carbs, 1921 mg electrolytes. As you see, the broad totals are pretty similar, so it’s the kind of situation that lends itself well to being treated a potential spectrum, where you can find a point along that spectrum, rather than two totally dissimilar things that cannot be treated that way.

One approach would be to to decide, for example, that you wanted to budget 2 scoops of MAG-10 as part of the workout nutrition.

Okay, that’s 20 grams of protein, and 11 g carbs. To stay within our overall profile of protein, carbs, and electrolytes, we now need about that much less from the Surge Recovery.

So, we’d drop 1.5 scoops. This gets us about the same on total protein, but does drop 33 g carbs in place of the 11 contained in the MAG-10. So we’re behind by 22 g. Really this is not a big deal, relative to having 110 g. The new amount may be perfecly fine for you. But if you wanted to replace it, you could add about 2/3 of a scoop of Surge Workout Fuel.

This would be perfectly fine: it (either with the SWF or without) would be a good way to “punch up” the SR protocol very significantly.

Punching it up with two scoops of Anaconda would be better yet, but more expensive.

Basically the reason for writing all that, rather than simply a specific recommendation, is that it gives the tools for tailoring according to how you see it, and provides the means for changing as the situation may change, rather than being limited to a single recommendation.

However, all this said, probably people are best advised to just use the standard protocols. When understanding how, it’s absolutely possible to be flexible, but for most, the published protocols are the best advice.

Thanks for the in depth input! FREE Biotest???!! How the heck did you land that??? Hard core jealous!

Well, I’ve been working for Biotest for 11 years now. It is a great and much-appreciated bonus to the job! :slight_smile:

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Well, I’ve been working for Biotest for 11 years now. It is a great and much-appreciated bonus to the job! :)[/quote]

And in those 11 years providing jewels like this thread, definitely well earned free product Bill.

Thank you, Eazy! :slight_smile:

Bill if you have a moment check this interview out. Quite the opposite ideology from what many purport on T-Nation. Thoughts?

Overall, I’ve heard many fine things about Chad and his training methods and advice. On the other hand, personally his methods don’t suit me. As with most things, there’s good to be found in many places, but almost nowhere, if anywhere at all, will everything be things that everyone should take home for themselves.

The body is constantly burning fat; whether there is better result over the course of the day from timing things as he suggests, I cannot say.

Where I do find some agreement is that when the pre and during workout is as good as I think it should be, which includes being at least as many and preferably somewhat more calories than were burned in the workout, then there is no need to slam any mass amount of nutrients post-workout.

That said, I don’t think there’s any disadvantage to that time window either compared to having those calories at some other non-peri-workout time.

For example, if you want to have a pretty big, quality meal somewhat post-workout “despite” having had 600 calories or so of really good workout nutrition, and your total daily intake stays the same, it’s just a matter of timing, I don’t believe this is going to give worse results than waiting for some other time of the day. If anything, better results, assuming that the result isn’t starvation or overly low intake at later times.

I just have never heard of an approach, purported by the individual chad interviewed… Ori, which recommends not feeding you body until 30- 60 mins post workout and to not have any carbs…just protein. Thanks Bill for the feedback.

I personally feel I would pass out on a protocol such as the one that you are training in a some what fasted state- then after training wait practically an hour before anything in your system? I would eat my arm before I got to the PWO nutrition.