Things I believe but can't prove...

[dw]

I also don't believe the BBM line about desensitization.

Or that volume needs to trend upward indefinitely. It seems to be more binary than that, assuming SS volume levels work for you at all you'll eventually need to bump them up, but from there you can probably progress indefinitely, and may even have to reduce them a little when hypertrophy gains are easily outpaced by fatigue accumulation.

[DanCR]

-Weightlifting coach John Broz once said he always tried to cultivate an attitude of laziness in his gym, which people may find vexing or off-putting but I totally understand it. I've gotten the strongest training relaxed, minimal psych, long and untimed rests between sets, big sets that are heavy but not "hard". Handle heavy weights but don't stress and don't work yourself into a rage until it counts, and maybe not even then.

I think you're talking strength here, but I've had the same experience with hypertrophy, and with sets that are "hard." Say that I can lift a certain weight on a certain movement for 8 reps, and that that's at or within one grinding rep of failure. I get much better results from taking long rests, unburdened by any timer, and hitting that set 2 or 3 times, as opposed to shortening the rest periods and having to drop the weight to get the reps. I of course know that many (most?) bodybuilder types have a different experience and preach short rests / density / time under tension.

In any event, I absolutely loathe timing anything in the gym; nothing makes a session more unenjoyable and stressful for me.

[CheekiBreekiFitness]

I also don't believe the BBM line about desensitization.

Or that volume needs to trend upward indefinitely. It seems to be more binary than that, assuming SS volume levels work for you at all you'll eventually need to bump them up, but from there you can probably progress indefinitely, and may even have to reduce them a little when hypertrophy gains are easily outpaced by fatigue accumulation.

I believe that volume needs to trend upwards indefinitely, but that the slope is very very small (maybe one more set per exercise every 1-2 years) ?

Now I think that BBM programs ramps up volume week to week not because of desensitization but rather because in the first week of a block you tend to have a smaller tolerance for volume, especially if you're introducing new exercises.

[Hardartery]

I also don't believe the BBM line about desensitization.

Or that volume needs to trend upward indefinitely. It seems to be more binary than that, assuming SS volume levels work for you at all you'll eventually need to bump them up, but from there you can probably progress indefinitely, and may even have to reduce them a little when hypertrophy gains are easily outpaced by fatigue accumulation.

I believe that volume needs to trend upwards indefinitely, but that the slope is very very small (maybe one more set per exercise every 1-2 years) ?

Now I think that BBM programs ramps up volume week to week not because of desensitization but rather because in the first week of a block you tend to have a smaller tolerance for volume, especially if you're introducing new exercises.

I promise you that it does not. Over time it actually needs to ramp down.

[CheekiBreekiFitness]

I also don't believe the BBM line about desensitization.

Or that volume needs to trend upward indefinitely. It seems to be more binary than that, assuming SS volume levels work for you at all you'll eventually need to bump them up, but from there you can probably progress indefinitely, and may even have to reduce them a little when hypertrophy gains are easily outpaced by fatigue accumulation.

I believe that volume needs to trend upwards indefinitely, but that the slope is very very small (maybe one more set per exercise every 1-2 years) ?

Now I think that BBM programs ramps up volume week to week not because of desensitization but rather because in the first week of a block you tend to have a smaller tolerance for volume, especially if you're introducing new exercises.

I promise you that it does not. Over time it actually needs to ramp down.

Do you have a mechanistic explanation for why it needs to ramp down ? I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just curious about your reasoning.

[Hardartery]

I also don't believe the BBM line about desensitization.

Or that volume needs to trend upward indefinitely. It seems to be more binary than that, assuming SS volume levels work for you at all you'll eventually need to bump them up, but from there you can probably progress indefinitely, and may even have to reduce them a little when hypertrophy gains are easily outpaced by fatigue accumulation.

I believe that volume needs to trend upwards indefinitely, but that the slope is very very small (maybe one more set per exercise every 1-2 years) ?

Now I think that BBM programs ramps up volume week to week not because of desensitization but rather because in the first week of a block you tend to have a smaller tolerance for volume, especially if you're introducing new exercises.

I promise you that it does not. Over time it actually needs to ramp down.

Do you have a mechanistic explanation for why it needs to ramp down ? I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just curious about your reasoning.

Over time your you can either increase volume or increase weight. If you increase weight, you will hit a tipping point at which volume must decrease to accommodate recovery. I don't like to throw around the word intensity here, it's not about intensity, you can recover from very high intensity if your load is still relatively small. In my own case, I could not possibly Squat and Deadlift every week and progress - as much as I want to. So I am squatting every week and Deadlifting every two weeks and there is a noticeable hit on the squat session that follows a deadlift session for me because I will not be fully recovered. I am not alone in this. Julius Maddox benches every 10 days because once a week is too often at his weights. Conjugate systems are building in limits by having a dynamic days using low weight, it limits your exposure to the lifts that crush your CNS (And honestly has a certain reliance on drugs to facilitate some aspects of recovery). Also, there is a limit to how much volume the individual can withstand. Everyone has a point at which nothing you can do gets you recovered except cutting stuff for a while. I mean, if you want to just push starting weights with ever increasing volume you will achieve a fairly high amount of volume before you hit the limit, but you also won't get far with respect to increased 1 RM or hypertrophy.

[CheekiBreekiFitness]

@Hardartery when you talk about "volume" do you mean the volume done on the competition lift with a heavy weight (say sets of squats with a belt in the 1-5 rep range) or do you mean all of the training volume that targets the same muscles as the competition lift (so squats, hack squats, belt squats leg extensions you name it).

For instance Conjugate/Westside features a low amount of volume for the competition lift with heavy weight (and I think you are right that since very strong people use such extreme poundages, you can't do too much of those anyways) but feature a very high amount of total training volume (Louie Simmons described Westside as "high volume training" himself).

In that case I agree that you can keep volume on the competition lift lower and compensate for this with a massive amount of volume of assistance. That's old-school american powerlifting training in a nutshell. But you don't necessarily have to. There are also people who have success with super specific training. I guess it's very individual. My observational broscience would be that very strong very large male lifters seem to do low volume on the main lifts type of training. Like if you're a 400 lbs behemoth you're probably not squatting heavy 3 times a week. But I don't know, anything is possible I gues.

[Hardartery]

@Hardartery when you talk about "volume" do you mean the volume done on the competition lift with a heavy weight (say sets of squats with a belt in the 1-5 rep range) or do you mean all of the training volume that targets the same muscles as the competition lift (so squats, hack squats, belt squats leg extensions you name it).

For instance Conjugate/Westside features a low amount of volume for the competition lift with heavy weight (and I think you are right that since very strong people use such extreme poundages, you can't do too much of those anyways) but feature a very high amount of total training volume (Louie Simmons described Westside as "high volume training" himself).

In that case I agree that you can keep volume on the competition lift lower and compensate for this with a massive amount of volume of assistance. That's old-school american powerlifting training in a nutshell. But you don't necessarily have to. There are also people who have success with super specific training. I guess it's very individual. My observational broscience would be that very strong very large male lifters seem to do low volume on the main lifts type of training. Like if you're a 400 lbs behemoth you're probably not squatting heavy 3 times a week. But I don't know, anything is possible I gues.

I mean total volume across all things has a cap. It is individual and you can train your way into greater volume over time, but there is still a cap at some point where you are impeding progress. The hardest thing in the world to do is to keep a meathead lifter out of the gym, we are inevitably trying to go do something, anything, when it is in our best interests to take a day off or cut back a little. You can get greater volume by cutting weight, but it still tops out at some point. The student tracks it and uses the data to know when to cut back, the meathead keeps overdoing it and telling himself that he's not overdoing it.

[GeoffBUK]

I think I've heard some of this before, about fibre type, but an interesting watch!

[perman]

There are probably many confounding factors here concerning whether volume needs to go up and down. Volume tolerance can be limited both by work capacity, tissue recovery capabilities and novelty. It's normal to improve your work capacity over time, and for many this will never not be a bottle neck for their strength and amount of time spent in the gym. For others, and I imagine this applies to people with more potent responses to training, they get stronger, can push their bodies harder, and just being able to recover enough to do it again the next time becomes the issue.

I believe a big confounder is that what programming works best may shift without you knowing it, and without you knowing the reason. Whether it's a physical need for novelty, your body getting used to stimulus, the limiting factor changing to something else, programming grows stale. You try something else, and something seems to work, but you can't quite pin-point it.

I saw Christian Thib (can't be bothered to look up that name) claim on Table talk that he believed a lot of the confusion about volume vs intensity for bodybuilding (basically straight sets vs low volume beyond failure) stemmed from the fact that people got a good result switching to the other, and people misinterpreted that as the other stylen being better when their original style had just gone stale.

[fit40strong]

There are probably many confounding factors here concerning whether volume needs to go up and down. Volume tolerance can be limited both by work capacity, tissue recovery capabilities and novelty. It's normal to improve your work capacity over time, and for many this will never not be a bottle neck for their strength and amount of time spent in the gym. For others, and I imagine this applies to people with more potent responses to training, they get stronger, can push their bodies harder, and just being able to recover enough to do it again the next time becomes the issue.

I believe a big confounder is that what programming works best may shift without you knowing it, and without you knowing the reason. Whether it's a physical need for novelty, your body getting used to stimulus, the limiting factor changing to something else, programming grows stale. You try something else, and something seems to work, but you can't quite pin-point it.

I saw Christian Thib (can't be bothered to look up that name) claim on Table talk that he believed a lot of the confusion about volume vs intensity for bodybuilding (basically straight sets vs low volume beyond failure) stemmed from the fact that people got a good result switching to the other, and people misinterpreted that as the other stylen being better when their original style had just gone stale.

Your observation about the complexity of volume in training is spot on. Volume is a multi-faceted aspect of workout routines, and its optimal range can vary greatly among individuals. Work capacity, recovery capabilities, and the need for novelty all play crucial roles in determining the ideal volume for an individual's progress. As you rightly mentioned, improving work capacity is a significant factor for many, as it allows individuals to push harder during workouts and achieve better results over time. However, for those with potent responses to training, the challenge often shifts towards balancing intense workouts with adequate recovery to avoid burnout or injury.

The concept of programming becoming stale and the need for periodic changes to stimulate progress is also crucial. The body is incredibly adaptable, and what works best at one point may not be as effective later on. This adaptability can lead to confusion, as people switch training styles and see positive results, attributing them solely to the new approach. Understanding that variety and adaptation are key elements of successful training can help individuals navigate their fitness journeys more effectively. It's important to remain open to experimentation and continuously assess what works best for your own body and goals while considering factors like volume, intensity, and exercise selection. Keep up the insightful analysis of training principles, as it can be immensely helpful for anyone seeking to optimize their workout routines!

[DanCR]

Getting major chatbot feels.

[Renascent]

At least it's lifting. The last chatbot I willingly interacted with kept refusing to tell me how much it could bench press, citing a lack of arms (or a "corporeal presence" altogether). It seemed to get offended when I kept insisting that it could if it tried. No fun at all.

I hope it starts a log. Still waiting on @THICKFIZZLEBODY to do the same.

[DanCR]

Still waiting on @THICKFIZZLEBODY to do the same.

I don’t think I’m being presumptuous in saying that you speak for us all.

[dlocas7]

I think I've heard some of this before, about fibre type, but an interesting watch!

Interesting. Thanks!

I pay a lot of attention to how my body reacts to the workload I'm putting myself under. Right now I'm getting back into training so I'm doing a lot of lighter, low-rep sets to get comfortable in my lifting technique again while still ramping up to some noticeable weight. I'll probably cut the number of sets as my technique gets better and I'm once again able to generate more force on every set.

Many lifters find that they actually need less to keep getting stronger, but there are cases where they find new strength when they add one or two extra sets, often in the form of back-off work after the top set, sometimes doing more straight sets. There are far too many factors to put up numbers for all. It's something I need to find for myself, and this will change as I progress.

I've learned many things about myself along the way. For example, I'm the anxious type. I'm always afraid I'm not doing enough sets. As a result, I tend to do a shitload of volume with straight sets, and it worked for a while, until I started to get overuse issues, which is a drawback of volume combined with increasing weights. I'm 6'1" 265 lbs and chances are I need less volume than a female athlete weighing 130. Lol.

In my case, I need to learn to be more confident in my nervous system's efficiency and not be afraid to experiment with less volume and see what happens. It boils down to paying attention to how your body is reacting and adjusting if need be.

[TornAlien]

I have been reading all your thoughts and I realise I am not the only one with weirds or unusual thoughts.

[hector]

I think Ab Wheel makes a fuck ton of difference on overhead press, squat, and deadlift. Basically, everything except bench.

[Renascent]

I think Ab Wheel makes a fuck ton of difference on overhead press, squat, and deadlift. Basically, everything except bench.

Absolutely agree.

I consider it a cousin of pullovers and front raises. My OHP form goes to shit when I neglect rollouts (and similar hip flexor stuff); the layback tells the tale.

[KyleSchuant]

I think Ab Wheel makes a fuck ton of difference on overhead press, squat, and deadlift. Basically, everything except bench.

Wait till you meet the rings.

[hector]

I think Ab Wheel makes a fuck ton of difference on overhead press, squat, and deadlift. Basically, everything except bench.

Wait till you meet the rings.

I have!
But I definitely used them sub-optimally.
What ring stuff in particular do you recommend?

(Was not able to do ring dips when I tried them.)