Lyle Mcdonald VS Mike Israetel Debate
Moderators: mgil, chromoly, Manveer
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 254
- Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2018 9:17 am
Re: Lyle Mcdonald VS Mike Israetel Debate
Its ok.
I still like to stress that this "These are the things everyone(I would hope) knows even before science and the science is just to make it "official"."
...may often seem that way in hindsight. But its not an evidence-based attitude and doesnt carve out the understanding that high-qualitv evidence of science ultimately decides what is likely to be true - not our common sense or subjective experiences that science is slow to validate a couple of years later.
Imo its important to view specific scientific evidence very critically - but to be even more critical about non-scientific low-qualitv evidence.
I still like to stress that this "These are the things everyone(I would hope) knows even before science and the science is just to make it "official"."
...may often seem that way in hindsight. But its not an evidence-based attitude and doesnt carve out the understanding that high-qualitv evidence of science ultimately decides what is likely to be true - not our common sense or subjective experiences that science is slow to validate a couple of years later.
Imo its important to view specific scientific evidence very critically - but to be even more critical about non-scientific low-qualitv evidence.
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 818
- Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:21 am
Re: Lyle Mcdonald VS Mike Israetel Debate
I agree. I am very pro science. That's why I can't help myself when I perceive science being misused and given a bad name. I don't always hit the mark. But it has been very irritating seeing people masquerading science around as something its not in the political and public sphere.Marenghi wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 2:48 pm Its ok.
I still like to stress that this "These are the things everyone(I would hope) knows even before science and the science is just to make it "official"."
...may often seem that way in hindsight. But its not an evidence-based attitude and doesnt carve out the understanding that high-qualitv evidence of science ultimately decides what is true - not our common sense or subjective experiences that science only validates a couple of years later.
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 254
- Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2018 9:17 am
Re: Lyle Mcdonald VS Mike Israetel Debate
Hmm, I havent made this experience here, have you?
Btw, which effects re volume-hypertrophy did you mean being with little/weak evidence? The high volume group in that Schoenfeld study Lyle and Mike debated? Id agree - couple of posts above I explicitly wrote about espcecially that part of the volume-effect curve remaining to be researched.
Btw, which effects re volume-hypertrophy did you mean being with little/weak evidence? The high volume group in that Schoenfeld study Lyle and Mike debated? Id agree - couple of posts above I explicitly wrote about espcecially that part of the volume-effect curve remaining to be researched.
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 818
- Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:21 am
Re: Lyle Mcdonald VS Mike Israetel Debate
Much less so here I suppose. There have been a few people I am not so sure about.....Marenghi wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 3:06 pm Hmm, I havent made this experience here, have you?
Btw, which effects re volume-hypertrophy did you mean being with little/weak evidence? The high volume group in that Schoenfeld study Lyle and Mike debated? Id agree - couple of posts above I explicitly wrote about espcecially that part of the volume-effect curve remaining to be researched.
When I consider these things, I try to look at what people are discussing. So in relation to your question about volume and why I assumed something about your post that wasn't directly in it. Is anyone talking about whether they should do 5 sets vs >10? Not that I see. Are people discussing 30+ sets? Not that I see. What I see is alot of heated debate in the 10-25 set range. Alot of it having to do with the trade off between higher volume and the lower intensity it requires. Or it's possible diminishing returns. Here is where things get sticky of course. I guess most people I see discussing these things (personally, on forums that I visit, and on social media) are all in the "medium" volume range as it is. So even if you set aside all other criticisms of the research, how do they even apply to the conversation most people are having? How is there strong evidence for 22 sets vs 18, as they are done by actual trainees? You of course did not say this. But I made the assumption that we are discussing evidence of topics that are actually debated.
- cgeorg
- Registered User
- Posts: 2732
- Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 10:33 am
- Location: Pittsburgh, Pa
- Age: 40
Re: Lyle Mcdonald VS Mike Israetel Debate
I haven't clicked through to see what time period 5 or 10 sets is across, but a lot of this came out of stevan wanting to stick with 3x5 forever rather than adding volume.
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 818
- Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:21 am
Re: Lyle Mcdonald VS Mike Israetel Debate
Across a week...... So even Stevans example is basically in the 10 category and no where near the <5......
That's what I was trying to say. Even what we consider to be low volume programming, is really "medium volume" when you put it in the context of "good" literature.
No one participating in discussions about working out (in any serious manner) is claiming that 1 light full body workout a week is optimal or as good as doing it 3x a week. I would be surprised if anyone serious has ever claimed that even before the invention of forums.(Obviously I can't be sure about that one). So I usually just assume that to not be within the realms of what we are discussing.
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 254
- Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2018 9:17 am
Re: Lyle Mcdonald VS Mike Israetel Debate
Oh, until recently there have been a few vocal researchers who clung to 1 set-training and tried to show the equivalency to multiple sets by some studies on beginners.
Now if you want to show that, youd do exactly the opposite compared to usual when designing the study: aim for non-significance, few trainees, high variance e.g. by heterogenity, take beginners. single set to failure - multiple sets not (by some weird rationale) and so on. And thats what they did.
Critically examining those studies, as always, helped to identify BS. And Metas.
Now if you want to show that, youd do exactly the opposite compared to usual when designing the study: aim for non-significance, few trainees, high variance e.g. by heterogenity, take beginners. single set to failure - multiple sets not (by some weird rationale) and so on. And thats what they did.
Critically examining those studies, as always, helped to identify BS. And Metas.
- TimK
- Much Mustache
- Posts: 2978
- Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:03 am
- Location: Grand Rapids, MI
- Age: 39
- Hanley
- Strength Nerd
- Posts: 8753
- Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:35 pm
- Age: 46
- TimK
- Much Mustache
- Posts: 2978
- Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:03 am
- Location: Grand Rapids, MI
- Age: 39
Re: Lyle Mcdonald VS Mike Israetel Debate
Also 4 sets of seated db press. And some LTE’s. And pressdowns.
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 818
- Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:21 am
Re: Lyle Mcdonald VS Mike Israetel Debate
I do not think you are advocating that this is something that most people can do and even benefit from. Are you?
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 818
- Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:21 am
Re: Lyle Mcdonald VS Mike Israetel Debate
You know what they say. Bicycling can increase a beginners squatMarenghi wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:28 pm Oh, until recently there have been a few vocal researchers who clung to 1 set-training and tried to show the equivalency to multiple sets by some studies on beginners.
Now if you want to show that, youd do exactly the opposite compared to usual when designing the study: aim for non-significance, few trainees, high variance e.g. by heterogenity, take beginners. single set to failure - multiple sets not (by some weird rationale) and so on. And thats what they did.
Critically examining those studies, as always, helped to identify BS. And Metas.
/s
- TimK
- Much Mustache
- Posts: 2978
- Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:03 am
- Location: Grand Rapids, MI
- Age: 39
Re: Lyle Mcdonald VS Mike Israetel Debate
- mettkeks
- Registered User
- Posts: 1600
- Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2018 1:28 pm
- Location: Siegen, Germany
- Age: 28
Re: Lyle Mcdonald VS Mike Israetel Debate
I'm LP-ing my bench with 8sx6r 3x/week (24 sets). Week 1 was 74% of 1RM, now I'm up to 87% in week 4.
Korte's 3x3 (24 sets of 6 at 68-74% of 105% training max per week) produced some of the best german powerlifters, especially benchers, like the first german 600lb raw bench press, first german raw 2100lb+ total and the first 3.87x BW single-ply bench (301kg at 77.5kg BW) in the IPF, which is the 13th best all-time equipped bench/BW ratio and the best equipped bench/BW in the IPF.
The best german drug-free RAW Masters 60+ bencher (Walter Kurda, 222.5kg at 125 BW) Started his cycles with 30 sets of 5 at 70% and progressed/tapered linearly, while also doing OHP and incline press as supplemental work.
I guess this approach is working well.
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 818
- Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:21 am
Re: Lyle Mcdonald VS Mike Israetel Debate
World class lifters are of not part of the discussion. They are self selected for their extreme capabilities.mettkeks wrote: ↑Thu Feb 21, 2019 3:31 pmI'm LP-ing my bench with 8sx6r 3x/week (24 sets). Week 1 was 74% of 1RM, now I'm up to 87% in week 4.
Korte's 3x3 (24 sets of 6 at 68-74% of 105% training max per week) produced some of the best german powerlifters, especially benchers, like the first german 600lb raw bench press, first german raw 2100lb+ total and the first 3.87x BW single-ply bench (301kg at 77.5kg BW) in the IPF, which is the 13th best all-time equipped bench/BW ratio and the best equipped bench/BW in the IPF.
The best german drug-free RAW Masters 60+ bencher (Walter Kurda, 222.5kg at 125 BW) Started his cycles with 30 sets of 5 at 70% and progressed/tapered linearly, while also doing OHP and incline press as supplemental work.
I guess this approach is working well.
I'm not trying to draw a box around what is acceptable discussion. Everything goes and everything is discussed at sometime or another.
I am commenting on what is generally discussed for almost everyone. 99/100 discussions that I see are within the range of "medium".
- Hanley
- Strength Nerd
- Posts: 8753
- Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:35 pm
- Age: 46
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 818
- Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:21 am
Re: Lyle Mcdonald VS Mike Israetel Debate
Maybe your right. And when they start I will definitely change my assumptions that I use when talking to people. I see that on this forum, I already have to as you have been a strong influence with your high volume/low fatigue experiments.
- Hanley
- Strength Nerd
- Posts: 8753
- Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:35 pm
- Age: 46
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 818
- Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:21 am
Re: Lyle Mcdonald VS Mike Israetel Debate
I didn't make a value judgement on it being good or bad. Just that it hasn't been the norm and now it's being discussed!
- Hanley
- Strength Nerd
- Posts: 8753
- Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:35 pm
- Age: 46