hey guys
Question: I am currently cutting but of course trying to maintain muscle. If I am doing a total body routine 3 times a week, should I be fatiguing all muscle groups? I really LOVE when I am sore the next day, but I am curious if I should be lifting like this on a cut?

hey guys
Question: I am currently cutting but of course trying to maintain muscle. If I am doing a total body routine 3 times a week, should I be fatiguing all muscle groups? I really LOVE when I am sore the next day, but I am curious if I should be lifting like this on a cut?

Why not. The only way to maintain/gain is to work it!!!!!

hey guys
Question: I am currently cutting but of course trying to maintain muscle. If I am doing a total body routine 3 times a week, should I be fatiguing all muscle groups? I really LOVE when I am sore the next day, but I am curious if I should be lifting like this on a cut?
Yes, yes you should.

To fatigue.... as in failure training or just working out hard?

I would avoid concentric failure while on a caloric deflift. I'm on a caloric deflict now and the DOMS can get pretty severe and its takes alot longer to recover, eventhou i always train through soreness.

Its not a bad idea to reduce the volume a little but you still need to be training hard.

IMO don't structure your training routine based on "cut" or "bulk." Always strive to build (or at the very least maintain) muscle, whether or not you do so by training to failure or by stopping short.

IMO don't structure your training routine based on "cut" or "bulk." Always strive to build (or at the very least maintain) muscle, whether or not you do so by training to failure or by stopping short.

Good advise.:tucool:

IMO don't structure your training routine based on "cut" or "bulk." Always strive to build (or at the very least maintain) muscle, whether or not you do so by training to failure or by stopping short.

I disagree slight changes can and should be made when on a caloric deflict. Shorter rest periods, reduced volume eg. less isolation excercises, split sessions etc all can be used when on a calorie deflict. Some people do lighten the load a little to offset burnout.

less isolation excercises, all can be used when on a calorie deflict.

I disagree with that. I believe more isolation movements should be used and less compound movements utilized while cutting.

I disagree slight changes can and should be made when on a caloric deflict. Shorter rest periods, reduced volume eg. less isolation excercises, split sessions etc all can be used when on a calorie deflict. Some people do lighten the load a little to offset burnout.
It depends Brad. If you want to add more aerobic activity then of course a shorter rest period could be effective, though I am not a fan of such styles personally. (I just flat out do not enjoy it.)

Of course shorter rest periods and reduced volume could be tools one uses, but it doesn't mean it's the most effective way. As with everything else, and as usual -- EXPERIMENT.

All I'm saying is that I prefer weightlifting to be used to build and maintain muscle. You're treading into the familiar "I'm cutting so time to do less weight and more reps" type of mindset. That whole theory just doesn't fly with me personally. I go to the weight room to build muscle. I use diet (and cardio, to a small degree!) to burn fat.

Of course, to each his own.

The reason i would decrease rest intervals is because it increases nutrient uptake. For instance, i usually take 2min intervals during normal hypertrophy training but right now i have reduced that to 60min and 90min. I'm just refering to slight changes nothing major.

I totally agree that weight training shouldn't be used for aerobic reasons.

The reason i would decrease rest intervals is because it increases nutrient uptake.
Please elaborate.

Don't know all the science but that's what waterbury and CT stated on t-nation and CT also mentions it in his black book. I assume one reason is due to increase blood flow. I also seen Chris sugart mention it.

Interesting, I've never heard that before. Not sure I fully understand why that works.

I as a general rule agree with 1FastGTX and just do the same thing regardless as to whether I'm bulking or cutting. That being said, I have had great results using 8x8's on the last couple of months of this cut as I get both a great pump and a good aerobic workout (8 sets of 8 with 15-30 second rest periods). What I did before and will alternate back to on my next bulk is 5 sets of decreasing reps (something like 12/10/8/8/6) adjusting weight up as needed. For that I do 1 minute rest periods. I've personally never found very long rest periods to have a positive effect on my size gains, althought they seemed to be good for strength.

Don't know all the science but that's what waterbury and CT stated on t-nation and CT also mentions it in his black book. I assume one reason is due to increase blood flow. I also seen Chris sugart mention it.
:rolleyes:

Your ability to recover depends on your diet/how much you eat...If you are bulking and traning as hard and as often as you can it would not work long term to continue with the exact same traning when cutting...Your food supports your training.

Of course it depends on your training...if you are using a split or full body program. If you are training to failure...How often you train.
But it´s possible to design a program for bulking and different program for cutting. And I believe that is the best, but not the only, way to do it.

:rolleyes:


Very subtle.:rolleyes: I assume no one agrees with my isolation theory. What's new?

The reason i would decrease rest intervals is because it increases nutrient uptake.
I believe this is what we're pondering, Michael. I've never heard this one. If this is true, 8x8s work for me for a good reason - I never use rest intervals of more than 30 seconds when performing 8x8 sets; if it's true, my muscles must be getting some mad nutrient delivery... but I've never heard of any correlation between rest period length and nutrient delivery.

Very subtle.:rolleyes: I assume no one agrees with my isolation theory. What's new?
Actually, I love isolation, but for a more specific reason than simple hypertrophy. One of my favorite training variations involves isolation movements before compound exercises. E.g., I'll do seated leg lifts to isolate quads before doing leg press or squats. My theory being that this forces the body to recruit more stabilizer muscles surrounding the major groups being worked during the post-isolation compound exercise. Lee Priest mentioned this in an interview I once read, decided I'd try it, I enjoyed it, and still use this technique today.

-R

:rolleyes:

What are you implying kino? I have the back book of training and i can tell you its a great book and yes i trust what waterbury and CT say, there professional coaches.

I'm more interested in practical applications instead of theory and semantics. These guys have train 1000's collectively.

Very subtle.:rolleyes: I assume no one agrees with my isolation theory. What's new?
Michael,
I agree with doing whatever produces results. I don't believe that anybody can say that there is one way that somebody should train under a given set of circumstances. If that was ever to be stated, somebody would surely come along in short time and prove the statement to be false. Indivisual make ups are different, which means that there are too many variables to have black or white guidelines.
Do something for 4-6 weeks, check your results, and go from there. That's probably as true a statement as you'll ever find.

What are you implying kino? I have the back book of training and i can tell you its a great book and yes i trust what waterbury and CT say, there professional coaches.

I'm more interested in practical applications instead of theory and semantics. These guys have train 1000's collectively.
I'm implying that you would be better off to make a statement like "Waterbury mentions in the Black Book of Training........" Instead of trying to throw out some vast amount of knowledge, playing it off as something you know and understand as fact.
If you don't understand something, just say so up front. It'd probably end alot of the bickering I see in threads such as this.

IMO don't structure your training routine based on "cut" or "bulk." Always strive to build (or at the very least maintain) muscle, whether or not you do so by training to failure or by stopping short.

I agree, with the one caveat that many/most people can handle a higher volume on a bulk without overtaining than on a cut if they choose to train that way. The intensity should be the same for both. High.

Don't know all the science but that's what waterbury and CT stated on t-nation and CT also mentions it in his black book. I assume one reason is due to increase blood flow. I also seen Chris sugart mention it.

Hmm. I don't remember them saying this. You could always ask them about it. I will attest that their training programs are excellent, and many including myself, have had great results. rRegardless, time between sets is just one more variable to be manipulated in a training program to get the results you want, irrespective of increased nutrient uptake.

Michael,
I agree with doing whatever produces results. I don't believe that anybody can say that there is one way that somebody should train under a given set of circumstances. If that was ever to be stated, somebody would surely come along in short time and prove the statement to be false. Indivisual make ups are different, which means that there are too many variables to have black or white guidelines.
Do something for 4-6 weeks, check your results, and go from there. That's probably as true a statement as you'll ever find.



Sounds about right to me.:tucool:

What are you implying kino? I have the back book of training and i can tell you its a great book and yes i trust what waterbury and CT say, there professional coaches.

I'm more interested in practical applications instead of theory and semantics. These guys have train 1000's collectively.

I'm interested in both. Quite separately from the efficacy of their programs, I'd be interested to know why this is if it's true.

I'm implying that you would be better off to make a statement like "Waterbury mentions in the Black Book of Training........" Instead of trying to throw out some vast amount of knowledge, playing it off as something you know and understand as fact.
If you don't understand something, just say so up front. It'd probably end alot of the bickering I see in threads such as this.

Your right, i tend to get lazy in my posts, my bad.

Hmm. I don't remember them saying this. You could always ask them about it. I will attest that their training programs are excellent, and many including myself, have had great results. rRegardless, time between sets is just one more variable to be manipulated in a training program to get the results you want, irrespective of increased nutrient uptake.

Its in CT's black book he outlined optimal rest intervals for different fiber makups and the different ranges offer different advantages.

eg. Fast Twitch Domiant

Hypertrophy - 90sec intervals

Effect of RI on physical recovery:
Incomplete: accumulation of muscle fatigue

Effect of RI on neural recovery:
Incomplete: Some residual CNS fatigue

Effect of RI on hormonal response:
Important increase in growth horomone

Overall effect:
Very effective a stimulating sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, increasing fat loss and good to increase nutrient uptake by muscles.

Hopefully that's makes up for my previous laziness:)

Its in CT's black book he outlined optimal rest intervals for different fiber makups and the different ranges offer different advantages.

eg. Fast Twitch Domiant

Hypertrophy - 90sec intervals

Effect of RI on physical recovery:
Incomplete: accumulation of muscle fatigue

Effect of RI on neural recovery:
Incomplete: Some residual CNS fatigue

Effect of RI on hormonal response:
Important increase in growth horomone

Overall effect:
Very effective a stimulating sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, increasing fat loss and good to increase nutrient uptake by muscles.

Hopefully that's makes up for my previous laziness:)

Interesting. Doesn't really explain why it's preferable to increase nutrient uptake over other traiing methods. But my interest is sparked. I will ask him about it.

Interesting. Doesn't really explain why it's preferable to increase nutrient uptake over other traiing methods. But my interest is sparked. I will ask him about it.

The only reason i'm doing it is because i'm on a calorie deflict and on the Velocity Diet, its wasn't no one's idea but my own. I figured due to the lack of food in my diet i would take steps to take more advantage of what i am getting in my diet.

Actually, I love isolation, but for a more specific reason than simple hypertrophy. One of my favorite training variations involves isolation movements before compound exercises. E.g., I'll do seated leg lifts to isolate quads before doing leg press or squats. My theory being that this forces the body to recruit more stabilizer muscles surrounding the major groups being worked during the post-isolation compound exercise. Lee Priest mentioned this in an interview I once read, decided I'd try it, I enjoyed it, and still use this technique today.

Almost everyone always insists -- compounds first, isolation second. I used to also...

This was a technique Layne Norton mentioned in one his articles on BB.com I read a month or so ago. I have since been applying it to shoulder days to fatigue the shoulder before shoulder presses so my triceps don't fail before my shoulders do. It's been working very well.

Just thought I'd throw it out there. :tucool:

As for the idea of training to failure on a cut...

I always have done so, at least on sets 2 and 3. However, I am considering stopping 1 rep short of failure on my next cut, just to see how it goes. I've read both sides of the debate about failure on a calorie defecit and I'm not sure which side of the fence I'm on, just yet.

Either way, I can assure you that you can achieve great results with either method. One just may offer slightly better results. Who knows?

Almost everyone always insists -- compounds first, isolation second. I used to also...

This was a technique Layne Norton mentioned in one his articles on BB.com I read a month or so ago. I have since been applying it to shoulder days to fatigue the shoulder before shoulder presses so my triceps don't fail before my shoulders do. It's been working very well.

Just thought I'd throw it out there. :tucool:

Yes, isolation can be effective as a pre-exhaustion technique. Otherwise, I agree with the concensus that it should be done after compound.

It depends on what you want to do..And it also depends on genetics and your level of fitness.

Most programs based on training to failure are for people that prefer to only train one or two days/week. The idéa is that the muscle must get plenty of time to recover before you train it again. It´s probably possible to train more often with a split. But still I think this is the basic idéa.

High frequenzy/high volume training is for people that want to spend more time in the gym and train often. You can use a split and train 5-6 days/week. People that prefer this believe that they will get more progress. That the muscles will grow faster. And I think even if the other training(less often and to failure) is more efficent higher volume split training and not to failure will give better results long term.

But that is of course not true for everyone. I think the best option is to try both styles and monitor your progress. I prefer to train more often and not to failure. But others might get better results and prefer the other style. Or prefer it because they want the time spent on training to be as efficent as possible.

The point is...You must believe in what you do. Get progress and have fun. Then it´s the right training for you.

Either way, I can assure you that you can achieve great results with either method. One just may offer slightly better results. Who knows?

That's the key. Doing anything (as long as you aren't CLEARLY hurting yourself) is better than a bag of Chips and Law and Order:Criminal Intent.

Sorry, had to stick that one in there due to your avatar.

:)

That's the key. Doing anything (as long as you aren't CLEARLY hurting yourself) is better than a bag of Chips and Law and Order:Criminal Intent.

I disagree. There is nothing better in this world than Law & Order: Criminal Intent (episodes without Goren excluded).

http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/abstract/01400.2005v1?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=1&title=DIFFERENTIAL+EFFECTS+OF+STRENGTH+TRAINING+LE ADING+TO+FAILURE+VERSUS+NOT+TO+FAILU&andorexacttitle=and&andorexacttitleabs=and&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid=1138212527054_4707&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&journalcode=jap
DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS OF STRENGTH TRAINING LEADING TO FAILURE VERSUS NOT TO FAILURE ON HORMONAL RESPONSES, STRENGTH AND MUSCLE POWER GAINS

Mikel Izquierdo1*, Javier Ibanez1, Juan Jose Gonzalez-Badillo2, Keijo Hakkinen3, Nicholas A. Ratamess4, William J. Kraemer5, Duncan N. French6, Jesus Eslava1, Aritz Altadill1, Xabier Asiain1, and Esteban M. Gorostiaga
The purpose of this study was to examine the efficacy of 11 weeks of resistance training to failure vs. non-failure, followed by an identical 5- week peaking period of maximal strength and power training for both groups as well as to examine the underlying physiological changes in basal circulating anabolic/catabolic hormones. Forty-two physically-active men were matched and then randomly assigned to either a training to failure (RF; n=14), non-failure (NRF; n=15) or control groups (C;n=13). Muscular and power testing and blood draws to determine basal hormonal concentrations were conducted before the initiation of training (T0), after 6 wk of training (T1), after 11 wk of training (T2), and after 16 wk of training (T3). Both RF and NRF resulted in similar gains in 1RM bench press (23% and 23%) and parallel squat (22% and 23%), muscle power output of the arm (27% and 28%) and leg extensor muscles (26% and 29%) and maximal number of repetitions performed during parallel squat (66% and 69%). RF group experienced larger gains in the maximal number of repetitions performed during the bench press The peaking phase (T2 to T3) followed after NRF resulted in larger gains in muscle power output of the lower extremities, whereas after RF resulted in larger gains in the maximal number of repetitions performed during the bench press. Strength training leading to RF resulted in reductions in resting concentrations of IGF-1 and elevations in IGFBP-3, whereas NRF resulted in reduced resting cortisol concentrations and an elevation in resting serum total testosterone concentration. This investigation demonstrated a potential beneficial stimulus of NRF for improving strength and power, especially during the subsequent peaking training period, whereas performing sets to failure resulted in greater gains in local muscular endurance. Elevation in IGFBP-3 following resistance training may have been compensatory to accommodate the reduction in IGF-1 in order to preserve IGF availability.

At least this kind of thing is being studied ;)

Oh and it will always be Original Law and Order with Jill Hennessy and nacho chips and el' paso salsa (chunky hot or picante) for me.