RE: Change of Programming (Damn you, RP!)

[Brackish]

Edit - Found the video!



So, I have been steadily chugging along with my programming. Sort of feel like I've finally gotten into a groove, minus the inevitable little hiccups where I overreach for too long and injure myself, or I miss a week of lifting due to sick kids. Awesome, right? Except, the other day, I made the mistake of hopping on the RP YouTube page because I was bored. I can't remember the exact video (I'll link it eventually, if I can find it.) but Dr. Mike was making the case to quit trying to do a bunch of different exercises for the same area of the body and just to a couple of them but for more sets. His reasoning was that muscles basically do the same things regardless of the specific exercise (e.g. squat vs. hack squat vs. leg press) and that the first set or even first two sets were just you finding your "groove". So, in his thinking, it's stupid to stop squatting/leg pressing/whatever after three sets to then go do leg extensions/something else for the same muscle as opposed to just doing 3 more sets of whatever exercise you're doing.

I can sort of see the merit in his thought process having felt similar things during some of my sessions. For example, first set of squats sucked, and so did second but then the third set was good. But then I quit squatting and went on to something else, because I was "done" squatting. I'm also attracted to the idea of being able to simplify my lifting routines and create blocks focusing on specific accessories. Right now I do ez-bar curls, hammer curls, and dumbbell curls. Instead, I could just do ez-bar curls 3 days a week for 3 months, and then swap to hammer curls for 3 months, etc.

Anyone have any thoughts?

[CheekiBreekiFitness]

I'm not sure he's saying that you should do only 1 exercise per session. He suggests doing around between 1-3 exercises per session. There are some good reasons why you want strictly more than 1 exercise per muscle group, at least for all the muscle groups that have several functions because they are bi-articular (for instance quads, hamstrings, biceps, triceps).

I think that this kind of video is targeted for "bros" who do the typical program of 1 muscle per session with 7 different exercises and 3 sets each.

[Brackish]

I'm not sure he's saying that you should do only 1 exercise per session. He suggests doing around between 1-3 exercises per session. There are some good reasons why you want strictly more than 1 exercise per muscle group, at least for all the muscle groups that have several functions because they are bi-articular (for instance quads, hamstrings, biceps, triceps).

I think that this kind of video is targeted for "bros" who do the typical program of 1 muscle per session with 7 different exercises and 3 sets each.

You're probably right, but the points he raised still make me wonder about my leg days, specifically. I'm doing squats or deadlifts, and then leg extensions/leg curls/RDLs as well. Why not just squat more?

[gtl]

I'm not sure he's saying that you should do only 1 exercise per session. He suggests doing around between 1-3 exercises per session. There are some good reasons why you want strictly more than 1 exercise per muscle group, at least for all the muscle groups that have several functions because they are bi-articular (for instance quads, hamstrings, biceps, triceps).
I think that this kind of video is targeted for "bros" who do the typical program of 1 muscle per session with 7 different exercises and 3 sets each.

You're probably right, but the points he raised still make me wonder about my leg days, specifically. I'm going squats or deadlifts, and then leg extensions/leg curls/RDLs as well. Why not just squat more?

I think in the case of squats, its ok to do leg ext/curls after squats. But what is probably unnecessary is doing hack squats/belt squats/goblet squats after barbell squats - just do more barbell squats.

[Hardartery]

I'm not sure he's saying that you should do only 1 exercise per session. He suggests doing around between 1-3 exercises per session. There are some good reasons why you want strictly more than 1 exercise per muscle group, at least for all the muscle groups that have several functions because they are bi-articular (for instance quads, hamstrings, biceps, triceps).

I think that this kind of video is targeted for "bros" who do the typical program of 1 muscle per session with 7 different exercises and 3 sets each.

Rennaissance Periodization? Israetel? Not sure what RP is short for... but if it's him then yes he would absolutely want you to do that. His training is Bodybuilding centred, and that makes perfect sense from that perspective. Most Bros are overdoing the exercise selection to their own detriment. That's why exercise rotation is a thing. You can only handle so much per session and after that you are just buring calories and actually intefering with growth and recovery. Here is where many would say "Unless you're on the sauce", but that's not true. You are actually more tolerant of it natty, while the recovery is greater on juice the actual workout is going to be way more severe and destructive, so in reality it means that you may gain the ability to do a dfferent exercise selection at the opposite end of the day or the next day and be recovered you still are better off limiting hoe many things you do in a single session.

[CheekiBreekiFitness]

I'm not sure he's saying that you should do only 1 exercise per session. He suggests doing around between 1-3 exercises per session. There are some good reasons why you want strictly more than 1 exercise per muscle group, at least for all the muscle groups that have several functions because they are bi-articular (for instance quads, hamstrings, biceps, triceps).
I think that this kind of video is targeted for "bros" who do the typical program of 1 muscle per session with 7 different exercises and 3 sets each.

You're probably right, but the points he raised still make me wonder about my leg days, specifically. I'm going squats or deadlifts, and then leg extensions/leg curls/RDLs as well. Why not just squat more?

I think in the case of squats, its ok to do leg ext/curls after squats. But what is probably unnecessary is doing hack squats/belt squats/goblet squats after barbell squats - just do more barbell squats.

Well it depends, if your barbell squat is all glutes adductors and lower back (a Rip squat), then doing hack squats will provide a very different stimulus.

And even if you squat upright, the hack squat is still unique because it enables you to lay back (can't do that on the squat otherwise you fall), which will stimulate the rectus femoris.

So it all depends.

[Brackish]

I'm not sure he's saying that you should do only 1 exercise per session. He suggests doing around between 1-3 exercises per session. There are some good reasons why you want strictly more than 1 exercise per muscle group, at least for all the muscle groups that have several functions because they are bi-articular (for instance quads, hamstrings, biceps, triceps).
I think that this kind of video is targeted for "bros" who do the typical program of 1 muscle per session with 7 different exercises and 3 sets each.

You're probably right, but the points he raised still make me wonder about my leg days, specifically. I'm going squats or deadlifts, and then leg extensions/leg curls/RDLs as well. Why not just squat more?

I think in the case of squats, its ok to do leg ext/curls after squats. But what is probably unnecessary is doing hack squats/belt squats/goblet squats after barbell squats - just do more barbell squats.

Well it depends, if your barbell squat is all glutes adductors and lower back (a Rip squat), then doing hack squats will provide a very different stimulus.

And even if you squat upright, the hack squat is still unique because it enables you to lay back (can't do that on the squat otherwise you fall), which will stimulate the rectus femoris.

So it all depends.

I can 100% guarantee that I'm not Rip squatting due to an almost complete absence of glutes. I can see what you're saying about hack squats, but wouldn't leg extensions do the same thing?

[DCR]

Caveat: haven’t yet had a chance to watch the video. That said, it may depend one’s goals. I can’t see why a bodybuilder would gaf about getting his or her groove, and wouldn’t be better served moving on to another movement. For strength, arguably different story.

[quikky]

I think it is hard to say whether just doing more of the same lift, vs more variations is better without knowing an individual's SFR to that particular lift and their goals. If you have a good SFR for a lift, and the stimulus is appropriate for your goals, then doing more can be more productive than doing variations. However, if the SFR is not great and/or the stimulus is not as appropriate, or complete for your goals, then variations are preferable.

For example, if your goal is 1RM squat strength, specificity is king, and doing more work with squats or very close variations can be the best choice. However, if you personally do not get the best SFR from squats, you might do better with some variations to either improve the SFR, or augment the weaker areas. On the other hand, if your goal is bodybuilding, it is unlikely that one lift will suffice, unless you are really built for it and get a good stimulus on all the involved muscles. I think it is more likely that for bodybuilding purposes, you will require more variation to produce the desired hypertrophy and aesthetics.

[dw]

Cheeki has a very good point about biarticular muscles and more generally the whole emphasizing different parts of the same muscle which is somehow I thing though I don't really understand it.

Also there is an issue of diminishing returns seemingly not apply as quickly to multiple exercises as to one.

For example I used to do 4 sets of leg press followed by 4 sets of leg extensions, twice per week. I'm pretty confident that 8 straight sets of either of those would have involved some junk volume.

What I'm not so sure about is how the scheme I described would have compared to say 6 sets leg press or 6 sets of leg ext. Does the freshness you get from changing between exercises allow more productive volume, or just more recoverable volume?

I've been mulling this lately because I currently to DB bench for 7 sets followed by machine flyes for 6 sets on my upper body days, and I'm considering dropping the flyes because although they don't seem to be impeding chest recovery, I'm kind of doubting they accomplish anything either. I sorta suspect DB bench is driving the apparent gains in both.

[Hardartery]

Cheeki has a very good point about biarticular muscles and more generally the whole emphasizing different parts of the same muscle which is somehow I thing though I don't really understand it.

Also there is an issue of diminishing returns seemingly not apply as quickly to multiple exercises as to one.

For example I used to do 4 sets of leg press followed by 4 sets of leg extensions, twice per week. I'm pretty confident that 8 straight sets of either of those would have involved some junk volume.

What I'm not so sure about is how the scheme I described would have compared to say 6 sets leg press or 6 sets of leg ext. Does the freshness you get from changing between exercises allow more productive volume, or just more recoverable volume?

I've been mulling this lately because I currently to DB bench for 7 sets followed by machine flyes for 6 sets on my upper body days, and I'm considering dropping the flyes because although they don't seem to be impeding chest recovery, I'm kind of doubting they accomplish anything either. I sorta suspect DB bench is driving the apparent gains in both.

I think it probably wouldn't matter. If you want to drive growth, it isn't that important how many sets and reps as long as you do enough damage to the muscle. If you drive that muscle to failure, really grind it into the ground and let it recover, you get hypertrophy. If you only provide minimal to medium stimulation because the intensity isn't there by the last set at least, it's all going to be junk volume. And DB Flyes with a straight but not locked out arm are significantly better than any of the machine versions both for strength and for size, IME.
Changing exercises doesn't really give you "Freshness" in an overall sense, you have depleted what you have depleted, it just allows you to stimulate different support muscles that you use less in other movements. Like @CheekiBreekiFitness pointed out, the Hack Squat hits very different things than the Back Squat in most people. It is going to trigger more hips and quads and more calves as well - depending - than Back Squats. Even Tom Platz used other exercises in addition to Squats to round out his legs, and he did an extremely quad dominant form of Squat.

[Hardartery]

RP guy on Table Talk right now.

[gtl]

I'm not sure he's saying that you should do only 1 exercise per session. He suggests doing around between 1-3 exercises per session. There are some good reasons why you want strictly more than 1 exercise per muscle group, at least for all the muscle groups that have several functions because they are bi-articular (for instance quads, hamstrings, biceps, triceps).
I think that this kind of video is targeted for "bros" who do the typical program of 1 muscle per session with 7 different exercises and 3 sets each.

You're probably right, but the points he raised still make me wonder about my leg days, specifically. I'm going squats or deadlifts, and then leg extensions/leg curls/RDLs as well. Why not just squat more?

I think in the case of squats, its ok to do leg ext/curls after squats. But what is probably unnecessary is doing hack squats/belt squats/goblet squats after barbell squats - just do more barbell squats.

Well it depends, if your barbell squat is all glutes adductors and lower back (a Rip squat), then doing hack squats will provide a very different stimulus.

And even if you squat upright, the hack squat is still unique because it enables you to lay back (can't do that on the squat otherwise you fall), which will stimulate the rectus femoris.

So it all depends.

yeah, I would agree with all of that

Could also be dependent on body structure.. long limbed and not well suited for squat mechanics might need the squat variants to accumulate enough volume.

[Brackish]

Caveat: haven’t yet had a chance to watch the video. That said, it may depend one’s goals. I can’t see why a bodybuilder would gaf about getting his or her groove, and wouldn’t be better served moving on to another movement. For strength, arguably different story.

Because then they know they are actually working the muscle they're trying to target with that specific exercise. I can BS my way through leg press sets and get them done without feeling it in my quads, or I can take the time to do them correctly and barely walk away from the machine when I'm done. I think that's why he's referring to "getting in a groove" being important. I believe I mentioned above that I've experienced this before. Where the first set of the exercise just doesn't feel right, and I'm not getting the feeling that I'm working the muscle(s) I'm attempting to work during that particular exercise. But once I sort things out for the second set, then I'm good to go.

[DCR]

Caveat: haven’t yet had a chance to watch the video. That said, it may depend one’s goals. I can’t see why a bodybuilder would gaf about getting his or her groove, and wouldn’t be better served moving on to another movement. For strength, arguably different story.

Because then they know they are actually working the muscle they're trying to target with that specific exercise. I can BS my way through leg press sets and get them done without feeling it in my quads, or I can take the time to do them correctly and barely walk away from the machine when I'm done. I think that's why he's referring to "getting in a groove" being important. I believe I mentioned above that I've experienced this before. Where the first set of the exercise just doesn't feel right, and I'm not getting the feeling that I'm working the muscle(s) I'm attempting to work during that particular exercise. But once I sort things out for the second set, then I'm good to go.

Perhaps we are using the term differently then. When I think of getting in the groove, I’m thinking from a strength perspective on a compound exercise - the phenomenon where somehow set four four moves better than set two. I’m not sure that I understand not feeling the muscle from jump, assuming that we’re talking worksets and there’s been a proper warm up. Different experiences, I guess.

[Hardartery]

Caveat: haven’t yet had a chance to watch the video. That said, it may depend one’s goals. I can’t see why a bodybuilder would gaf about getting his or her groove, and wouldn’t be better served moving on to another movement. For strength, arguably different story.

Because then they know they are actually working the muscle they're trying to target with that specific exercise. I can BS my way through leg press sets and get them done without feeling it in my quads, or I can take the time to do them correctly and barely walk away from the machine when I'm done. I think that's why he's referring to "getting in a groove" being important. I believe I mentioned above that I've experienced this before. Where the first set of the exercise just doesn't feel right, and I'm not getting the feeling that I'm working the muscle(s) I'm attempting to work during that particular exercise. But once I sort things out for the second set, then I'm good to go.

Perhaps we are using the term differently then. When I think of getting in the groove, I’m thinking from a strength perspective on a compound exercise - the phenomenon where somehow set four four moves better than set two. I’m not sure that I understand not feeling the muscle from jump, assuming that we’re talking worksets and there’s been a proper warm up. Different experiences, I guess.

The argument could be made that there is a groove for every goal. Platz had a very specific form and had a lot to say about how other people Squat and how they were doing it wrong in terms of leg hypertrophy. I would naturally have a power groove at this point, from having focussed on that, and the resulting lack of overall quad development because of that.