Gaining Muscle and Losing Fat (2015)

Yes, I've read that about Jones and Mentzer. However, the studies I referred to do not involve going beyond momentary muscle failure while maintaining good form. I've attached a study. The recommendations, which you can find on page 49, are as follows:


RECOMMENDATIONS



What is really known about the science of resistance training is contrary to the opinions expressed in the Position Stand. That is, the preponderance of research strongly suggests that gains in muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, and endurance are the result of the following simple guidelines:


• Select a mode of exercise that feels comfortable throughout the range of motion. There is very little evidence to support the superiority of free weights or machines for increasing muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, or endurance.






• Choose a repetition duration that will ensure the maintenance of consistent form throughout the set. One study showed a greater strength benefit from a shorter duration (2s/4s) and one study showed better strength gains as a result of a longer duration (10s/4s), but no study using conventional exercise equipment reports any significant difference in muscular hypertrophy, power, or endurance as a result of manipulating repetition duration.






• Choose a range of repetitions between three and 15 (e.g., 3-5, 6-8, 8-10, etc.). There is very little evidence to suggest that a specific range of repetitions (e.g., 3-5 versus 8-10) or time-under-load (e.g., 30s versus 90s) significantly impacts the increase in muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, or endurance.






• Perform one set of each exercise. The preponderance of resistance-training studies shows no difference in the gains in muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, or endurance as a result of performing a greater number of sets.






• After performing a combination of concentric and eccentric muscle actions, terminate each exercise at the point where the concentric phase of the exercise is becoming difficult, if not impossible, while maintaining good form. There is very little evidence to suggest that going beyond this level of intensity (e.g., supramaximal or accentuated eccentric muscle actions) will further enhance muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, or endurance.






• Allow enough time between exercises to perform the next exercise in proper form. There is very little evidence to suggest that different rest periods between sets or exercises will significantly affect the gains in muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, or endurance.






• Depending on individual recovery and response, choose a frequency of 2-3 times/week to stimulate each targeted muscle group. One session a week has been shown to be just as effective as 2-3 times/week for some muscle groups. There is very little evidence to suggest that training a muscle more than 2-3 times/week or that split routines will produce greater gains in muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, or endurance.

 

Absolutely! (within my window, of course).

(When you said cake, you did mean that chicken off the grill last night...with the skin on!!!:eek

 

If by very low, and not including a warm up pyramid, I've tried something I've read that Mentzor incorporated (you mentioned earlier you were familiar with him.) Very slow positive, hold, and negative, sometimes as much as 4 seconds each. That would be a 12 second rep. With heavier weight, that can get pretty intense. I experienced my greatest strength gains doing it. Sometimes just one or two reps. Also, the weight doesn't have to be heavy, just done slowly. I often do a really slow 1rst rep at very little weight as a warm-up. I'll often pause incrementally through both the positive and negative of the warm-up. Even get a burn sometimes!!...Doing a warm-up:eek:! I do this routinely, regardless of whichever type of overall routine I'm doing. I ALWAYS warm up, through several weights to my max, which kind of disqualifies me as low volume trainer. I guess it depends on how you look at it.

The biggest two differences I experience: I definitely feel different after lower volume heavy workouts than I do after high volume low weight. Better after the low volume (maybe because shorter, less boring workout). High volume low weight cycles, boring as they are, seem to have a therapeutic effect on joint pains or minor injuries that occur during my heavy cycles. That said, I like to keep changing things every few weeks.

Could you post a sample regime regarding the approach you will use, and if you will change it periodically?


A few questions came to mind while reading the articles (they might have been mentioned and I missed them + I only read the portions you posted). They may not even have been a consideration of the studies you mentioned.

Did any suggest the difference in calorie burn by different levels of reps and weight and related variables (I know guys who work out in such a way that they don't need to add cardio...by design. One of them has a degree in kinesiology, has won local body building contests, but he never does cardio. He told me he gets plenty from his workouts. He takes almost no rest periods, even when not super-setting. I'm not sure about his individual muscle volume, but he won't train more than 45 minutes per workout. He is on the most strict diet imaginable, as well).

Did the studies offer insight into the body reacting to changing routines? Volume and weight changes and related variables are a big player in that dept.

The comment comparing machines to free weights: Does it mention stabilizers? I've read that certain free weight movements are superior than many machines simply because of the limited range of motion offered by many machines. Old school thinking is free weights utilize stabilizers to a much greater degree than many machines.

Limited exercises per muscle: Doesn't a muscle, or to be more precise, different regions of the muscle as well as fiber composition react differently to different exercises, angles of exercises, and of course, number of reps? Did the studies use compound moves, isolation moves, or both?

These might be a few questions I would ask before changing what I've been doing, and I would certainly compare it to other studies. Much of the thinking in the posted studies seem contrary to many of the studies I've seen backing old school methods (as in any science). I have to admit, most of the different stuff I've tried over the years came from....you guessed it...studies!

 

I've read about slow reps, but the idea never appealed to me, so I can't really comment on it. The studies, as best as I can recall, do not address a particularly slow cadence. You will note that the recommendations I posted from the meta analysis above suggests a fairly basic protocol, suggesting that fancying it up would not appreciably enhance benefits. Again, I can't comment one way or the other. Personally, I prefer a deliberate unhurried pace using no momentum whatsoever and a full range of motion for all exercises. I prefer reps in the 7 to 12 range, depending on the exercise. It's a personal preference.

Regarding your question about different calorie burn rates, I don't recall seeing anything about that in the study summaries I saw.

I know that some researchers believe in changing routines and periodization, but Richard Winnett and Ralph Carpinelli, whose meta studies I liked, suggested that variety might be overrated. (I know this flies in the face of conventional wisdom, but the conclusion appeals to me.) Check out the bottom of the page of the following link in the brief Q&A section:

http://www.ageless-athletes.com/90minutes.php

Regarding exercises per muscle group, I know a lot of people believe you need to hit a muscle from different angles. They may be right, and I only do it a bit (vertical and horizontal pulling and pushing). Other guys here, like Baron, would know more about this stuff than I do.

You asked about my routine. I don't want to bore everyone here with the details. I tried to PM you, but cannot do so.

 

Excellent and detailed response! You should have no trouble feeling a difference going to even lower volume. Regarding detailing our routines, it might get away from Baron's intent for this thread, so it will be up to him. We can always throw a different thread together regarding the details of routines.

I had a great fasting WO today. I only did 5 exercises (2 for lats, 3 for triceps) but managed to match my all time highs on two triceps and one lat exercise. I am enjoying the fasting diet, though the last two nights I exceeded my macros by several hundred calories, but paid it off today. My weight crept back up a tad, but hey...it's the weekend! Back to business tonight, though. Shooting for 192-195 by next Sun. I'll let you know, then. I'm feeling good at these heavy weights, and doing a few more reps than last time I visited these amounts (many months ago). Wondering if the BCAA's are playing a role. I haven't changed any other supps.

Pistols?! (You realize I will bring this up in our next gun debate downstairs ....just kidding...I just couldn't resist)...with weights to boot (you said age 57, right?)! I'm impressed. Talk about getting stabilizers involved!

I look forward to hearing how your reduced volume plays out over your entire routine(s). For now, I'm only changing my dietary approach with the fasting. I'll continue to alter my routines as usual, but will continue this 16/8 through those changes, and see how each reacts to the diet. Good luck!

 

Ah, okay. I initially included my routine in my last response post to you, saw how overly long the entire post was and then deleted that part. I tried to PM it, but couldn't do so. Anyway, I'm glad you saw the routine. It seems so insubstantial in comparison to the routine(s) I had been slogging through over the years. It begins today and it will take a while for me to see if it "works."

At least I know I will enjoy it since it is a slight reduction to an already abbreviated routine I've been doing. You'll note that, aside from the calf raises, all the exercises are compound, which give the best bang for the buck and also have a better effect on metabolism than isolation work. So I think I have the 3 Bs covered: brief, basic and brutal.

I'll keep you posted, and please do likewise. And good luck to you, too!

P.S. Not 57 quite yet, but in the first week of August. Catalogue of gift ideas available on request.

 

I have to say I'm a bit surprised and disappointed that there is not more widespread discussion and debate here about exercise volume. This thread is about building muscle. That usually doesn't happen without exercise. And so, one of the first questions should be How much? The debate about exercise volume rages on the Internet. I was hoping people here would chime in on what they have arrived at through their own experimentation over time. But except for a bit of interest here and there, the subject is mostly dead in this thread. Is it that boring a topic because everyone has it figured out?

 

That is unfortunate. When I first saw the picture, I thought that was one clean and glossy floor finish. But I feel your pain. Totally sucks.

You have what appears to be some fancy equipment in your home gym. And I imagine that's only a partial shot. How much stuff do you have?