Lyle McDonald's Ultimate Guide to Hypertrophy Training

0:00[Music]

0:14I'd like to ask you about and I'll send

0:17it in the chat right now. This Facebook

0:20post you made kind of succinct

0:24guide to hypertrophy training. See, I

0:26love this and I wanted to pick your

0:28brains about this.

0:30something that I literally crapped out

0:32as a joke one time and it's probably

0:34like the most coherent training advice

0:36I've ever gotten ever given. I love it.

0:40I love it. So, this is the ultimate

0:42guide to hypertrophy training.

0:48Step one, lift the thing. Step two,

0:52lower the thing. Okay. Step three,

0:56repeat steps 1 and two 6 to 12 times and

1:00then rest a couple of minutes. Step

1:03four, repeat step three four to eight

1:06times in a workout. Step five, repeat

1:09step four once every 3 to 5 days. Step

1:14six, add a little weight when you can.

1:17Step seven, go to step one. Yeah. And

1:21that's pretty much it. That's pretty

1:23much it. The Basically, for for people

1:25that didn't follow that, what it's

1:27saying is do four to eight sets of six

1:30to 12 with a couple minutes in between

1:34every 3 to five days and add a little

1:37weight when you're able to. Yeah, you

1:39can basically just stop watching this

1:41video right now and you'll have walked

1:43away with most of the knowledge you'll

1:44ever need about training for muscle

1:46growth.

1:48Yeah, I mean we could quibble about

1:51details but in terms of the principles

1:53of growth but and we you know and we can

1:55and that's of course most of what this

1:56industry is. Well, how fast do you lift

1:58the thing? How fast do you lower the

2:00thing? Well, what about five times or

2:02three minutes or you know should it be

2:04four to eight time 48 set 4 to eight

2:06sets or two to four 10 to 12? What every

2:08three to five days? What about every

2:10six? like in the aggregate summary of

2:14training for

2:15growth. That's it.

2:18Yeah. Awesome. Well, um having just

2:22outlined the guide and what it means,

2:25let's do the quibbling and the little

2:27critical analysis. So, I mean, starting

2:30with points one and two or steps one and

2:32two, lift the thing, lower the thing. Um

2:34we could talk about repetition speed. We

2:37could also talk about why even lift and

2:40lower the thing at all? Why not just do

2:42an isometric to grow muscle, right? Like

2:46you know, say for example, instead of

2:47doing lateral raises to grow your side

2:50delts, why not just do like the

2:51strongman crucifix hold? And it's just

2:54Yeah. So number one and two can be

2:57summarized as perform coupled concentric

3:00lifting and eccentric contractions,

3:03right? As a generality. Now there are

3:06exceptions. They have done research

3:08where doing twice as many concentric

3:11contractions gives you the same growth

3:13as doing coupled concentric and

3:15eccentric. And occasionally they do

3:17weird [ __ ] where they do eccentric only.

3:20And that is the same or better or worse

3:22than doing concentric only. And that's

3:25all good and well. But what people

3:27forget is that these studies use

3:30extremely specialized

3:33equipment to allow that to occur. So you

3:37do the concentric and then the machine

3:39mechanically lowers it for you or vice

3:42versa. You do the eccentric and it

3:44raises it for you. It's great from a

3:47mechanistic standpoint, but it is

3:49impractical. Anyone who's ever tried to

3:52do eccentric only training, you have to

3:54have two very patient partners and even

3:57then it can be very problematic.

4:00Now, does isometric training generate

4:02growth? And there are some studies that

4:05it like in beginners like it might to

4:08some degree because tension is kind of

4:10tension.

4:11And and years ago, I would have said one

4:15of the early models of

4:17hypertrophy was that during concentric

4:20training, you would reach muscular

4:23rigor. basically the muscles would lock

4:25up and then on subsequent eccentric you

4:27would cause some degree of damage in

4:28that stimulated growth. Now we know now

4:30that that's not true. Muscle damage if

4:32it does anything it harms growth. So

4:35anyone still saying you should chase

4:36soreness or damage doesn't know what

4:38they're talking about. Would an

4:40isometric generate growth? I don't like

4:42I said I've looked at the research and

4:44there is some stuff. I've never delved

4:46into it that much, but practically I

4:49don't know how useful it would be. And I

4:52don't know, in the real world, it

4:53doesn't seem to work. Yeah, as far as I

4:56know, no bodybuilders use isometrics as

4:58their primary form of resistance

5:01training. I guess that's Yeah, I mean,

5:03if they use it, I mean, a very common

5:06bodybuilder technique would be peak

5:08contraction is in exercises that have

5:11tension during peak contraction. You

5:14hold, you know, yeah, you're doing leg

5:16extensions, you do an isometric hold at

5:18the top and squeeze as hard as possible.

5:20Can't do that on a leg press. You can't

5:22do that on a hack squat. You know,

5:24powerlifters will occasionally do

5:26isometric holds throughout the movement

5:28to develop very specific angular

5:30strength, but that's for strength, not

5:32hypertrophy. So, yeah, I don't know. The

5:35studies notwithstanding, it just doesn't

5:37seem to work, right? So, your best bet

5:41is likely to do full repetitions that

5:43involve both a raising and a lowering.

5:46And and and a lot of that's just

5:47practical. In most exercises, that's

5:49going to be the case. Like there are,

5:51you know, there are exceptions. In some

5:52cases, we would reverse that. On a leg

5:55press, you lower the thing and then you

5:56lift the thing. Sure. Yeah. For example,

5:59depending on the style of leg press,

6:01right? Deadlifts are a rare exception

6:03where powerlifterss will lift the thing

6:05and then drop the thing, you know,

6:07Olympic lifters as well. And I mean, and

6:09that's probably, you know, a good

6:10example. Olympic lifting does not build

6:12growth, does not build muscle, just

6:14doesn't because of the nature of the

6:16sport. It's pure concentric and it still

6:17doesn't work. Um, but as for tempo, it

6:21is generally agreed that the right tempo

6:23for bodybuilding training is to perform

6:25an explosive concentric or raising

6:27action in a slow and controlled

6:29eccentric or lower action. Yeah,

6:31generally speaking, and if you look at

6:32the limited data on repetition speed,

6:36within reasonable ranges, by which I

6:38mean two to four seconds of repetition

6:40or so, the difference is negligible. So

6:43once you get out of that into the super

6:45slow stuff, it brings the tension so low

6:49that it's no longer really a training

6:51stimulus. But within that range, um, I

6:54mean, there are folks that will still

6:55argue for a more controlled concentric

6:58for reasons, but if it's heavy enough,

7:01even explosive, it will not move that

7:03fast, especially after the first couple

7:05repetitions. Like maybe if you're doing

7:06sets of 20 to 25, you have to keep it a

7:09little bit in your pants on the first

7:10handful of reps. But yeah, like I like

7:12to see explosive concentric, a squeeze

7:15if the exercise allows it, if there's a

7:17peak contraction, and then two or three

7:19second eccentric. And that's pretty much

7:21going to be good enough across the

7:24board. There would be rare except there.

7:26I can't think of many exceptions outside

7:28of the injury thing we discussed. Yeah,

7:30sure. Super slow. Well, why not move on

7:33to step three then, which is to perform

7:36sets of six to 12. So, why is that a

7:38good rep range for muscle growth?

7:40Perhaps we could start by discussing the

7:41pitfalls of lower rep training, i.e.

7:44sets of 1 to five, and pitfalls of

7:48higher rep training, i.e. sets of well

7:51you know 13 plus yeah so back in the day

7:56right and I don't remember when I've

7:57written this multiple times over the

7:59years whenever someone's like and I'll

8:01just whatever just repeat that so the

8:04hypertrophy zone was always 8 to 12

8:08all kinds of textbooks would state this

8:10is scientifically proven to be the

8:12hypertrophy zone but there was never a

8:14reference or if there was a reference it

8:16was to another book there was never any

8:18original data

8:20to support that repetition range. Now, I

8:23have a

8:24theory. So, in the earliest days of

8:26lifting, this came out of Delor's work

8:29in the 50s, you did three sets of 10.

8:32That was that you still see this all the

8:35time. Three sets of 10 for beginners.

8:38Even what I read from the the the heavy

8:41duty for women, one set of just sets of

8:4310. Why? Probably that's why. Because we

8:46can count to 10. No, I'm like dead

8:48serious. It's just it's a nice even

8:50number. Nine sucks. 11 sucks because

8:53power of the primes. Like 10 is just a

8:55number we can remember. Here's what I

8:57think happened. It's a shame we don't

8:58use base 12, right? So what I think

9:02happened was you had bodybuilders trying

9:04to do sets of 10 and they lose count.

9:07And so sometimes they do eight and

9:09sometimes they do 12 and they're like

9:11eight to 12. That's my I'm not saying

9:13that's true, but I can come up with no

9:16better explanation. Sure. Or maybe

9:20they're aiming for 10 and they fall

9:22short. Yeah. I mean, if you ever anyone

9:24that's ever trained, there's a reason I

9:26prefer low repetitions because I cannot

9:28count that high without losing. I will

9:30lose track. Any there are practical

9:33considerations. Five. Five. Five is is

9:37I'm pretty good up to five. The time you

9:39get up to eight, good luck. The beauty

9:41is if you ever train people hands-on,

9:43when it gets heavy, they count for you

9:46because I'll be just like seven. They're

9:48like, "That's eight." Like they know

9:50when it's heavy, they know how many

9:51they've done, even if I've forgotten, of

9:53course. So, okay. So, that was Yeah.

9:57Yeah. So, that was You can absolutely

9:59grow muscle with sets of one to four,

10:02but I would argue it's harder on your

10:04joints and connective tissues. So, for

10:06most people, the moderate rep range is

10:08generally better. Well, you jumped the

10:10conclusion. Let's go through the the

10:11detail some of the details first. Oh,

10:13please. So, even early, even with that,

10:17you would still often see lower

10:18repetitions recommended. Five to eight

10:20was a real common one. Six to eight was

10:22a common one. Now, when I was, you know,

10:25I came out of school and of course, you

10:26know, I thought I knew everything about

10:28everything like we all do. And I'm like,

10:30I knew hypertrophy was higher

10:32repetitions. And I went and took the um

10:36US Olympic lifting certification and Wes

10:38Barnett who was one of the top Olympic

10:40lifters of the day. I mean he was big

10:41dude. So I asked one of the teachers I

10:43go what does he do for hypertrophy? They

10:46said oh he just does lots of sets of

10:47five. I was like but that can't be I'm

10:50like maybe there's more to this than

10:53than than meets the eye. Maybe I need to

10:55think about this a little bit more.

10:57And so you would see that and I wrote an

11:01article years ago very early in my

11:03career. And I remember I'd asked my

11:05training partner this. My training

11:06partner was a great bodybuilder,

11:08physical therapist, really bright guy.

11:10And I go, "Okay, dude, I got a question

11:12for you. If you had to pick one rep

11:13range for hypertrophy that you could

11:15only do that, what would you pick?" And

11:17he goes, "Five to eight." I'm like,

11:19"Exactly." And I wrote this article on

11:21my website to that effect. And here was

11:23my logic. And then I will get back to

11:25the the original question and it had to

11:27do with the way muscle fibers are

11:29recruited in terms of loading, right?

11:33Because outside of one individual who I

11:36will not name but who apparently likes

11:37to whine about me on

11:39Reddit, if you do not recruit a muscle

11:41fiber, you cannot train it. This

11:45seems fairly self-explanatory,

11:48right?

11:50So the the genesis of my argument was

11:52this. Muscle fibers can be recruited in

11:55one of two ways. Let me back up. There

11:57are two ways that muscles generate

11:59force. Fiber recruitment, which is

12:01getting more fibers into the exercise,

12:04and what's called rate coding, which

12:05just means sending more nervous signals

12:07down the the

12:08nerve. Up to about 80 to 85% of

12:12maximum, the body uses recruitment

12:16to increase force production. above 85%

12:19it uses rate

12:21coding. Okay? So if you take 85% of your

12:25max on average five

12:28reps, you will get full muscle fiber

12:30recruitment from the first repetition

12:33and the entire set of five will be done

12:34under conditions of full

12:36recruitment. Now if you were to go to

12:3990% you will get that same 100%

12:42recruitment but you will do less

12:44repetitions, right? It uses rate coding

12:46past that. Now 80% is about eight reps.

12:5085% is about five reps. So if you pick a

12:52weight between 80 and 85% and do a

12:54maximum set of five to eight, you will

12:57get maximum fiber recruitment for at

13:00least five of the total repetitions like

13:02the 80% you might not first couple of

13:04reps. Now you can also get fiber

13:07recruitment by taking lighter sets to

13:10failure. Right? So let's say you take a

13:12weight that's set of 15. That's 70% a

13:16max, somewhere in that range, maybe

13:1965%. You will not get maximum fiber

13:21recruitment right off the

13:23bat because force production is too low.

13:27Yeah. And as you get closer to zero reps

13:29in reserve, that last five repetitions

13:32or so will be under full recruitment, a

13:35maximum recruitment. So,

13:39neurologically, five reps of a maximum

13:41five rep set, sets reps three to eight

13:44of an eight rep set, reps 10 to 15 of a

13:4815 rep set, and reps 20 to 25 of a 25

13:51rep set look essentially neurologically

13:54identical, which is why the bar speed is

13:57the same. On a maximum set of eight,

14:00your bar speed will look exactly the

14:01same as on a maximum set of 15, as on a

14:04maximum set of 25. they are

14:05neurologically essentially the same. So

14:08we know so but five to eight is the

14:11sweet spot. It gives you maximum

14:13recruitment and it gives you the maximum

14:15number of repetitions under the

14:17conditions of maximum recruitment. Hence

14:19five to eight if you had to pick one

14:22range because if you're going to do 15

14:24rep if you do sets of 15 to get the same

14:27five maximum reps you got to dick around

14:30for 10 reps. you're gonna do in a set of

14:3230, you got to fart around for 25 reps

14:35to get to the five good ones. Yeah. And

14:37that's just boring and hurts. Yeah. It's

14:40fatiguing and demanding on your

14:42cardiovascular system if you throw up

14:44exercises and it's hard to tell if you

14:46failed due to acidosis or actual like

14:49you know just giving up because it hurts

14:51etc etc. Now back there was this whole

14:53thing when the five to 30 rep range

14:55studies demonstrating equivalent

14:57hypertrophy if taken to failure study

15:00came out where everyone started

15:03prescribing sets of up to 30. You know

15:05do set 20 on this exercise 30 on that

15:08exercise. Just because you can and not

15:11because you should. Yeah. Well and

15:13that's and what what the message became

15:16well hang on we'll come back to that.

15:18Yeah. Sure. Sure. I'm getting ahead of

15:19myself again. Okay. So the original

15:21schema if you go back even further back

15:23was what they called the repetition

15:26continuum. So the general idea was

15:29that's a one to five maximum

15:31strength. It was too few reps to really

15:34that's that's what powerlifters and you

15:36know some like maximum strength

15:39six to 15 was hypertrophy in that range.

15:4215 to 25 was local muscular endurance.

15:46Right? That used to be the rep continuum

15:48and certainly some studies of the day

15:50showed that that was the

15:51case. It's but it is a continuum. What

15:54happened is that then got taken out of

15:56context.

15:57Ah 1 to 5 is only strength. 6 to 12 is

16:01only hypertrophy. 12 to 25 is only

16:04muscular endurance. No that's not what

16:05the word continuum means. Yeah. There is

16:09overlap. So studies then came out later,

16:12right, showing that yeah, fives can

16:14generate growth if you do enough

16:17sets that you know Brad did the paper

16:21such as it was. He compared seven sets

16:23of three like three sets of 12.

16:27Yet

16:28they did, but the seven sets of three

16:31took

16:32like five or five to eight times as long

16:35because it was like by the time you

16:37figure out three minutes between sets.

16:39That's 20 minutes to get seven sets of

16:41three. And it took about seven minutes

16:42to do three sets of 12. And they had

16:44much higher injury rates to boot.

16:46Correct. And several folks drop out of

16:49the study even. Yes. So which yes, it

16:53can work, but you have to do a million

16:57more sets and realistic it'll take you

17:01so much longer to do it and the risk of

17:03injury is much higher. So it's like

17:05again, yes, physiological, can it work?

17:08Like I don't know if you could do it

17:09with singles. I don't think you could

17:11actually do enough repetitions to do it

17:13to get whatever. One question we have

17:16not answered yet, right? We know that

17:18you need some number of maximal force

17:21contractions to turn on growth, right?

17:24The titan and uh the jack complex and

17:27all that stuff. We don't know how

17:29many, right? Chris Beardsley has thrown

17:32out a value of 25 per workout. I read

17:34his article half a dozen times. I've had

17:36people that work with him explain his

17:37logic to me. I still don't get it, but

17:40it doesn't matter. But you accept it

17:41nonetheless. But it's probably close

17:43enough. There is some value below which

17:46you don't get maximal growth and above

17:48which you either

17:50get no more growth or maybe less because

17:52you're doing more like but we don't

17:53know. But if it is 25, you cannot do 25

17:57sets of one with a max weight. You might

18:00could do I mean can you do seven sets of

18:02three? Sure. But you're probably going

18:05to get hurt. You can do five sets of

18:07five a lot easier. You can do four sets

18:10of eight super easy. You can do two to

18:13three sets of 12. Right? Now, probably

18:16that it's not actually accurate. We need

18:17to count the the the maximum contraction

18:19reps, but you get the idea. And then we

18:21had the low volume. Then we had the low

18:23load stuff. They're like, it's like,

18:24okay, so you can get growth at fives if

18:27you do a lot of sets. And even my low

18:29rep range was five to eight depending on

18:31the exercise. I wouldn't do fives on say

18:33lateral raises, but you know, you could

18:35do it on a leg press or a hack squat.

18:38Um, like only really for certain

18:40movements. Sure. And then we had the low

18:42load stuff that showed, oh, if you do 20

18:4425% of one RM and get 30

18:48repetitions, you can get the same

18:50growth, but you have to do triple the

18:52volume load, which I think is funny. The

18:53same guys are like, "Oh, volume load is

18:55all that matters." I'm like, well then

18:57why do you need triple the volume load

18:58of low load stuff to generate the same

19:00growth as sets of eight. So yeah so then

19:03the narrative became oh you can use any

19:05repetition range and get growth and that

19:07may be true in a physiological sense but

19:10in a wrote another article and said is

19:13there a hypertrophy zone and I said in

19:16the strictest physiological sense it is

19:18much wider than we used to think. So,

19:21however, there is a practical

19:23hypertrophy zone in terms of striking a

19:26balance between such so many low rep

19:30sets that you get hurt and you're in the

19:31gym for a million hours, the high rep

19:33sets that are painful and can only be

19:35applied to certain exercises. Something

19:37that got forgotten, most of the low load

19:38stuff was on leg extensions. Yeah, try

19:41that [ __ ] on squats. Try it on anything

19:44more complex than that and you're still

19:45probably going to you're either going to

19:46get hurt or throw up or both, right?

19:48people tend to forget that these tend to

19:50be very exercise specific. So from a

19:53practical standpoint and then if you

19:54look so I wrote that article and a bunch

19:56of people of course crapped on it even

19:58though they were saying the same thing

20:00like I think Eric Helms at one point

20:01said yeah 80% of your growth training

20:04should be you know in the that range and

20:07then maybe 10% in fives and a little bit

20:10of higher rep work like yeah exactly or

20:13just don't like whatever like I said I

20:16tend to program max strength blocks the

20:17end of every few hyper trophy blocks

20:19that's fives and triples I don't use a

20:22lot of lowload training because it sucks

20:23and it's boring and I've done it and it

20:25hurts like hell. I mean, back in the

20:27day, my old training partner and I. So,

20:28there's old Hatfield system is a fiber

20:30type training system that we know also

20:32isn't particularly true, but you did

20:33sets of five for type two, well 2B,

20:36really 2X fibers, sets of 12 to 15 for 2

20:39A, and then sets of 40 for type one. But

20:42my training partner and I being who we

20:44were, decided to make that even a little

20:46bit more structured. So, we still did

20:48the fives and the 15s. We did timed

20:51two-minute sets instead of sets because

20:53you can crank out 40 reps in 40 seconds

20:55if you try. We did timed sets. Two

20:58minutes of leg extensions is one of the

21:00worst things you'll ever do. Oh dear. I

21:03don't wouldn't. But yeah, so six to 12.

21:05Is it the only hypertrophy range? No.

21:08But it is about as good of a range as

21:11you're going to get for a practical

21:12hypertrophy range. Like and it is

21:14exercise specific like for many It's a

21:17nice sweet spot. Yeah. For many compound

21:19movements, higher repetitions, many

21:21people find that triceps is more

21:23limiting than on lower repetitions. For

21:25isolation movements, six to eights are

21:27either hard on the joints or hard to be

21:29technically correct, right? So, if

21:32you're going to apply that for say a

21:33chest workout, yeah, you might do four

21:36sets of six to eight on a hammer incline

21:39chest press and follow that up with

21:42three sets of incline flies for 10 to 12

21:45because that's probably going to so

21:46there are exercise. But yeah, that is

21:49for most people that would be a

21:51perfectly good sweet spot. Yes. And the

21:54viewer should rest assured that if uh

21:56his or her gym equipment is limited or

21:59there's an injury that gets aggravated

22:02with sets of six to 12, then you can

22:05still grow plenty. Yes. With sets of up

22:08to 30, perhaps even beyond that as long

22:10as you go to failure. It'll be

22:12excruciating. Yes. And that is and that

22:14is making is that when you look at

22:17growth and this gets into this is

22:20explained by the recruitment thing sets

22:22of eight and

22:23less do not have to be taken to failure

22:26to generate growth. And the research all

22:29shows this because with loads that heavy

22:32you're getting full recruitment early

22:34enough. Even a set of eight with like a

22:3710RM, like two reps in reserve, you are

22:40still getting multiple repetitions under

22:42full contraction or full recruitment

22:44without going to failure. Instead of

22:472025, you have to go to failure. Unless

22:49you use blood flow restriction, the

22:51reason blood flow restriction doesn't

22:52have to be taken to failure is that the

22:54blood flow restriction causes the body

22:56to recruit the muscle fibers more

22:58readily and earlier because of the

23:00metabolite buildup. So, it's all

23:02explained by this recruitment issue.

23:04Thank you. And I've had people say

23:06actually I someone I again I consulted

23:08with recently who's done both said that

23:10they actually prefer sets of six to

23:11eight because on a set of six to eight

23:14when you hit zero reps reserve if you go

23:17to that level you know that it's truly

23:20muscular. This is going to be kind of a

23:22dumb way of putting it because it's all

23:24like fatigue muscular fatigue is

23:26extremely complicated. It can occur like

23:28seven across seven different steps from

23:30the the cortex to the muscle. But he's

23:32like, "Yeah, when I do sets of eight,

23:34like I know that it's like the muscle

23:37itself." He goes, "But when I do sets of

23:3915 and the acidosis starts to build up

23:42and the pain starts to build up, I don't

23:44know if it's the muscle or if it's me

23:46giving up." And in the strictest sense,

23:48there's not a dis like you know what

23:51he's a physiologist would hear that just

23:53have an aneurysm, but you know what he's

23:56saying. Is it? Yeah, of course. Are you

23:58stopping the set because the muscle can

24:00no longer generate enough force or

24:02because it just hurts too much for you

24:04to continue? So that might be a

24:05potential advantage of low rep sets in

24:07at least some situations. But again,

24:10yeah, it it definitely and people that

24:12have joint issues don't do well with low

24:14repetitions. They just don't. Usually

24:17you find that success people that are

24:19successful in things like powerlifting

24:20and strongman or strong lifts or 5x5,

24:23they tend to be pretty sturdily built.

24:25And people with lighter joint structures

24:28do not handle that kind of training

24:29well. Brilliant. Shall we? Uh yeah. So

24:33let's go to step four. Rest intervals.

24:36So why rest a couple of minutes after

24:39each set? Why not just train in a

24:41circuit style for instance? So, I do

24:45think and I would have trouble defending

24:47this, but there is something to

24:50cumulative fatigue in terms of I don't

24:54think doing a set and then coming back

24:56to the same exercise 10 minutes later is

24:59the same as doing it with an incomplete

25:02rest interval. And I don't know if I

25:05could defend that physiologically.

25:06That's just one of those things that I

25:09feel is true. As much as anything, it's

25:11usually practical. Most people can't

25:13train in circuit style and move from

25:15exercise to exercise to exercise. So I

25:18generally prefer to either do the same

25:19if you're doing if you're doing multiple

25:21sets per exercise, you know, to do a

25:23set, take a rest, do a set. If you're

25:25doing alternate super setting, you can

25:27alternate exercises with a shorter rest,

25:29right? Chest press, rest a minute, row,

25:32rest a minute, chest press, which gives

25:34you two minutes between sets. Yeah. As

25:36compared to chest press, three minute

25:38rest, chest press, three minute rest.

25:40It's more time it's more time efficient.

25:42And the reason to use I like full

25:44generally a full well depends. I like

25:47full rest for heavier work because the

25:49goal is tension and if you're using

25:52short rest intervals you drop either

25:54drop so many repetitions or you have to

25:56drop the weight so much that the tension

25:58stimulus isn't as good. for higher

26:01repetitions there may like fatigue by

26:04which I mean metabolic some there's

26:06something metabolic there may be

26:07something to fatigue as part of the

26:09stimulus component that if you're doing

26:11higher repetitions you would typically

26:13use shorter rest intervals that you also

26:15may not need as long of a rest so there

26:18are some contingencies and that depends

26:20on rep range exercise talking of

26:22exercises you know you might need up to

26:25five minutes to recover between sets of

26:27heavy squats and deadlifts but You say

26:2990 seconds for Yeah. triceps press

26:32downs, chest flies, bars. Exactly. But

26:34in that range, whatever rest interval

26:36you choose for a given exercise though,

26:38it probably makes sense to keep it

26:40consistent just to standardize your

26:42training. Yes, absolutely.

26:45Would you suggest that there's a kind of

26:47sweet spot? Like if you had to pick I

26:49know you mentioned a couple minutes. I

26:50don't know if couple implies two, one,

26:52two, that's a couple. Um,

26:56would you if you could just throw out a

26:58number this many minutes? Yeah. To pin

27:00me down, I would say, you know, two two

27:03minutes for exercises involving larger

27:06muscle groups and one minute for

27:08exercises involving smaller muscle

27:10groups. And that's probably good enough

27:12under most conditions. Um,

27:15perfect. Yeah. And I and what and I

27:17found Well, I find two things. Back in

27:20the day before cell phones infested

27:23training, most people didn't rest long

27:26enough because they get bored. Right?

27:30This is that was one problem with like

27:31real strength training. Getting people

27:33to rest for three minutes between sets,

27:36they get bored. And many people tends to

27:39go too quickly. Now people spend 10

27:42minutes on their damn phone in between

27:44sets doing jacking up the equipment. But

27:47for heavy work, for to maintain qu

27:49training quality, I would rather see a

27:52little bit longer, couple minutes, cuz

27:54go too long and you cool down. But

27:56again, when you're doing piss training,

27:58you're just doing warm-ups anyway.

28:01For higher rep work to increase the

28:04metabolic Well, it's like you can kind

28:07Yeah. to increase the metabolic stress a

28:09little bit. I don't know that it matters

28:10that much. I I go back and forth on

28:12whether or not like usually the way I've

28:15you know the model I've built tension

28:18plus mechanical work equals growth

28:21stress right and that's also why this

28:22rep range a set of three gives you the

28:25no more tension than a set of five but

28:28it gives you less mechanical work that's

28:30also part of the hypertrophy suite I

28:31lost you you're locked up so on the one

28:33hand you could probably argue for

28:35shorter rest intervals but on the other

28:37hand they're they are more metabolically

28:38fatiguing like good luck doing three

28:40sets of 20 in the back squat on 60

28:42seconds, which would be what's logically

28:44implied. You probably need longer

28:46between sets of 20 in the squat than you

28:48would need on sets of two. But typically

28:51programmed rest interval. But we're

28:54talking about hypertrophy training,

28:55right? We're talking about something

28:56like sets of 12 to 15 where the goal is

28:58a little bit more metabolic fatigue. I

29:00would go towards slightly shorter rest

29:02interval.

29:05And I might change my mind on that

29:07tomorrow. I haven't decided yet. I go

29:09back and forth and back and forth. I

29:11feel that if you don't mind moving on to

29:15the next step. Yes. Well, rather steps

29:18plural because I think that steps four

29:22and five are hard to discuss

29:24independently of each other because they

29:26concern volume and frequency which are a

29:28coupling. Right. Correct. So I guess my

29:30question could be why four to eight sets

29:33once every 3 to 5 days? I suspect I was

29:37just simply pulling that from, you know,

29:41basic volume requirements or what we

29:44think of as, you know, considered to be

29:45like optimal optimal volumes, you know,

29:48which we've been throwing around 10 to

29:5020 sets for a while. That is so

29:53contextual. Like this is seriously me

29:56crapping out something very, very simple

29:58because the nuance, the complexity that

30:00could make a whole book, right? Because

30:02like we talked about, how many sets you

30:05would actually do would depend on your

30:07proximity to zero reps reserve. If you

30:09were going to all out limit failure, you

30:12would only do four sets. If you were

30:14stopping at two to three reps in

30:16reserve, you might do eight. So, I just

30:18kind of picked that range because again,

30:20this is something I crapped out in 30

30:21seconds to be both deadly serious and

30:24facitious at the same time. So, and same

30:28thing with the frequency. I don't even

30:30know if I would say every three days.

30:32Well, every three to five days, right?

30:34Basically, I was describing my generic

30:35bulking routine for lack of a better way

30:37of putting it. Right? If you do an upper

30:39lower four days a week, you're training

30:41each muscle group about every third day,

30:43Monday, Thursday, Tuesday, Friday. If

30:46you do an ABA alternating three-day,

30:48you're going to train every body part

30:50about every fifth day because I still,

30:52like I said, I know people have made

30:54once a week body part training work. I

30:56don't think it's optimal for most people

31:00for no go lower than once every fifth

31:02day. Yeah. So three to five days was

31:04just kind of like it split the middle

31:06between twice a week to three times

31:09every two weeks. Yeah. Sure. So So on

31:11the face of it, it's a pretty big range.

31:13Like if you go on the low end of both

31:16frequency and volume, that's four sets

31:18once every five days, right? But if you

31:21took those but if you took those to

31:22absolute limits, that would probably be

31:24enough. Yes.

31:26On the high end, conversely, it's like

31:28eight sets once every three days, which

31:32is like I don't know. Well, but those

31:34almost 20 sets a week. Surely, it would

31:36be 16, but if it was at two two to three

31:38reps in reserve, that would be more than

31:41doable. Like that's the generic bulking

31:42routine is like six to eight sets at two

31:44to three reps in reserve twice a week.

31:48I'm sure you'd agree that for most

31:50people, you'd want to start off

31:51somewhere in the middle of that range.

31:53something that works out to about 10 to

31:5514 sets a week. Yeah. Spread across two

31:59workouts and then adjust as necessary.

32:02For sure. Yeah. Like I said, this is,

32:04you know, would this be appropriate for

32:05a beginner? Absolutely not. Would be

32:07this appropriate for an advanced

32:08specialization routine? Absolutely not.

32:10That's why this is the this is like the

32:13most generic prescription. This would be

32:15for like your typical intermediate

32:18trainee from years one to three. this

32:20would be this would get it done all

32:23practice. So you're yes th those caveats

32:26do apply. Um and you also wrote this

32:29with optimal muscle growth in mind. So

32:32that this isn't to say that you won't

32:34see good results even if you train a bit

32:37less frequently. Sure. And with fewer

32:39sets than you're suggesting here. Well,

32:42as the saying goes, you can't let the

32:43perfects be the enemy of the good. Well,

32:45but there's there's that inverse

32:47relationship. If you start going too low

32:49volume too infrequently, that becomes a

32:52problem. But it depends on what extreme

32:53you take it to. It depends on are you

32:55train like I said the variable of

32:58intensity plays such a massive role

33:00here. Yeah. Like if you're you know if

33:04you did one one set one all out limit

33:06set every fifth day would that be it

33:09would generate some growth. Would it

33:10generate optimal growth? I don't know.

33:13But this wasn't, you know, I didn't say

33:15it was the optimal guide to, you know,

33:16to optimal hypertrophy. This within the

33:20ultimate guide within these parameters

33:23as a range, this pretty much covers what

33:27the average person will probably get the

33:29furthest doing. Like if you look so if

33:31you go back and look at that old worm

33:32bomb meta analysis that everyone decided

33:34was crap and yet we seem to keep coming

33:36back to every four or five years when he

33:40looked at the number of contractions per

33:42workout that got

33:45growth. It was it was a inverted curve,

33:48right? Even 10 contractions per workout

33:51got growth. One set got growth. 40 40 to

33:5570 was where it kind of hit a maximum

33:56somewhere in that range. And then by the

33:58time he got to 100, it was less. Now, he

34:01was agging a lot of data. Some of it was

34:03probably in beginners. Like, I'd have to

34:05go back and pull every study, and I'm

34:06not going to do that to figure out where

34:08those numbers came from. But there's no

34:10doubt like, you know, one one set will

34:13get you growth. Like, if you make the

34:16mistake, you know, when that the big the

34:17big meta analysis came out last year

34:20that was like, oh, to 50 sets there's a

34:21linear increase in growth. It's like,

34:23no, not really. Um, but they did that

34:26they did these podcasts that make ours

34:28look positively piffy. Um, no, they did

34:31like two four-hour podcast. I tried I

34:33tried to watch the whole I got two hours

34:35in. I'm like, I can't do it. Like, I'm

34:36exhausted by this already. But they had

34:38this chart that was really good and they

34:41were like, "Look, one to four sets is

34:44going to give you the biggest return on

34:46your investment." Yeah. And with each

34:48and what they did, they broke it up in

34:50like they did a bunch of statistical

34:51meanderings that they spent an hour

34:53explaining. And I'm like, who is this

34:55video for? I understand this and I'm

34:57already bored. Two sensils. Like just

35:00get to it. But for every like what they

35:04did is they looked at it go, okay, how

35:06many sets does it take to get the next

35:082% growth? They decided that was the

35:10minimum measurable growth. 2% more than

35:14the last block. And it was like one to

35:17four got you the most. Then it took like

35:20up to 10 I'm gonna get the numbers wrong

35:23to get the next two%. Then it was like

35:26another eight sets to get the ne like it

35:28was increasing not exponentially but

35:31every next 2% was taking incrementally

35:33more growth. And the point was like one

35:35to four will give you growth.

35:38No doubt you'll get somewhat more by

35:41maybe doubling that but the next 2% is

35:45going to take

35:46you 150%. And then a two like it it the

35:50return on investment becomes absolutely

35:52shockingly low. So yeah one one you know

35:55one or two allout sets every fifth day

35:57you'll get some growth. Will you get the

35:59most that you can get per unit time?

36:00Probably not. Do you think it would be a

36:02wash in the big picture? It's hard to

36:05say, but probably I mean if you were

36:07still making if you were still able to

36:10apply progressive overload, you were

36:11still able to add weight. I mean

36:14honestly one

36:16of very productive growth cycle I had

36:18this was years ago. I mean admittedly I

36:20was I got big and not in a good way but

36:22I did grow. It was a hard gainer routine

36:25by John Christie. And so here was the

36:28entirety of the workout. So on Monday I

36:31did a squat two by five all out grinders

36:34zero reper five minute

36:38rest bench press

36:41row some tinkering arms calves all 2x5

36:47Friday deadlift overhead press pull down

36:51tinkering all 2x5 all out started

36:55submaxally built up added a tiny bit of

36:57weight I mean we're talking like a pound

36:59and a quarter per side. Half a pound per

37:01side on the little

37:03stuff. I did it for like nine like I did

37:05it for like nine months straight. And I

37:07mean I ate like a pig, but I I got

37:09bigger and I got fatter, too. But that's

37:11because my diet I was eating too many

37:13calories. That's about as low volume as

37:15it gets. But the goal is progressive

37:16overload. The goal is to add weight to

37:18the bar. And as long as you're eating

37:20big, you can do that on low volume. Am I

37:22recommending that? No. It's just to make

37:24the point that like yeah you can

37:28said there's that inverse relationship

37:31because without getting into this

37:32without getting into the effect of reps

37:33thing which is a whole

37:35separate most of this discussion in my

37:38opinion all these debates and arguments

37:39about volumes and frequencies and this

37:42stuff is asking the wrong

37:44question. It's not a matter of how many

37:46sets and reps you do. You can do 10 sets

37:48of 10 pissing about and get no stimulus.

37:51You can do two all sets of 10 and grow.

37:53There is

37:54a variable that's not getting discussed.

37:57And I think the better way to look at it

37:59is in terms of these maximal repetitions

38:02done under maximal recruitment. What

38:04Blade calls stimulating reps, what

38:07Beardsley calls effective reps, what

38:09Arnold and his ilk called the growth

38:10reps. They're like those last two or

38:12three hard reps. Those are the growth

38:14reps. They knew. Yes. They didn't grind,

38:17but they trained hard. a lot harder than

38:19what we're seeing these days. So, you

38:22can do 10 sets of 10 and if they're at

38:25five reps in reserve, you've gotten zero

38:27effective reps. It's not a growth

38:29stimulus. It's a piss about stimulus. If

38:32you do two allout sets of 10, you've

38:36gotten 10 effective reps. It will be a

38:39growth

38:40stimulus. If you do one dog crap

38:43set, activation set of eight, you get

38:45five effective reps. then you get 321 on

38:48the mini sets, you've gotten 10

38:50effective reps in one allout set. If you

38:53do eight sets at two to three reps in

38:56reserve, so that you're getting two to

38:59three effective reps, you're getting 16

39:01to 24. It's not about the sets and the

39:03reps. The way we need to be the way I

39:06think if we math it out this way and

39:08also look at the differences. You're

39:10training bench and you're measuring

39:11triceps, it's only half the volume. I

39:13think if we math it out correctly, all

39:16of the supposed contradictions between

39:19all these different training styles will

39:20go away because you'll find that they're

39:22generating the same number of effective

39:24reps. I could be wrong about that, but I

39:28won't be because I see no other way.

39:30Well, I see no other way to build a

39:32coherent model that explains why all

39:35these things seem to generate the same

39:37growth, right? So they compare three

39:40sets of 10 to failure to three sets of

39:4325, right? Same growth. Three sets of 10

39:47to failure will generate five effective

39:49reps per set. That's 15 per workout.

39:51Three sets of 25 to failure, five

39:53effective reps per set, 15 effective

39:55reps. The volume load is totally

39:57different. The sets and reps are totally

39:58different. The number of effective reps

40:00is identical. That's my hype. That's the

40:03model I currently work under. It could

40:05be wrong. I see but I see no other

40:08coherent way. Right. So I guess to wrap

40:11up this section. Oh yeah. The first

40:13thing to say is

40:15if you can only do say one hard set per

40:18week for your biceps then don't despair.

40:20The return on investment is still good.

40:22The second thing to mention is the

40:25closer to fail you are the fa the closer

40:28to failure you are on any given set the

40:30more growth you'll get out of it. So if

40:32you train really really hard then you'll

40:34want to be on the lower end of L's

40:36range. And conversely if you're allergic

40:38to really hard training then you'll want

40:40to be on the higher end of LS range.

40:42Both approaches are fine as long as

40:45steps six and seven are taking place.

40:48Correct about that for a segue. And I

40:50would only add in terms of you know the

40:52the thing about being allergic to hard

40:54training I think can be a little bit I

40:56know you didn't mean it in necessarily a

40:58critical or um denigratory way but it

41:01can be taken as such. Not everyone has

41:03the ability to generate maximal

41:05intensity. Not everyone enjoys doing it

41:08and some people do burn out from it.

41:10Make no mistake it. As much as dog crap

41:12worked for a lot of people there were

41:14people that got burnt out on it that

41:15going to constant failure whether it was

41:17physiological or psychological. Not that

41:19there's a difference. The point and you

41:21can see anecdotes of people complaining

41:24about burnout doing Martin Bergen's

41:26reverse pyramid training. Absolutely.

41:28Where you take every set to concentric

41:29failure and you're really pushing for

41:31progression. And I would never I would

41:33never dismiss that as part of again this

41:36is where men went wrong as I have the

41:38only optimal method like but that

41:41ignores the individual. Certain

41:43exercises also don't lend themselves to

41:45certain types of training. So you've got

41:47that that's a practical issue, but it is

41:50one. So if someone simply doesn't have

41:53the ability or hasn't learned how,

41:56doesn't enjoy it, and this is part of

41:58training. You do have to enjoy it on

42:00some level. I mean, if you're doing it

42:02right, it shouldn't be fun, but you have

42:04to and there's a buyin concept. You have

42:07to buy into the training to believe in

42:08it enough. There are many paths to the

42:11same goal. So if you're not good at

42:14going to true limit failure, then you

42:16will have to slightly increase volume to

42:18compensate for that to some degree. If

42:21you are, I've consulted people on both

42:24ends of it. Some people are like, I

42:26don't know reps and reserve. I suck at

42:28it. I'm not good at it. All I know is

42:32can't move anymore. All right, cool.

42:34That's fine. That's who they are. Or

42:36they just prefer that kind of training.

42:38We keep the volume at the lower end. And

42:40if they're not good at that yet, I set

42:42the volume at a slightly higher end. But

42:44in that but so yeah, so that's just it

42:46does that is that's the mediating

42:48variable in those two things.

42:51Thank you for clarifying in steps four

42:53and five, but six and seven are really

42:54the important ones anyway. Very much so.

42:57So step six is to add a little weight

43:00when you can and I think it's the most

43:01important point in the whole guide.

43:04Yeah. Because it basically concerns

43:07progressive tension overload, right?

43:09which is the main driver of muscle

43:11hypertrophy. Yes, despite what the

43:13industry still continues to repeat,

43:15although that trust me, it'll start

43:17changing here before too long. I hope

43:19progressive overload. Fingers crossed.

43:22Well, yeah. Well, the thing is, if you

43:24actually read the studies, and I'll make

43:25this point because I've made it

43:26repeatedly, you can see why they've just

43:28all gone wrong. I mean, even back in the

43:30day, like Arnold and them, they didn't

43:33train for maximum strength. They were

43:35all pretty strong. Yes. Right. Like, no.

43:39They weren't trying to be powerlifter

43:40strong. They weren't trying to get

43:42strong, go heavier at every workout, but

43:44they were strong because of course they

43:48were. But in the long term, progressive

43:52tension overload, forcing the muscle to

43:55lift progressively heavier loads, is the

43:59And we've known this since the 70s,

44:01right? Back in the day, people used to

44:03argue with me, "Oh, we don't even know

44:04what turns on muscle growth." Well,

44:06actually, yeah, we do. It's high tension

44:08overload. Gold Spin showed that back in

44:10the 70s. This is so wellestablished.

44:13It's painful. Are there other parts to

44:16it? Absolutely. But that and we know we

44:18now we know why. Now we know why high

44:21tension overload actually turns on

44:23growth because and I wrote it I talked

44:25about this. I know I wrote an article

44:27series about this because for years we

44:29didn't know. They couldn't figure out

44:31because the question was protein

44:33synthesis is

44:34biochemical and the question was how can

44:36a mechanical stimulus turn on a

44:39biochemical process and the

44:41physiologists couldn't figure it out and

44:43the story as I heard it was they had

44:45some bioysicists come in to look at it

44:48with a set of fresh eyes and they said

44:50you

44:51know if the muscle were connected to the

44:55cell

44:56membrane mechanical tension could pull

44:58on it and cause things to happen. And

45:02they went looking and they found, holy

45:04crap, there is a lattis work of

45:07connective tissue, what are called

45:08integrins like kitten that are connected

45:12to the cell membrane as opposed to

45:15incritins, which we've also discussed.

45:17That's yeah, that's a whole separate

45:18thing. Yes, the integrans that are

45:20connected to the cell membrane itself

45:23and to components of the cell membrane.

45:26So high mechanical tension through these

45:29integrans pulls on something called

45:31focal adhesion kynise complex which

45:34causes something to happen with

45:36pulmitate and that turns on mTor the

45:39mamalian target of rapomyasin which is

45:42its own interesting historical story

45:44that I don't remember well enough. So

45:46that so they came in and they were just

45:48like well you know if this and they went

45:49and looked and go we'll be dam I'll be

45:51damned you're right you're right that is

45:54in the long term the trigger to growth

45:56is progressive tension overload if for

45:59no other reason than as the muscle gets

46:02larger and stronger because muscle force

46:05output is related to cross-sectional

46:07area and there's a bunch of complexity

46:08to that you have to lift progressively

46:11heavier weights to maintain the same

46:13maximal tension stimulus just Like if

46:16you're riding a bike and you're trying

46:18to improve your aerobic capacity once 20

46:21miles an hour doesn't generate a high

46:23enough heart rate, you can't just ride

46:26longer. You have to go

46:28faster in the weight room in response to

46:31the adaptation that makes the

46:33current weight on the bar too light to

46:37trigger a stimulus. You have to add

46:38weight to the bar. Yeah. Now, let's

46:42qualify that because everybody messes

46:44this up. Not everybody, but a lot. When

46:46I say that, I don't mean every workout.

46:48I don't mean every week. I mean, yes. I

46:51want to commend your your careful

46:53phrasing of add weight when you can.

46:55You're not saying add weight every

46:56workout or add weight every solar

46:58eclipse. You're saying do the work, let

47:01the adaptation occur occur organically

47:03and then add weight when you can.

47:05Correct. You when you're ready, rather.

47:07Right. Now, how do you now how do we

47:09define that? Well, we can in a number of

47:12ways, right? So, we know

47:14that you need to be within a certain

47:17number of reps in reserve to stimulate

47:18growth. That's generally taken between

47:20one and four. We look further at that

47:22and that's typically when you see bar

47:24speed start to slow. And what you would

47:26typically see, and it varies by

47:28exercise, this isn't universal, you

47:30know, six, seven,

47:33eight,

47:37nine. That's zero because you bring it

47:39back and you get stuck. Okay. that and

47:42it will vary. People show different uh

47:46different patterns, different exercises

47:48may slow differently. This is yet

47:49another reason to spend some time

47:52training as your eruption reserve to see

47:54what it looks like and what it feels

47:56like. So, one way to do it, knowing when

47:59to add weight.

48:01Well, if two weeks ago, 8

48:07n 10, and now two weeks later, 6 7 8 9

48:1410. Okay, that 10 rep, that 10th rep now

48:18looks like the eighth rep from two weeks

48:20ago. Speedwise, you've gotten stronger.

48:23Your muscles have become a little bit

48:25bigger. It's time to add weight. If

48:27you're using reps in reserve, if you're

48:28good at that, well, if your target was

48:30two reps in reserve, right? So, seven,

48:36eight, you'd grind out two more. Well,

48:38when you're at four reps in reserve,

48:41seven, eight, it's time to go up, right?

48:44You're now two reps stronger than you

48:46were. One heristic I use for people that

48:49aren't good at this and many aren't.

48:52It's not meant to be. It's just it's a

48:54learned skill to know when it's time.

48:56This is where a repetition range can be

48:59very useful. Right? So I gave a six to

49:0112. Like let's say you set a range of

49:02six to eight. Well, currently you can

49:05get away for six reps. When you can get

49:07eight, go up a little bit. We'll bring

49:10you back to six. The old double

49:11progression or 8 to 10 or 8 to 12 or

49:14whatever. You start at the low rep

49:15range. Over time, however many weeks it

49:18takes, you build up, you hit the high

49:20end, you add weight, come back down.

49:23That works really well. One thing I will

49:25occasion recommend to people who aren't

49:28good at reps and reserve and who aren't

49:30training the limits, which again is

49:32completely

49:33legitimate, every once in a while, like

49:36let's say you're doing three sets of a

49:38given exercise. Every once in a while,

49:41take that final set to zero reps in

49:44reserve. Go ahead and rep it out. Like

49:46not all the time. That's actually just

49:48as a hilarious aside because of the

49:51video series theorize I did. Everyone's

49:52like, "Oh yeah, Ly advocates training to

49:54failure." No, you illiterate [ __ ]

49:56illiterate cretins. I said, "This is

49:57what it looks like." Other people in the

49:59industry recommend train to failure far

50:01more than I ever have. And you can look

50:03at my 30 years of history in this

50:05industry and that is provably true.

50:07They'll be like, "Oh, you can take your

50:09four set of an exercise to failure at

50:11every workout." I've seen powerlifting

50:13workouts that are like, "Oh, do an AMR

50:15prep set of squats every week." Sure,

50:18amb deadlifts. Oh, I believe you. I

50:20would never do that. But every few

50:22weeks, take that final set to

50:25limits. And the heristic is this. Let's

50:28say you're doing six to eight reps. If

50:30you get to 10, well, you're still at two

50:32reps in reserve. You're fine. If you get

50:3511 or more, it's time to add weight

50:37because now you were at three to four

50:38reps

50:40reserve. But if you're an intermediate,

50:43you're not going to be adapting that

50:44quickly. You're just not certainly not

50:46every week. Certainly not every workout,

50:48unless it's a new exercise that you're

50:50learning or something. It might be every

50:543 weeks or every four weeks. I can't

50:55say. It'll depend. Different exercises

50:58may adapt at different rates. It just

51:00depends. At the advanced level, it may

51:03take even longer than that. And now the

51:05hearts go like, "But how are you still

51:07stimulating growth if you're not

51:08adding?" Well, if the weight you're

51:11lifting right now for set of eight is

51:14two reps in reserve and a month still

51:17two reps in reserve, it's still a damn

51:19stimulus. Yeah. You don't need to add

51:21weight until the current stimulus is no

51:24longer a stimulus. And that's after you

51:26have adapted.

51:28But that in the long term, like I said,

51:30hence we go back to Arthur Jones's

51:32statement. By the time the average man

51:34can curl 200 pounds, his arms would be

51:36as big as they can possibly be for any

51:40task less than wrestling a bear. And I

51:43would ask any of the supposed academic

51:46exercise scientists, the naturals, Eric

51:50Helms, little Milo

51:53Wolf, if progressive overload doesn't

51:56matter, why did y'all bother getting

51:58strong? Why aren't you just still

52:00squatting 135 for 15 and just doing more

52:03sets? Eric, why do you compete in

52:05powerlifting, Milo? Why are you able to

52:08squat for Why did you bother? Why did

52:10you bother building your squats to 405

52:11if progressive overload isn't that

52:13important? It's real simple. There are

52:16no there are

52:18zero large natural weak

52:22bodybuilders. But people go, "But

52:24they're not powerlifter strong." I

52:26didn't say they

52:28were unless they practiced powerlifting.

52:31And many bodybuilders cross-co compete

52:33in powerlifting. And there's a lesson

52:36there. More importantly, they're all

52:38much stronger than when they started.

52:41Right? People got so many things when I

52:43said that so wrong. It's not about the

52:45absolute strength. Ed Con deadlifted 405

52:48his first day in the

52:50gym. He deadlifted 900 by the end of his

52:53career. It wasn't what he was lifting,

52:55it was how much stronger he got.

52:58If when you started you were deadlifting

53:00135 and now you're deadlifting 395 or

53:03whatever many years later you will be

53:05bigger or whatever. Like now for singles

53:07again we're assuming certain things

53:09about volumes and frequency. Like I'm

53:11not saying that doesn't matter. It's

53:14going back to the isometric thing. I

53:15once got into an argument with the HST

53:17guys and he was like all that matters is

53:20maximal tension. I said no there's a

53:22volume component. He goes no there

53:24isn't. I said if that were true, you

53:26could do a single maximal isometric and

53:28grow, but we know that doesn't work. We

53:31know there is some number of

53:33contractions that you have to do. There

53:36is a volume component and I would never

53:38deny that in the long term progre if

53:41progressive tension overload doesn't

53:43happen. It doesn't matter what else

53:45you're doing in the long term. In the

53:47short term, sure. In an eight-week

53:49study, yeah, because that load may be a

53:52stimulus. But even there when you go

53:55read the papers like four exceptions

53:58that I can think of hidden there in the

54:01methods when they're describing the

54:03workout no matter what they're looking

54:05at frequency volumes doesn't matter

54:09length and partials. It doesn't matter

54:11what they're actually studying it will

54:13always stay in the methods both during

54:16the workouts and from workout to

54:17workout. We adjust the load to make sure

54:20that we keep the repetitions in our goal

54:22range. Meaning, as they get stronger, we

54:25add weight to the bar. Progressive

54:27overload is built into the

54:29studies because lab coats know what PhDs

54:34and exercise science in the fitness

54:35industry don't. Without progressive

54:37overload, it's not training. Which means

54:39that all these other things, volume,

54:41etc. are on a the base of progressive

54:45overload. That's assumed because that's

54:48primary. Now, yeah, there are a couple

54:50studies, there's like four of them that

54:53short-term that compared one compared

54:55progressive overload to random ass

54:57training. One compared progressive

54:59overload to adding reps. And yeah, over

55:01eight weeks there was no difference in

55:02growth. And I wouldn't deny that because

55:05over eight weeks, people weren't making

55:07enough progress to need to add weight. I

55:09don't that's fine. But long term, again,

55:12you can prove it. Go to your gym, find

55:14somebody benching, whatever, come back

55:16in a year, and if they're benching the

55:18same amount, they will be no bigger. I

55:19don't care if they're doing infinite

55:21infinity sets. It won't matter without

55:25progressive

55:26overload, either on the bar or in the

55:29needle in most cases. I mean, that's the

55:33Well, that's the thing, and this is the

55:35huge problem. When you jack in enough

55:38anabolics, you don't need progressive

55:40overload. Although it is interesting to

55:42note that many of the best bodybuilders

55:44are strong as spark, right? Yeah. Dorian

55:47was strong as hell. Go find guys

55:50listening. Go find the videos of Arnold

55:52squatting. He was not weak. He was not.

55:55None of them are. But there are. But you

55:57can you can piss about with light

55:59weights and just take more drugs and you

56:02will grow. I said there are no weak big

56:04natural bodybuilders. They do not

56:07exist because it can't be done. Very

56:10good.

56:11Do you think we're ready to move on to

56:12step seven?

56:14Sure. Pretty easy. Go to more. It simply

56:17states go to Well, I think it can be

56:19charitably interpreted as stay

56:21consistent. Yeah. It just means, you

56:24know, well, after you add a little bit

56:27of weight, then you go back and you lift

56:29the thing and lower the thing and do

56:31this for a number of reps and a number

56:33of sets at a certain frequency till you

56:34can add weight again. And like months,

56:37years. Yeah. Exactly. And we can quibble

56:39and oh and intensity cycling and de

56:41loing and all this and like yeah that's

56:43fine but we're talking about just like

56:46the simplest explanation of hypertrophy

56:48training. And if you look

56:50at any

56:53time-tested or effective training

56:56system, right, that has been provably

56:59shown to generate growth over

57:01time. And there are many of them, right?

57:04hypertrophy specific training dog crap

57:07my reps uh FST7 was a thing a while back

57:10I think it's still around um there's uh

57:14Scott Stevenson's for two training

57:16generic bulking routine generic we all

57:18agree there's all these and if you look

57:19at them they're more they share more

57:22they have more in common than they don't

57:24like they have I mean they take a

57:26different slightly different path but

57:28they're all usually about 8 to 12 week

57:31cycles dog crap is about eight weeks

57:33generic Bulking routine can run 8 to 12.

57:35HST is like

57:3712. They all focus on some consistent

57:43interaction of frequency, volume, and

57:46intensity, right? Dog crap. Lower volume

57:48and frequency, higher intensity, right?

57:51You only train each muscle group every

57:53fifth day, but with two drop sets. So

57:56lower end of the volume, but lower

57:58frequency, much higher intensity. hypers

58:02civic civic training a little bit higher

58:03frequency a little bit lower intensity

58:06moderate volumes GBR splits the middle

58:08fortitude is a little bit more of a

58:10mix but they all focus on over

58:14time adding weight to the bar the way

58:17Dante put it in the 2000s because even

58:19then people were still locked into the

58:22pump and the squeeze and all that stuff

58:25and he realized the population he was

58:27talking to when he said growth is

58:29stimulated and this is also important

58:30People also get this wrong. Growth is

58:34stimulated by becoming stronger in a

58:37moderate repetition range. And that's

58:39key because when I write when I talk

58:40about progressive row, they go, "Well,

58:42you can get stronger in singles and not

58:44get bigger." Well, that's great because

58:45that's not what I'm talking about. I'm

58:47not talking. So, this refers more to

58:49step six than step seven. Keep going.

58:53But, well, yes, in the sense of people

58:55are like, "Well, you can get a lot

58:56stronger on singles without getting

58:58bigger." I'm like, and that'd be great

58:59if that's what I was talking about.

59:02There are absolutely technical

59:04efficiency neurological pathways. I go,

59:07hence moderate repetition range. That's

59:10the qualifier. And what does number

59:11three say? Six to 12 times. I'm not

59:14saying repeat number one and two one

59:16time because that's a very different

59:19style of training. Dante made it a

59:21little bit more explicit. You need to be

59:24in a moderate repetition range and be

59:26adding weight. That's what stimulates

59:28growth which is just a different way of

59:30summing up you know my whatever one two

59:34three and six and seven like he didn't

59:37talk about for but all of those Brian

59:40Hawk's goal every two weeks was to set a

59:42new PR for a given repetition range my

59:46goal with each hype with GBR cycle you

59:49should be setting a new

59:52PR in terms of the poundage being used

59:55for the repetition range for that given

59:57exercise. Now, there's a zillion

59:59qualifiers to this assuming you maintain

1:00:01your form and don't start cheating and

1:00:04etc. Like, but again, I this isn't now

1:00:08we're talking about writing a book,

1:00:10right? There there are all these

1:00:12qualifiers. We're not there yet, right?

1:00:13There are all these qualifiers to this

1:00:16because people they're like, well, what

1:00:17if I do this, but you know, I start

1:00:20bouncing the bar off my chest. Well, is

1:00:22that what I said? Like seriously, are

1:00:24you people just determined to find the

1:00:26dumbest way to interpret the and the

1:00:28answer is yes, right? Assumed are you're

1:00:31maintaining the same form, the same temp

1:00:33like these are all assumed things when

1:00:35you're adding weight. Like you're not

1:00:36doing the add weight, cut depth, you

1:00:39know, cut range of motion, squat

1:00:40approach, which so many people love to

1:00:42do, right? I I'm we're assuming certain

1:00:45things are staying consistent and

1:00:47assuming that those are true. That is

1:00:50what makes you bigger is getting

1:00:51stronger in a moderate repetition range

1:00:53which requires consistency. I mean it's

1:00:55not enough to do steps one through six

1:00:59and then do that only

1:01:01once to gain muscle. Like you have to

1:01:04reach seven and do it over and over and

1:01:06over and over again over weeks, months

1:01:09and years on a consistent basis because

1:01:11you know muscle growth it takes a long

1:01:14time especially when you're natural. And

1:01:16the reality is that some biological

1:01:18processes can't be rushed. And we would

1:01:20all accept that a woman, a pregnant

1:01:22woman can't force out a healthy baby 3

1:01:25months earlier than she should just by

1:01:27working really, really hard at it. Like

1:01:29you don't know her work ethic.

1:01:32Well, you know what? I would love to see

1:01:34her try and I think taking that approach

1:01:37would yield a worse baby. that that that

1:01:39that comment is so and I'm sure this

1:01:42came up when you and I we talked about

1:01:44genetic limits so long ago is whenever I

1:01:46would try to tell people that especially

1:01:49this is a very American attitude. This

1:01:50is a very puritanical work ethic thing

1:01:53and they go you don't know my work

1:01:54ethic. I said your biology doesn't give

1:01:56a damn about your work ethic. Yes,

1:01:59muscle growth is no different. It's not

1:02:01your you're sorry it's not how it works.

1:02:03You cannot you cannot will your it's not

1:02:06even a matter of rushing it. They're

1:02:07like, "I'm not at my genetic limit

1:02:09because you don't know how my work

1:02:10ethic." They go, "It doesn't matter what

1:02:12your work ethic is. You're as big as

1:02:14you're going to get at this point or as

1:02:16meaningfully big." Like, yeah, maybe

1:02:18you'll eek out another two pounds over

1:02:20the last year, but god, there's better

1:02:22things to do with your time. Um, than

1:02:25than that. But there's this idea that,

1:02:27oh, there are no genetic limits. Well,

1:02:29yeah, there are. Um, there absolutely

1:02:32are. I I love getting into arguments

1:02:34with people about that. here because

1:02:36here's another argument at extreme. I

1:02:37actually talked about this in different

1:02:39podcast I did just the other day and I

1:02:42made the point I was arguing with

1:02:43someone like there is an upper there is

1:02:46obviously a a limit to performance. I

1:02:49think we were talking about the 100

1:02:50meter sprint and he goes well no there's

1:02:52not. They said, "Okay, currently people

1:02:55run this fast. Somewhere between 979 and

1:02:590 seconds, there will be a point that

1:03:02nobody can get past because there must

1:03:04be an upper limit." Now, that is an

1:03:07argument that is to make the point.

1:03:09Obviously, nobody can run the 100 in 0

1:03:11seconds or a tenth or 1 second. There is

1:03:14just a limit to human acceleration and

1:03:16velocities. But, you know, somewhere

1:03:19between here and here, there must be.

1:03:21Now the argument and this came up I

1:03:23think this sort of came up and we talked

1:03:25about this you know people make that

1:03:26well you're never at your true your true

1:03:29upper limit there's always a little bit

1:03:30more people need to learn what an

1:03:32asmtote is

1:03:35apparently like this is you know okay

1:03:37fine here's your genetic limit you're at

1:03:4199.9% of that in the strictest sense no

1:03:44you're not at your limit you've got that

1:03:46last point you know it is what is it

1:03:48we'll call it Zeno's training system,

1:03:50right? Like you can never actually reach

1:03:53your limit because every every step

1:03:54along the way you'll, you know, be

1:03:56halfway closer and then halfway closer.

1:03:58You'll never actually be truly tragenic.

1:04:01And I said I said, "Guys, look at sports

1:04:04performance. It is, you know, it's

1:04:07taking progressively longer to make

1:04:10progressively smaller improvements in

1:04:12performance. Performance in every event

1:04:15has done that.

1:04:18Fine. There's not a limit. Fine. There's

1:04:20another in 50 years someone will go

1:04:241,000th faster or 100th faster than they

1:04:28are now. You would say they're not at

1:04:30their genetic limit. I would say not in

1:04:33the strictest sense, but for all

1:04:34practical purposes, they might as well

1:04:36be. And most of that improvement comes

1:04:39from equipment anyway. Like that's a

1:04:40whole separate I mean that's just but

1:04:44sort of the same thing here. The the

1:04:45work ethic. That's just me being silly.

1:04:47She's like, "No, you don't know my work

1:04:48ethic." Like, well, it doesn't matter.

1:04:50Your biological limit is your biological

1:04:52limit. Why it's called a limit. It's

1:04:55right there in the name. So, yeah. So,

1:04:57that's what you have to do over long

1:04:59periods of time. But that's not very

1:05:01interesting or sexy. No. But I can

1:05:04guarantee anybody listening to this who

1:05:06is entrenched in the social media

1:05:09gibberish and all these people writing

1:05:12every day about the new study and the

1:05:14new secret and this volume and length

1:05:15and partials and this and that and the

1:05:17other. If you actually ask them how they

1:05:20trained to get to the size they are

1:05:23now, they did it like

1:05:25this because none of this crap that

1:05:27they're writing about was a thing. Yeah.

1:05:30Right. I mean, you simply have to be

1:05:32patient doing a safe and sustainable

1:05:35routine week in week out, adding weight

1:05:37to the bar because the alternative is to

1:05:39be injured, making no progress, giving

1:05:41workouts out of dread, and that yields

1:05:44worse results in the long term. Yeah,

1:05:45that's not that's not even my point in

1:05:48this case. But you get someone like

1:05:50again like Milo, he's like, "Oh, length

1:05:52and partials are superior and this and

1:05:54that and the other and volume and

1:05:55progressive overload." Like, how did you

1:05:57get big? How did you train to get the

1:05:59size that you have, Milo? Exactly like

1:06:01this. They all did it exactly like every

1:06:04Jeff Nippert and Athleen X and all these

1:06:06people did it exactly the way everyone

1:06:08has ever done it. And then all the crap

1:06:11that they write online is about all this

1:06:13[ __ ] in these studies that they

1:06:15literally has never done and never did.

1:06:19But they're telling people is the next

1:06:20way that No, because none of them train

1:06:23this way. I guarantee you guar none of

1:06:25in the way that they're writing about

1:06:27they all did the same basic stuff. I

1:06:30think it's been termed something like

1:06:32advanced

1:06:33amnesia where these advanced natural

1:06:36lifters reach their genetic limits doing

1:06:39normal training and then forgot that

1:06:41they did normal training to reach their

1:06:43limits. I believe that. Or I think more

1:06:48cynically, they're doing it to sell

1:06:50ebooks to stay relevant to Fad Jump

1:06:54because when the high frequency thing

1:06:56came around and a couple of guys in the

1:06:58industry were like, "Yeah, I'm training

1:06:59the high frequency. It's working really

1:07:00well." You guys are both highle

1:07:02bodybuilders that haven't gained an

1:07:04ounce of muscle in 10 years. You're not

1:07:07doing real well on it. You got an e to

1:07:09sell. Yeah. Right. And then suddenly

1:07:12when high frequency was no longer the

1:07:13thing, they were doing the Oh yeah, I'm

1:07:15doing BFR. It's working really well for

1:07:17me now. All right. How how many gains

1:07:18have you made? None. If anything, you're

1:07:20smaller than you were 10 years ago

1:07:21because you're getting older. Stop lying

1:07:24to people.

1:07:26But that doesn't allow you to generate

1:07:30content. I mean, whatever. I will give I

1:07:32will give Martin his due in that he

1:07:35absolutely trained the way he told other

1:07:36people to train. There's no I mean he's

1:07:39got a torn bicep and a torn quad because

1:07:41of it. But you know he he certainly

1:07:44never fat jumped like that. That is

1:07:46true. Some you know give him some degree

1:07:48of credit for that. I mean same thing

1:07:50with Blade. He's stuck to his story as

1:07:52far as I can tell. Um and as much as I'm

1:07:55still not entirely clear on how my reps

1:07:57are applied even after having read his

1:07:59book, I'm still not real clear, but

1:08:01that's a whole separate thing. Um, but

1:08:03yeah, like this is if you look at even

1:08:06look again, look at what Menor did in

1:08:09his buildup. Look at what Dorian did

1:08:11early on. Very traditional training.

1:08:14When you're seeing what they're doing at

1:08:15the most advanced level, that's a whole

1:08:18different thing. But again, you look at

1:08:20the commonalities. Look at all like

1:08:22successful natural bodybuilders. They

1:08:25all did the same basic thing within

1:08:27some. Yeah, they may have taken slightly

1:08:29different approaches, but they all

1:08:32started with three days a week, learned

1:08:34the exercises, found exercise that

1:08:35worked for them, you know, assuming they

1:08:38stayed natural, and they all got strong,

1:08:39and they all got big. And that's how you

1:08:41that's how you do it. And yeah, they

1:08:43probably did more going back to our

1:08:45original one of our original

1:08:48points. And as much as bodybuilding

1:08:50became kind of its

1:08:52own activity outside of the earlier

1:08:55days, like yeah, I think bodybuilders

1:08:57now pay much more attention to things

1:08:59like symmetry and smaller muscle groups

1:09:02that like wouldn't have been emphasized

1:09:04in the 50s. All guys want to do is bulk

1:09:06and power. So there's lots of heavy leg

1:09:08and back work. like if you want to get

1:09:10big overall, you do the bulk and power

1:09:12work and then you do some refined stuff

1:09:14and you go pump it up and do some arm

1:09:16work and things of that nature. But

1:09:18again, that represented that's what

1:09:21that's what training was. Certainly with

1:09:24the advent of bodybuilding as its own

1:09:26sport, it and it did, make no mistake,

1:09:29it developed its own specialized

1:09:31techniques for a reason. I did another

1:09:35consult with someone the other day and

1:09:36they had done strongman and powerlifting

1:09:38and they decided quite rationally I'm

1:09:40like I want to switch to more

1:09:41bodybuilding so that I can stay in one

1:09:44piece as I get older and realistically

1:09:47it's a lot safer of a training. And so

1:09:50I'm going through him over him some of

1:09:52these principles and he's like and I'm

1:09:54like okay no more back squats. I'm like

1:09:57f the overhead press. He's like wait

1:09:58what? I'm like, the goal is to stimulate

1:10:00the

1:10:01muscle, not to train a movement. But

1:10:04like, it's so foreign to him. But if you

1:10:06look at the individual sports, Olympic

1:10:09lifting,

1:10:10powerlifting, strongman is its own

1:10:12thing. It's very odd because of the

1:10:15nature of the sport, it's probably

1:10:16closer to powerlifting than to anything.

1:10:19And

1:10:20bodybuilding, do they all involve

1:10:22weights? Yes. Do they all have very

1:10:26different what we consider optimal

1:10:28training? Yes,

1:10:31absolutely. Right. Olympic lifters,

1:10:33right? Their focus is on explosiveness,

1:10:37quality of training. They do not do the

1:10:39Olympic lifts to failure ever. Usually

1:10:42not to limit. I mean, they miss, but

1:10:44that's different, right? So, they will

1:10:46do multiple sets of ones, twos, and

1:10:48threes in, you know, the 85 to 90%

1:10:50range. They will do squats and

1:10:53assistance exercises, not grindy, very

1:10:55explosive. But here's what's

1:10:57interesting. The Chinese Olympic lifters

1:10:59who have made being jacked part of the

1:11:00sport again. They do bodybuilding

1:11:04exercises. Their coach tells them to do

1:11:06eight to 10 sets of eight to 10 reps or

1:11:08until they get bored to find one or two

1:11:11exercises that really works well for

1:11:13their muscles. So that means leg

1:11:15extensions. That's what they do because

1:11:17they know that if you want to get bigger

1:11:19muscles, you don't look at what the

1:11:21Olympic lifter, you look at what the

1:11:23bodybuilders are doing. They have

1:11:25refined the art of hypertrophy. And if

1:11:28you want maximal strength, you look what

1:11:30the powerliffters are doing. And narrow

1:11:32the two shall meet. Unless you've got an

1:11:34athlete that needs some combination,

1:11:37right? Again, look at how I trained Sumi

1:11:39olymp. Her power lifts were singles at

1:11:4190%.

1:11:43not explosive because she doesn't move

1:11:45fast doing anything, but probably closer

1:11:48to Olympic lifting style than

1:11:50traditional powerlifting. Certainly, her

1:11:53assistance work was more powerlifting

1:11:55was what would be traditional

1:11:56powerlifting, threes and fives, heavy,

1:11:58and then bodybuilding

1:12:00work. I wanted to use the right tool for

1:12:02the right goal. So, bodybuilding has

1:12:05certain techniques that they developed,

1:12:07some of which are good and some which

1:12:09are nonsense.

1:12:10Like I said, the goal of bodybuilding is

1:12:12to stress the muscle to the greatest

1:12:14degree to generate a local adaptation

1:12:17because growth is local. That's

1:12:19something else that back in the day

1:12:20everyone was like, "Oh, squats are

1:12:22systemic growth and all that nonsense."

1:12:24Like, no, growth is a local phenomenon

1:12:27completely due to mechano growth factor

1:12:30and all that stuff. So it's like the

1:12:32goal is to stress the target muscle with

1:12:34a combination of tension and mechanical

1:12:37work to turn on protein synthesis.

1:12:40That's all hypertrophy is. My ultimate

1:12:42guide is just the parameters that will

1:12:45do that. And and as I put in another I

1:12:48did this ranty ass post in my Facebook

1:12:49group. Somebody just pissed me off and I

1:12:51was tired of

1:12:53nonsense. So, when I do my best

1:12:55work and I said something to the effect

1:12:58of I said, "Look, the acute training

1:13:01principles, number of reps, number of

1:13:03sets, proximity to zero reps reserve,

1:13:06that's what turns on protein synthesis

1:13:08during the workout. Adding weight over

1:13:10time is what keeps growth occurring in

1:13:12the long term because that's it. If

1:13:15you're not if you're not doing enough to

1:13:16turn on growth during the workout, you

1:13:19never get to step six."

1:13:21Sure. Which also brings me just as

1:13:24another side rant, one of the dumb

1:13:26dumbass arguments from several years

1:13:27ago. Most of which can be summarized as

1:13:30we just want to make Lyall wrong. That's

1:13:32where most of this seriously derives

1:13:34from because I spent 25 years 20 years

1:13:37going progressive tension over like

1:13:39adding weight to the bar is what builds

1:13:40muscle. They said, "No, no, no. Building

1:13:43muscle is what lets you add weight to

1:13:45the

1:13:46bar." Here's my question. Where does a

1:13:50circle start? Where does the circle

1:13:54start? You got you got a certain weight

1:13:56on the

1:13:57bar. You gain some muscle. Okay, let's

1:14:00say you stop

1:14:02here. You come off the circle. You no

1:14:04longer add weight to the bar. Well, you

1:14:06won't grow

1:14:07anymore. Come back around and you add

1:14:10weight. What does adding weight to?

1:14:13Cause you to gain more muscle, which

1:14:15allows you to add more weight, which

1:14:17allows you to gain more muscle. That's

1:14:19adding weight stimulates muscle so you

1:14:20can add more weight. It is a semantic

1:14:22argument that comes down to we want to

1:14:25make ly sound wrong. Same thing with the

1:14:27volume, right? They're like, oh no, you

1:14:29add weight. Well, just add volume. Okay,

1:14:31so you add volume and you grow. What

1:14:33happens

1:14:34now? Add more volume. You won't grow

1:14:37anymore. You still got to come back and

1:14:39add weight at some point. That's

1:14:41primary. It always will be. And nothing

1:14:44will ever change that. I mean that's

1:14:46just all that that's that's all I have

1:14:48to say about that. I mean it's just like

1:14:50that is

1:14:51the the singular the primary is it the

1:14:53only factor factor of course not but is

1:14:56the primary factor adding volume can

1:14:58facilitate adding weight to a

1:15:02point and I I mean yeah like and I I

1:15:06talked you know there there are places

1:15:08it's funny during the whole volume thing

1:15:10and and the volume escalations pretty

1:15:13much everybody except Ike was saying

1:15:16yeah you don't do volume escalations

1:15:19would like one exception. Well, okay,

1:15:21there are

1:15:22exceptions. A beginner will be

1:15:25escalating volume from their beginner

1:15:27volumes because they're very low and as

1:15:29they you'll eventually you will increase

1:15:31them somewhat. Again, they go up to the

1:15:33intermediate level, then they come down

1:15:34as you hit the advanced level, right?

1:15:36It's it doesn't doesn't do this unless

1:15:39your drugs are also doing

1:15:41that, which is where that all comes

1:15:43from. The Russians were the ones who

1:15:45kept going more and more and more volume

1:15:46as you get more advanced. Yeah. because

1:15:47they kept giving him more and more and

1:15:49more

1:15:50drugs. So that would be a case where

1:15:52volume escalation. Okay, if you're

1:15:53coming back from a layoff, you're going

1:15:55to start with low volume and you're

1:15:56going to build back up to your old

1:15:57volumes gradually. But that's just

1:15:59coming back. And somebody, I forget who

1:16:02it was in a podcast said, okay, this is

1:16:06a COVID thing. So let's say you've got

1:16:08two kettle bells, a 7 kilo and a 20

1:16:12kilo.

1:16:14probably not a place where you're going

1:16:16to be able to make a weight jump. That

1:16:19would be a place where adding

1:16:22volume might be the only way to apply an

1:16:26overload in the short term. And I

1:16:28certainly don't disagree with that. But

1:16:31again, that's a practical that's a

1:16:32specific practical issue because at one

1:16:35point Ike wrote this article for the

1:16:36strength and conditioning journal trying

1:16:38to defend his volume

1:16:40escalation by it's a great it's a great

1:16:43paper. Eric Helms, Brian Miner, and

1:16:45Jacob

1:16:46Schffis pieces. And what they wrote in

1:16:49there, they said the best way to go

1:16:51about it is to set weekly volumes based

1:16:54on either scientific background or past

1:16:57history and add weight to the bar as

1:17:00adaptation occurs. I'm like, wow, that

1:17:03sounds really familiar. Because like I

1:17:05said, that's what got left out is that

1:17:08because I know I know the coach that

1:17:09recommends those types of volume

1:17:11escalations, but it's occurring with

1:17:13dose

1:17:14escalations. Yeah. And that's fine.

1:17:17Again, that's again, I'm not saying

1:17:18that's an illegitimate way to train in

1:17:21that

1:17:21context. I will, in as much as I don't

1:17:25know much about it, I absolutely agree

1:17:27that for people on

1:17:29anabolics, adding weight too quickly can

1:17:31get them hurt because their joints fall

1:17:33off because you get so strong. so

1:17:35quickly. There is a reason. I got a good

1:17:38buddy who's who's been on for years and

1:17:40is very smart. He's like, "Yeah, when

1:17:41you're on high doses, you do just just

1:17:44let the training do the work. You're not

1:17:45trying to go heavier and heavier and

1:17:47heavier all the time because you do get

1:17:48hurt." And I'm like, "Let the drug do

1:17:50the work." Yeah. Let the Yeah, sorry.

1:17:52Let the drugs do the work. But you do

1:17:54still, again, look at most of these top

1:17:56body, they're they're very strong. The

1:17:58difference is they're probably not

1:18:00needing to add weight to the bar as all.

1:18:03And it's it's interesting if you listen

1:18:04to people like in the industry that are

1:18:07honest about it like I think Greg Ducet

1:18:09has talked about this. I think you told

1:18:10me about that where he said very

1:18:12explicitly look the training when you're

1:18:14on versus training when you're natural

1:18:15are completely

1:18:17distinct. what you not only can do but

1:18:20probably should do because as as a

1:18:23natural you're not going to be getting

1:18:24strong so quickly that you're going to

1:18:26get into joint problems unless you do

1:18:28high frequency BS and then you get

1:18:31tendonitis and lose nine months of

1:18:33training but when you're on anabolics my

1:18:35understanding you do get strong so

1:18:37quickly that you can very rapidly get

1:18:39into trouble and you probably do have to

1:18:41be a lot more moderated.

1:18:44So just to come back to consistency and

1:18:46then we can take a little break. Yeah, I

1:18:49guess you would exhort the viewer to be

1:18:51careful of fads, lengthen partials, high

1:18:54frequency training, train more than the

1:18:56pros, which some pharmaceutically

1:18:58enhanced amateur bodybuilders advise you

1:18:59to do. You should probably train more

1:19:03than the pro bodybuilders you follow.

1:19:05Just do the stuff that works and be

1:19:07consistent with it, however boring and

1:19:09difficult it may be. I mean, yes. I It's

1:19:13like It's what's so funny to me. I mean,

1:19:16maybe not funny funny, but funny, you

1:19:18know, not funny. Haha. If you actually

1:19:20look at what athletes in most sports are

1:19:24doing, successful athletes, regardless

1:19:26of the

1:19:27sport, endurance sports, powerlifting,

1:19:30Olympic lifting,

1:19:33bodybuilders, their training is very

1:19:35boring.

1:19:37It's very boring, but they're doing the

1:19:39same things very well, very consistently

1:19:43for long periods of time. Now, I'm not

1:19:46saying that there aren't changes that

1:19:47are occurring over time as they adapt,

1:19:50as they have weak points, as they find

1:19:52more limitations in their performance.

1:19:54There may be changes that are occurring,

1:19:57but it's always within a framework of

1:19:59the most boring, consistent crap you've

1:20:01ever seen. Sprinters are doing speed

1:20:03work twice a week. They're doing

1:20:05technical work. They're doing a little

1:20:06bit of endurance work depending on the

1:20:07event. Endurance cyclists are riding

1:20:09endless miles, 80% of their volume.

1:20:12Powerlifters are practicing the lifts

1:20:13and doing assistance work. Olympic

1:20:15lifters are practicing the lifts

1:20:17relentlessly doing assistance work and

1:20:19then other stuff and the successful

1:20:23bodybuilders are just doing the same

1:20:25basic consistent stuff. Now I'm not

1:20:28saying they're immune to fads or immune

1:20:30to trying different types of training

1:20:32but they're not changing it every

1:20:34month right Dr. Ken used to talk about

1:20:37this. So, back before the internet and

1:20:39kids, there was a time that the internet

1:20:41didn't exist. I know that's hard to

1:20:43believe. There was a time when it wasn't

1:20:45a thing because I was there. I don't

1:20:48know if the world was better or worse

1:20:49then, but it it it was every month the

1:20:53new workout of the pros would come out

1:20:56and everybody would change their

1:20:57training completely.

1:20:59I could always tell when I was in Salt

1:21:01Lake, even then, internet was still

1:21:03relatively new. I could always tell when

1:21:05Men's Health ran an article on power

1:21:08cleans because suddenly everybody in my

1:21:11gym was doing shitty power cleans for

1:21:13the next month. Brilliant. And then it

1:21:16would change the next month. And Dr. Ken

1:21:18called it muscle magazine syndrome. Not

1:21:20that he didn't change his training. you

1:21:22if you read, you know, if you ever get a

1:21:23chance to read, you know, uh, Tales from

1:21:25the Loft, he's like he and his buddy who

1:21:28they were both bouncers and stuff and he

1:21:29played he played rugby or football or

1:21:31something and he just wanted to get

1:21:32bigger and faster and he was like,

1:21:33"Yeah, they would do these intense six

1:21:35to eight week blocks of just in super

1:21:37intense training and then they would do

1:21:41something slightly different, but it was

1:21:43never

1:21:45like diametrically opposed to what

1:21:47they've been doing before." Yeah. He was

1:21:49always within the same general schema of

1:21:52lower volume wreck ourselves and he's

1:21:55like his buddy wanted to do more arm

1:21:56work. He wanted to be a bodybuilder. Dr.

1:21:58Ken's like I don't give a crap about

1:21:59armwork. I want to be bigger for

1:22:01football. Like so they would compromise

1:22:03and they'd be like all right. So we did

1:22:04the big leg and back worked. Then we had

1:22:06a little shoulder and arm day to make

1:22:09dude happy. But it was always within the

1:22:11same general framework of training

1:22:12within and like whatever equipment they

1:22:15had. He's like the loft was frozen so we

1:22:17had to go down. is like we found they

1:22:18would find like these giant uh manhole

1:22:22covers that weighed like a hundred pound

1:22:23and they would find ways to like bolt

1:22:25bars and [ __ ] to them just to do they're

1:22:27just like hey we built this new thing

1:22:29let's do something with this for six

1:22:31weeks but every month the new work and

1:22:35everybody would change their workout

1:22:36radically. Meanwhile, the bodybuilders

1:22:38are doing the same stuff, you know, week

1:22:40in week out within some

1:22:42realm. And then the internet started and

1:22:45it was like, okay, Teen Nation ran three

1:22:48articles a week and then one a day and

1:22:51then five a day. What do they write 10

1:22:52articles a day now? And they all

1:22:54contradict one another. And now you can

1:22:56get a new magic thing you should do or

1:22:59can't do or shouldn't do or never do

1:23:01every 10 seconds. And I guarantee you

1:23:03that the people who were pushing this

1:23:05crap, they don't do any of it. They do

1:23:07it because it provides content. That's

1:23:09not how they train. It's not how they

1:23:11train now. They still Or even if it is

1:23:14how they train now, it's not how they

1:23:16train to get to their current state.

1:23:18Yes. Absolutely. And that's because it's

1:23:20very easy to maintain muscle mass. Much

1:23:23harder to build it in the first place.

1:23:24Correct. And that's the other thing that

1:23:26gets left out when people look at the

1:23:27workouts of the pros. It's like look,

1:23:29Lance Armstrong didn't start riding four

1:23:31riding the bike 40 hours a week. He

1:23:33started riding five like every other

1:23:35human being in the world, right? Looking

1:23:38at what Dorian is doing or like I made

1:23:39the example, you know, Mener in the what

1:23:41Mensor did in the off season was much

1:23:44more traditional than we give it credit

1:23:46for. Four days a week, upper lower,

1:23:48higher volume because he couldn't push

1:23:49himself that hard. But what he wrote

1:23:51about doing was his competition training

1:23:54when he was presumably dieting anyway

1:23:57and trying to maintain while bringing in

1:23:59the anabolics. But people saw that. But

1:24:02that's what he made it sound like.

1:24:03That's how he trains. Like no, that was

1:24:05that was part of how he trained. I mean,

1:24:07Dorian trained blood and guts year round

1:24:10so far as I could tell. And whether or

1:24:13not he adjusted it during contest prep,

1:24:16I don't know.

1:24:17Um, but when your volume's already that

1:24:19low, the nice thing is you don't have to

1:24:21adjust it that much. Um, because he was

1:24:23already doing fairly low volume. Like I

1:24:25know what he said in hindsight. He

1:24:27wishes he had de loed more

1:24:30frequently. He thinks he would have

1:24:31avoided his couple of minor injuries if

1:24:33he had taken the occasional easy week

1:24:36more often. But other than that

1:24:43um I guess coming back to what might be

1:24:46missing from your guide I guess one

1:24:48question I wanted to ask and I already

1:24:51know the answer

1:24:52but I think it would be helpful for the

1:24:55viewer it's is this protocol to be

1:24:58understood as something you should do

1:25:00for every muscle group at once and I

1:25:02think there are two considerations

1:25:04number one is overlap

1:25:06Number two is your level of advancement.

1:25:09Yeah. So, yeah. So, this is, you know,

1:25:11obviously meant to be a generic quickie

1:25:15guide. Like I said, usually this is when

1:25:17someone asks a question on Facebook and

1:25:19I'm like, here's all you need to know.

1:25:21And in the aggregate, that's true. So

1:25:24the first question which is

1:25:27overlap which is something I've been

1:25:29making an issue out of since oh god the

1:25:32the original volume

1:25:34nonsense because I made the point or

1:25:37tried to make the point right in Brad's

1:25:39volume study they did nothing but

1:25:41compound chest and then measured the

1:25:44triceps and that's not how volume works.

1:25:48Um,

1:25:50did they measure the triceps work from

1:25:52the compound

1:25:54pressing for triceps or half? Well,

1:25:56that's the thing is they said they did

1:25:5845 sets a week for chest and they

1:26:01measured tricep growth and they said 45

1:26:04sets gives maximum tricep. I mean, even

1:26:06the statistics didn't support it. They

1:26:08were counting it as one to one and

1:26:10that's wrong.

1:26:12It should be and I I mean I when I

1:26:14looked at all the volume studies of the

1:26:16day, I very carefully mapped them out

1:26:18that way. I said,

1:26:20"Look, accessory muscles for compound

1:26:23exercises should not be counted one to

1:26:25one for volume."

1:26:27Yes. Now, we don't know exactly what it

1:26:31should be counted as, right? And I made

1:26:33I made this point six or seven times

1:26:35because I knew people would get it

1:26:36wrong. I said, 'Look, I'm going to count

1:26:38it as one half to one. So, one set of

1:26:42barbell bench or machine bench is the

1:26:44equivalent of half a set for triceps. I

1:26:47said, now I'm not saying that's the

1:26:48exact number. Said, this is what I'm

1:26:51going to use consistently. I said, you

1:26:53can pick a different value, but we know

1:26:56it's

1:26:57not 90% and we know it's probably not

1:27:0010%. I'm going to guess it's half. And

1:27:02if you talk to other coaches, they'll

1:27:05generally assume that's about the same.

1:27:08Like, and it it'll it'll depend on the

1:27:10person. It may depend on the exercise,

1:27:12right? Like obviously like an undergrip

1:27:14pull down is probably more direct biceps

1:27:16than a V-bar pull down. We can only go

1:27:19so deep into this. But my point was,

1:27:22look, you cannot count 45 sets for chest

1:27:25as the optimal growth for triceps

1:27:28because it wasn't 45 sets for triceps.

1:27:30Now, why they didn't ultrasound the

1:27:32chest, I don't know. I don't know if

1:27:33there's a technical reason or whatever,

1:27:35right? If all you're doing is compound

1:27:37leg work and then all you measure is the

1:27:39quads. You can't count that one to one.

1:27:42And yet, that's what they did. So, I

1:27:44went through and I re and I masked out

1:27:46all the volume studies. I looked through

1:27:48all of them. I said, "Look, I'll count

1:27:49direct exercise as

1:27:51one. I'll count indirect as half to

1:27:53one." Mainly so I can be consistent.

1:27:56Because if you look at that, if you look

1:27:58at Brad's study and you ignoring the

1:28:01fact that statistics didn't support the

1:28:02highest volumes

1:28:04anyway, right? So he did 9 27 and 45

1:28:08sets a week. So for the compound chest,

1:28:10it was all compound chest work. Okay? So

1:28:12we cut that in half. So what we were

1:28:13really comparing four and a half sets

1:28:16per week of

1:28:17triceps, 13 and a half sets per week of

1:28:20triceps, and I would agree 13 probably

1:28:23gave you more than four and a half.

1:28:26Yeah. 21 to 22 and 13 and 22 were the

1:28:29same because that's the range we're in,

1:28:31right? When you ma when you math it out

1:28:34correctly, suddenly the values make

1:28:37sense.

1:28:38Yeah. So, and just as a couple other

1:28:42things just because you know me, I

1:28:43always got to give every example. So, a

1:28:45few years later, Brad wrote this

1:28:48paper about counting sets in exercise

1:28:52science. And I maintain that many of

1:28:55these papers are written by these simply

1:28:58to go Ly was wrong. I don't see why else

1:29:01he would have written it. And what it

1:29:03said was that effectively based on

1:29:06limited

1:29:07data it is clear that it's not one to

1:29:10one. Right? There's actually there is a

1:29:12study that compared pulld downs to

1:29:14direct bicep work only. Same same volume

1:29:18and the bicep work grew biceps more than

1:29:21the pull down work. And the paper

1:29:23literally said, "Well, we know it's

1:29:25probably not one to one, but since we've

1:29:28always counted that way, we should keep

1:29:29doing it that

1:29:30way."

1:29:32Brilliant. And then in his book, Max

1:29:34Muscle 2.0, he said we should count one

1:29:38half to one because of course we should.

1:29:41But he never would have admitted that

1:29:42when I was criticizing his paper. Now,

1:29:44what's really interesting that that

1:29:46giant meta analysis, that huge volume

1:29:48thing last year that seemed to have been

1:29:51caught everybody's attention for about a

1:29:52day, I will give those guys credit. They

1:29:55I mean, they did a thorough ass job.

1:29:59Make no mistakes, right? I I I I never

1:30:02bothered to write anything about that,

1:30:04but like methodologically they did a

1:30:07tremendous amount of work. But one of

1:30:09the things they did going in was they

1:30:13were like they decided that when we

1:30:14count volume they actually looked at it

1:30:15in two ways. They said one we're going

1:30:17to count it one to one but we're also

1:30:19going to math it out as if indirect work

1:30:22was one half to one and I'm like it's

1:30:24nice to be validated because of course

1:30:26of course that's how you should count

1:30:28it. So yes, so within the context of

1:30:30this, I I do adjust volumes like this.

1:30:33This shows up very much in my generic

1:30:34bulking routine in the sense of the

1:30:36number of sets that that I do I do

1:30:41count compound

1:30:44work partially for indirect as indirect

1:30:47for the smaller muscle groups. So, for

1:30:50example, like let's say you were going

1:30:52to

1:30:53use the highest the, you know, step

1:30:56four, repeat number three four to eight

1:30:57times in a workout. If you did eight

1:30:59compound pushing sets, right? Four sets

1:31:03of a flat chest exercise, four sets of

1:31:05an incline, I would count that as four

1:31:07sets of triceps. If you wanted to get

1:31:11eight total sets for triceps, you'd have

1:31:14to do another four. You would do four

1:31:15direct sets. Yep. Yeah. you, but you

1:31:19would not do eight direct sets of

1:31:20triceps because that would now be 12.

1:31:22You would actually now be doing more for

1:31:24triceps. Now, let's say you your chest

1:31:27work was two sets of pec deck, two sets

1:31:30of flat chest, two sets of incline

1:31:32flies, two sets of incline chest press.

1:31:34Now, you've got four compound chest

1:31:37sets. I would count that as two tricep.

1:31:40Two try you've done eight sets for

1:31:41chest. You've only done four compound

1:31:44sets. So, you've only done two tricep

1:31:46sets. Yeah, you'd have to do six sets of

1:31:48direct work. If you wanted to get to

1:31:50eight, you wanted to do four, you do two

1:31:52more sets. So, yes, I would I would take

1:31:54that into account. Yeah, very good. And

1:31:57next, advancement. So, right, you know,

1:32:00if you're if you're a healthy young

1:32:02enthusiastic novice or intermediate

1:32:05traininee with some free time and

1:32:07nothing by way of any other strenuous

1:32:08physical activity, then you can't have

1:32:10that. You probably could recover from

1:32:12training every body part at once in the

1:32:14fashion you describe. Sure.

1:32:18You know, if if you're a more advanced

1:32:20lifter or you're challenged in terms of

1:32:23recovery, then you might struggle trying

1:32:26to hit every body part with this exact

1:32:28protocol. And in that case, you could

1:32:30consider, for example, specialization

1:32:32cycle where you train. Correct. But even

1:32:35before we get to that, there are there

1:32:37are a couple of other ways you could

1:32:38modify this before you move to that

1:32:41depending on like and even so like okay,

1:32:43other nuance. Who is this for? Is this

1:32:46for a 22 year old male or a 50 year old

1:32:49female? Like I again I can't cover every

1:32:52nuance, right? A younger guy who's, you

1:32:55know, unemployed or whatever in school

1:32:57and has a lot of time to train is in a

1:32:59different situation than someone who's

1:33:01older, but assuming we're talking about

1:33:02sort of that general population. Let's

1:33:05say someone is having trouble recovering

1:33:07from the higher volumes twice a week.

1:33:10Well, you go to that ABA split. Well,

1:33:13you got two options. One, you could

1:33:16reduce the volume per workout. Rather

1:33:18than doing eight sets, you could go to

1:33:19four. Yes. And do that twice a week. Or

1:33:23you could maintain the volume at eight

1:33:25and reduce the frequency to once every

1:33:26fifth day. Those are both legitimate

1:33:30approaches and will have the same

1:33:32effective end result. Either way, you're

1:33:34reducing the training load either again

1:33:36through either a volume or a frequency

1:33:38adjustment. You don't adjust the

1:33:39intensity, right? That's the one thing

1:33:41we don't get to like you don't get to

1:33:43just like oh I'm just going to train at

1:33:44seven reps in reserve because I

1:33:45guarantee you that won't work. You have

1:33:47to adjust one of the others. So that's

1:33:48one adjustment that could be done. I

1:33:51need to go figure out which paper that

1:33:53dumbness is getting pulled from. Um

1:33:56another thing that some people might run

1:33:58into even before they get to the

1:34:00advanced level, right? Once they get to

1:34:02say the advanced intermediate level,

1:34:04maybe year

1:34:06three, especially if they're doing

1:34:09working in the lower repetition

1:34:11ranges, frequently doing two heavy

1:34:14workouts a week is just too much. Yes.

1:34:16Because your joints, connective tissue

1:34:18starts to become the limiting

1:34:21factor at that point. And realize this

1:34:24is, you know, three years into

1:34:25productive training. This is not early

1:34:27on. It's when you start to get

1:34:29reasonably strong. Yes, you may

1:34:32frequently the best approach is to move

1:34:33to a heavy light. So you do all the

1:34:36heavy work on one day, you do nothing

1:34:37but six to eights on one workout and you

1:34:40do nothing but 12 to 15s or 10 to 12 on

1:34:42the other workout just to give your

1:34:44joints a break. Yep. That is something a

1:34:46guy work with in the UK. He's well he

1:34:48was going to do a physique competition

1:34:50until he realized that it was a dumb

1:34:51waste of time. Um okay that's unfair. he

1:34:55wasn't sure he wanted to do it. And a

1:34:57coach that he knew actually said

1:34:59something that I thought was extremely

1:35:02insightful, which was before you go down

1:35:05this

1:35:06road, you need to have a strong reason

1:35:09why, and I thought that was actually a

1:35:12really good way of putting it. To put

1:35:14yourself through the rigors of dieting

1:35:17and contest

1:35:18prep is not something you do on a lark.

1:35:24And realistically, this guy is a

1:35:26physical therapist and he's got a life

1:35:28and he's like, "At the moment, I don't

1:35:31have a good reason to do it." And I

1:35:32said, "Good enough." Good on him. And

1:35:37but one thing, but he is very he

1:35:38actually he's very much a failure guy. I

1:35:40mean, he's he's he he knows Dorian and

1:35:42he very much he does four all out sets

1:35:44twice a week and grows on it. And

1:35:47actually, I had him on specialization

1:35:49cycles for a year. I'll come back to

1:35:50that in just a second. But he's like,

1:35:52"I'm having trouble. You know, stuff

1:35:54hurts." I go, "You are definitely at the

1:35:56point." I'm like, "You need to go to a

1:35:58heavy light." Yep. All your heavy work

1:36:00one day, you know, which is very similar

1:36:04uh Lane Norton, as much as I don't care

1:36:06for the guy, his PHAT, that power

1:36:09hypertrophy, whatever. It's a heavy

1:36:11light system. So, you do all the tension

1:36:13work on one day and all the pump mech

1:36:15metabolic work on the other, and that

1:36:17works. I mean, powerlifterss have used

1:36:19heavy lights for a billion years, and

1:36:21that's certainly a good way to do it

1:36:24when you start to get very strong. But

1:36:26even at some point, that becomes

1:36:30untenable because there are people in

1:36:32the industry who will continue to tell

1:36:35folks, oh yeah, even at the advanced

1:36:37level, you can bring up everything at

1:36:38once. And the answer is that no, you

1:36:41can't. There are two limits that that

1:36:44that become the issue. One is that

1:36:48recovery we don't know what it is but it

1:36:50is it doesn't just keep increasing

1:36:52forever like your recovery is going to

1:36:55ultimately become a limiting factor but

1:36:57more importantly when you are strong

1:36:59when you have gotten to a certain level

1:37:02you simply cannot put the amount of

1:37:04necessary intensity and focus into

1:37:07everything at once. You just

1:37:10can't. And you see this in most in many

1:37:14many sports. It's not super common, but

1:37:16you will. I've known highle powerlifters

1:37:19that find that they cannot bring up all

1:37:21three lifts at once. So, they'll

1:37:22maintain two and focus on one for a

1:37:26while. I've I've heard of triathletes

1:37:29that do that because think about the to

1:37:31to improve cycling, running, and

1:37:33swimming. the athletes in those

1:37:36individual sports. Cyclists may be

1:37:38putting in 30 to four hours a week, 30

1:37:40to 40 hours a week. Runners up to 20

1:37:42hours a week. Swimming an ungodly number

1:37:44of hours. Athletes are trying to combine

1:37:46those three.

1:37:48Ouch. You can't. Now, they I mean, not

1:37:50at full volumes and there is some

1:37:52overlap. Like running and cycling have a

1:37:54little bit, but you got to swim. You got

1:37:56to put in the yards because swimming is

1:37:58so technically complicated. You get to

1:38:00the point at the highest levels, what

1:38:02are you going to train? 80 hours a week.

1:38:04When are you supposed to sleep or work

1:38:06or eat something? So, they'll maintain

1:38:09one of and they'll, you know, put a lot

1:38:11of energy into another. I think

1:38:14Ly maybe we should save specialization

1:38:17for another time. Okay.

1:38:20Yeah. Separate topic. I don't It is a

1:38:22separate topic. Um, and I also wanted to

1:38:26ask you about exercise selection.

1:38:34Yeah, because it is I you I knew you

1:38:36were probably thinking of talking about

1:38:38it, but it it is one thing that your

1:38:40guide doesn't contemplate and I know you

1:38:42have a lot of thoughts about it. Yeah, I

1:38:44was when I was making my protein drink.

1:38:46Go ahead. Would you mind if I shared I

1:38:49thought you'd be thinking about it

1:38:51anyway. Um would you mind if I shared my

1:38:54personal four criteria when it comes to

1:38:58exercise selection for hypertrophy and

1:39:00then you can either share your thoughts

1:39:01or add if need be. So number one is I

1:39:05think the exercise has to be safe that

1:39:07is it shouldn't give you joint pain. If

1:39:10you get joint pain from a particular

1:39:11exercise then it and the joint pain gets

1:39:14worse um then it it should be discarded.

1:39:18The exercise obviously has to hit the

1:39:19target muscle. That would be criterion

1:39:22two. Um, that's highly individual. I

1:39:26guess you you'd agree that it depends on

1:39:27biomechanics. If you're built like Tom

1:39:30Platz and you can squat bolt upright,

1:39:33then the high bar squat might be an

1:39:35amazing quads builder, but if you're

1:39:37real lanky, then not so much. Not so

1:39:40much. I guess number three is the

1:39:42exercise has to be stable. We discussed

1:39:44this earlier with our little machines

1:39:46versus free weights versus bos squats

1:39:49discussion. Um, yeah, if you're wobbling

1:39:53around like a leaf in the wind, then

1:39:55that limits the amount of mechanical

1:39:57tension you can impose on you can expose

1:40:00your muscle to. So, yeah, anything Joel

1:40:03Seedman is basically out. Um,

1:40:09indeed. I guess the last one would be

1:40:13the exercise has to allow for

1:40:15progressive tension overload. Um that is

1:40:18it either allows you to add weight or

1:40:22reps over time with no issues. And so in

1:40:25keeping with that, an exercise like a

1:40:28plank would probably be bad for the abs

1:40:32because

1:40:33well, you know, compared to something

1:40:35like a cable crunch because planks are

1:40:37excruciating and provide relatively

1:40:39little mechanical tension once you

1:40:41develop strong rectus abdominis whereas

1:40:45Yeah. I mean like your mind would

1:40:46probably give out before your muscles

1:40:48do. Whereas with a cable crunch, right,

1:40:50the abs are definitely the limiting

1:40:51factor. And and like how, you know, how

1:40:53are you going to load a plank? I mean,

1:40:56yeah, I guess you can put weights on

1:40:58your back or have someone sit on you or

1:41:00something, but like there is a a in a

1:41:03practical sense. Push-ups have the same

1:41:06problem in that, okay, once you can do

1:41:0820, all right, yeah, you can do weird

1:41:10angles and stuff and like what are you

1:41:12going to do? Put you can put weights on

1:41:14your back in a backpack or whatever. You

1:41:16can just do a machine chest press and

1:41:18throw two and a half on each side and

1:41:19move on with your damn life. So yeah,

1:41:22that that's there are that is a

1:41:23practical issue. Uh certainly would you

1:41:27say that was a rather comprehensive

1:41:30I mean overview of exercise. Yeah. I

1:41:32mean, that's basically so I wrote this

1:41:34this post on my in my Facebook group a

1:41:36while back and I forget what I'm sure

1:41:39just anger in general stimulated it and

1:41:41it was called uh let's talk about

1:41:43exercise selection for

1:41:45hypertrophy and I made it real clear

1:41:48because there's always one dumbass and

1:41:50I'm like I'm talking about hypertrophy

1:41:52like do not come in and go what if you

1:41:55want to improve your squat I go what

1:41:57what did I say come on what did I say

1:42:00not talking about improving a movement

1:42:02talking about hypertrophy like let's

1:42:04let's let's pretend we're literate here

1:42:06and I wrote this longass thing and a lot

1:42:10of it was building a model of

1:42:12hypertrophy some of which we discussed

1:42:14in terms of recruitment how do you get