Hey All! - Alpha Progression App: alphaprogression.com/HOUSEOFHYPERTROPHY + Click Read More for further discussion on "periodization" Timestamps: 0:00 Intro 1:37 Part I: More Muscle Growth? 3:28 Part II: More Strength Gains? 6:47 Part III: Returning to Muscle Growth 12:17 Part IV: Summary Other Periodization Styles for Hypertrophy or Strength: - Block, reverse linear, and mixed session are some other styles of periodization. Unfortunately, these are a lot less studied currently so not strong conclusions can be made about their effectiveness for strength or size. - We could even "periodize" our training through other ways. For example, across a training block, you may add more sets across weeks. Technically, a recent study somewhat explored this, we dissected it in a previous video: ruclips.net/video/yrtsa3swsAo/видео.html - It did lead to more hypertrophy and strength! but there are crucial considerations as detailed in the video. For example, the groups that added sets across weeks also ended up performing a higher number of average sets overall, so this could explain the findings. - You could also "periodize" by varying the exercises you perform across sessions or weeks. However, we have research suggesting this probably just produces similar hypertrophy to training with the same exercises every week, these ideas were touched on in this video: ruclips.net/video/H3IN8yUHTeY/видео.html Examining the Term “Periodization” More: Periodization suggests dividing your training into "periods", so undulating approaches may not strictly fit this. Instead, some may say undulating is just a form of "programming" and not "periodization" Some may define periodization as making long-term changes in volume (sets x reps) and intensity. The linear approach does this (increases intensity and decreases volume over time), but the undulating approach may not as we're performing the same sessions every week. Due to this, some might suggest undulating models are just a form of "programming". However, it is actually possible for you to combine linear and undulating models. You do this by varying the rep ranges you perform in a week, but still decreasing the number of reps across weeks. For example, week 1 you may perform 12 reps on Monday, 10 reps on Wednesday, and 8 reps on Friday, in week 2 you perform 10 reps on Monday, 8 reps on Wednesday, and 6 reps on Friday, and so on). Fewer studies have used this approach, the large majority just involve comparing the linear and undulating approaches as described in the video. Finally, some might say periodization can only really be applied over 6 or more months, and since most studies are 12 weeks or less, they fail to provide a true insight into periodization and are instead just providing insight into shorter-term "programming" strategies. So overall, it's clear that there's no single way to think about periodization.
Such a fascinating topic! I combined both linear and undulating periodization for training as well. It helps me gain a few pounds of lean muscles in 3 months. I will keep tracking the results in the next few months to see if it is really beneficial for both muscles and strength gain in long term.
Many paths can lead you to the same destination, and the literature on hypertrophy has certainly made this clear. Though I would still argue there are important things worth keeping in mind (exercise selection, set numbers, rest intervals, etc. ) - things covered in other videos.
agree with you, after all, im doing pushups, pull up, dips , body row, and bodyweight squats , and some arm movements with 5 kg each hand only..do daily this sets and im on my best body at 36 years without even suplements.. just do some moves and reach failure sometimes.. and keep constant
@@LuizGustavo-tf7qrmost supplements are just snake oil. That’s why I take 40 different ones a day; that way I can make sure I get the one that’s actually beneficial. I’m also 36 and at peak sexiest for my lifespan.
fr as long as we can manage sleep, nutrition, and stress levels, theres no need to overthink the minor details of training (unless you're a bodybuilder lol)
To any beginners/people that just started lifting. Hypertrophy, sets, reps, splits, nutrition and fitness in general are one of the biggest rabbitholes to fall into. If you are just starting out, stick with exercises you like doing and structure your workouts how they suit your lifestyle, not the other way around. Don’t do the same mistake i did when i first started Lifting, by trying to do the best, most effective workouts my body could take. I stopped enjoying lifting and quit after a few months. We’re all in it for the long run. And consistency is key. Don’t forget to have fun. And dont confuse yourself by trying to optimize everything from the getgo. Enjoy the ride.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:00 🏋️♂️ *Introduction to Periodization* - Periodization is a key component for accelerating gains and minimizing plateaus in physique and strength development. - Linear and daily undulating periodization are common approaches, involving manipulation of training variables over time. - Linear periodization decreases volume and increases intensity over weeks, while daily undulating periodization varies the number of reps each session. 01:37 📊 *Meta-analysis on Muscle Growth* - A 2022 meta-analysis found no significant difference in muscle growth between periodized and non-periodized training. - The analysis included both trained and untrained subjects. - Muscle growth did not significantly differ between linear and undulating periodization models. 03:32 💪 *Effects of Periodization on Strength Gains* - Periodization led to greater one-repetition maximum (1RM) strength gains compared to non-periodized training. - Limitations exist in the studies, and the potential influence of lower reps and heavier loads on strength gains is discussed. - Undulating periodization may be more effective for increasing 1RM strength, especially in trained individuals. 06:47 🤔 *Long-term Considerations and Muscle Hypertrophy* - Studies with suboptimal periodization for muscle building may influence results, indicating the need for further research. - Limited evidence suggests that varying rep ranges, especially avoiding very low reps, could be beneficial for long-term muscle growth. - Individual differences in muscle response to different rep ranges emphasize the potential benefits of varying rep ranges. 08:51 📚 *Studies on Rep Range Variation* - Studies, such as the Kramer study over 9 months, indicate that varying rep ranges may lead to greater fat-free mass and indirect muscle growth. - Ascending pyramid training with a wider rep range showed superior muscle mass gains in older untrained women. - Individual differences in response to specific rep ranges suggest the importance of flexibility in rep range selection. 10:15 🏋️♀️ *Practical Recommendations for Rep Range Variation* - Varying rep ranges may optimize muscle growth by addressing potential individual differences in response. - The evidence is not strong enough to mandate rep range variation, and personal preference in training style remains valid. - Suggestions include linear, undulating, pyramid approaches, or different exercises for the same muscle with varying rep ranges. 13:18 🤯 *Summary and Considerations* - Periodized programs show similar muscle growth compared to non-periodized programs, and hypertrophy does not significantly differ between linear and undulating periodization. - Strength gains are generally greater with periodization, especially undulating periodization in trained individuals. - Personalized considerations for rep range variation should be based on individual responses, and there is no one-size-fits-all approach. Made with HARPA AI
What about periadization vs none in the context of accumulated fatigue and stress - week 1: 50% of max, week 2: 75%, week 3-8: 90-100% then repeat vs always do 90-100%
@@freezerain Bodybuilding is gentics ... Train a Muscle with Volume 10-20 Sets a week near to failure big Lifts and isolation...then sleep eat repeat thats all you need Some day high Reps some Low you dont need 21.,5% of your Max blablabla bullshit
For that reason in my training program is undulating in every session. Example: bench press 6-8 tô failure, next, super set Peck deck 15 reps 30seconds rest. After The last set, i take a 3 mins rest and Go to incline bechpress 8-12 tô failure. Every session, the First exercice is with more load and less rep, and this one is my benchmarking to see If i progressing week by week. Seeing great results with this. In 4 weeks my bench went from 20kgs in each side to 35kgs.
for me I feel periodization helps me get some improvements when I stuck, unable to increase more weight but when add more sets or add more reps with the same weight (or even more weight with less reps) later on I can lift heavier in the subsequent weeks. other than that I feel it helps me not get too boring, too.
In general periodization is definitely a good tool for long term sustainability especially for people who consider themselves strength athletes because no matter what genetic freak someone is They can’t handle the weight that’s heavy for them for too long
I like using daily periodization. It helps me to work on strength, while also using my final set to do 12+ reps, and focus on the stretch and mind-muscle connection.
I have so many question on what you just said, but I ll keep them to myself. I believe you do not understand that strength and hypertrophy cannot be achieved on trained individuals on the same training session as efficiently as separating the 2. It is one or the other or none. some reasons are:1. your stored glucose levels that will be turned into ATP to fuel your mostly anaerobic weight lifting has a limit until it constitutes overtraining 2. How you reach mind muscle when you have exausted your motor unit on first or second set?
@aethaerial8212 What you are saying isn't entirely factual. Under the right conditions, the intermediate and advanced lifter could achieve both hypertrophy and strength gains just as effectively as separating those styles of training. Lastly, you can reach MTM connection on every set you perform. I really don't understand why you're confused with his comment. Not everyone trains the same way. And even if someone trains with an objectively worse approach than other styles, that approach can still be better performed by them than the other. You have to understand even with general research data, most lifters respond differently to different styles of training methodology. There's no, on size fits all, to training. There's many factors we can't even account for, from the human anatomy and its vast array of traits and differences. If you're going to use absolutism, atleast provide concrete data supporting it. And by concrete, I mean we shouldn't see outliers. The problem is even with the studies we have access to now there is still so much that we haven't discovered and data that is constantly being revised.
It all works, just use them all at some point, it adds variety. Over analyzing over 10% differences not worth the time and energy, doing what suits you at any given time is more productive.
Undulating splits is by far the best. The downside to bodybuilding is how personalized it needs to be. There about 3 dozen things you need to be doing all at once for it to work.
Thank you HoH for another interesting video - I always look forward to the next video. Since watching the channel I've also been reading various sports science papers, including those you kindly give links to. Sadly I have to say that based on the papers I've read over the past 18 months I've concluded that sports science research is surprisingly poor. It seems that various issues, that should never happen in a research paper, are very common - badly designed "experiments", ill-defined or even undefined concepts, data recording & data analysis not being done blind - thus introducing the possibility of bias & deliberate manipulation of the data and results, inappropriate statistical analysis etc., etc. These issues often occurring in papers from very well known names. Therefore the HoH is absolutely necessary to point out these shortcomings & separate the wheat from the chaff. 👍
I think it depends on which studies we're talking about. Over time, my opinon is that the general design of most resistance training papers is improving, such as using within subject designs to assess hypertrophy (which can increase statistical power and reduce confounders like nutrition). These can also shed light on to individual differences (as shown by a paper by Schoenfeld in this video on some people growing better with either 6-10 or 20-30 reps). Some papers are starting to ditch null hypothesis testing, which I think might be quite a good thing due to the over reliance on p-values and the misinterpretaion. Even if a paper does report them, we're also seeing confidence intervals and effect sizes also being presented which are always super useful. Moreover, as we accumulate more papers on a given topic, meta-analyses become possible and can be a solid overview, such as the meta-analysis in this video on periodization for strength and size :)
Another vid well done friend. Great info. My legs have always responded to 20 rep squats. Other body parts respond to 8-12 reps (arms). Change is good.
Periodization definitely works, but i dont subscribe to it for two key reasons: 1- it typically requires an overtraining period, followed by a deload. Id rather train below the threshold of overtraining, and maintain it for much longer. 2- it assumes linear progess. We aren't machines. We often experience things outside the gym that affect our performance. It also assumes you are in perfect health every day. I prefer to train intuitively, avoiding things that cause pain, pushing hard when im fresh, pulling back when i feel "off". Just my take
Back in high school, this is the method my weights coach implemented for our weights program. We normally started our "working sets" around 65%-75%, and increased the load while decreasing the reps per set. All I'll say is I was so much stronger using that method as opposed to a standard method of weightlifting. I managed to reach 300lb bench in high school as a 220 pound male. 🤷♂️
I typically have two to three exercises per muscle group. For example, chest = incline dumbells, incline flys, flat bench. Each chest workout the reps flip. workout one: heavy incline dumbells, medium weight/rep flys, higher rep bench. Workout two = heavy bench, medium flys, higher rep incline dumbells. I hit each muscle twice a week so I find in each week im doing a low rep bench and a higher rep bench and a low rep incline dumbells and a higher rep incline dumbells. But I am not ultra rigid either. Sometimes the thought of doing a heavy bench press is just beyond me some days. I just have the mindset that as long as the chest is targetted heavy with something, any one of the three exercises, then it will be fine until the next workout a few days later. And it is.
It has become abundantly clear that one size does not fit all, therefore an individual must experiment with 1. What's effective for them, and 2. What their goals are. Clearly a budding powerlifter will not be spending the majority of their time in the 8-12 rep range, however to completely ignore it would be short sighted.
Your sentiment is right, but the example isn't. Most powerlifters including newbs mostly train in the hypertrophic rep ranges. The big three, bench, squat, and deadlift will be trained in the power specific range of 1-5 rep sets, but the assistance work will typically be in the 6+ rep ranges eg: one might perform a 3×3 in the bench, but then they'll do incline fry-presses, dips, over head presses and tricep presses in the 6-12 rep ranges. Almost no one trains every lift in the power specific rep range.
@@rustyshackleford735 You raise a fair point. I could have worded it better, but I also considered rest between sets. Including that, I might spend 65% of my workout on the primary lift for the day. Assistance work goes relatively quickly.
Are there any studies of inverted pyramids? That is, starting heavy and then lowering the set weight, because naturally you can lift a lot more if a small warm set is done before.
Well, idk chainging volume overtime just seems like too much of a hassle, especially if you wanna hit your muscles as equally as possible (via load). But i do believe in periodizing rep ranges because well when we're more bulky, we tend to progress a little easier in terms of strength but definently harder in terms of reps, but when i'm leaner, harder with weight but easier to progress with reps, and i think that is because when i'm bulky i tend to put my stress on my cardiovascular system so it makes sense that i tend to get tired faster, but when i'm leaner it's less stress so i can push more reps and potentially get closer to failure via higher rep ranges.
Can you make a video where you collect all the best undisputed facts about muscle gains that we know of so far. Not the ones that are open for discussion, but the facts that we know are cemented.
I have a question i couldn't find an answer to on Google. If there is a difference between gains made by training for example my arms only vs training full body for a long period. I tried searching but all google shows me is full body vs split but I'm not interested in split training because it's training all muscles in a whole week but each muscle group once a day, that's not what interesting to me I meant if arms trained alone would show more gains than training my arms while other muscles like my quads competing for proteins and natural anabolic hormones
I always thought periodization was a term more geared towards advanced trainers. Personally, I find that maintaining non-periodized approach is sufficient for me.
Nah, it’s used more in advanced athletes. But you can even use it to train endurance for a block then speed for another or strength then hypertrophy…etc etc. It’s a general term used in sports training to focus on something specific by cycling through variables for periods of time. I.e. I use it for 2-3 month blocks to focus on running vs lower body strength (leg day once a week instead of 2x, run 4x week instead of 2x)
@@comingverysoon I disagree, it’s lifestyle based. I hunt in the fall - backcountry type hunting where it’s literally rucking many miles in then hiking with a day pack after making camp. I need to be strong and have stamina to do that. 3 months before I prioritize stamina (hence my comments on running). I’m 55 so have to lift yr round to maintain strength. This not new advanced technology, but if u just lift to look kinda good, then meh, but if u actually have some practical application to train, then it’s really useful regardless of level
Individual differences on rep ranges should (at least partially) be because every person has different lactate threshold so their muscles could fatigue earlier. A study comparing rep ranges between two groups: *20 long distance runners, 20 sprinters, with rep ranges 6-12 reps. *The same amount for each but with rep ranges from 30-35. *The same groups but the rep ranges are beyond optimal for building muscle, with rep ranges over 50. Would they find differences between responses from long and short distance runners?, long distance runners would see better hypertrophy response with more rep ranges?, sprinters would see better results with less rep ranges?
I'd love to see that too. I am very reliant on cardio anyway because I ride by bike to the gym and need to be warmed up very well because otherwise my muscles harden and I get tendinopathy. I'd just love to know how much I am losing, if I am at all.
@@AllisterCaine I have the answer now, we don't need "cardio" or "aerobic" (which are fitness buzzwords) because both of those systems are significantly stimulated with High Intensity Training. 1. We get the most cardiovascular benefits when we lift weights, we engage more muscle motor units, therefore, we pump more oxygen-rich [and more] blood (this is cardiac output), that's the reason why we don't gasp that much while lifting, but it's recommended to breathe faster (through mouth) as the set gets more intense. 2. The aerobic metabolism works in equivalent to and often greater than low-intensity locomotive activities maximum when at rest after a High Intensity Training. As you recover, the stacked up lactic acid gets converted into pyruvate again. Pyruvate is a chemical form that can be transported into mitochondrion, which is then metabolized aerobically. 3. When you jog, you will only improve in jogging, there's no general endurance, skills are very specific. Try jogging on a treadmill for 3 months, then try doing it on land, you'd notice that you've not adapted to it. Check the book "body by science".
Since the body has 3 energy systems , should we not focus on tut instead of rep range? Coz tempo can change reps in sets, instead I try keep sets between 15 and 90 seconds as over 2 mins you enter oxidative energy system and therefore better o2 turn over rather than stored glucose for energy which means endurance training over hypertrophy training. Just a thought
Hey. Check the hypertrophy study from Enes, De Souza on 52 sets per week per muscle group as the most hypertrophy building. Apparently, new studies point towards going one rep shy from Rhabdo.
I usually do 2 sets to failure but I might try to do one low one high and see if I see any better progress I have been at a Plato on preacher curl for some time 3 weeks I'll try this and see if it change anything I will continue to write lifts down Reps and weight (energy levels too)
@@joezyadeh4805 i haven't been doing this one for more than 1-2 months I usually run with exercises for 3-4 months depending It's a preacher curl machine I hit 50 kgs for 6 reps and been a little stuck since So I'll try to put the weight down and see if I can progress with 8-12 rep range instead of 6-10 as I been doing
How do they measure hypertrophy ? Sets of 4-5 reps build less size than sets of 10-12 reps everyone can verify that but it is mostly because of water/glycogen. It seems that when they measure hypertrophy they cannot tell the difference between contractile components and non-contractile components. So higher reps will always appear to be superior while they are not. There was also a study with a few sets of 2-4 reps leading to some size gains but when another group added a set with 50% of 1RM to failure they had nearly 2x more size gains. Once again that is not “real size”.
Exactly! The higher reps work more on the sarcoplasmic, and the lower reps hit the myofibrils. So yes the question is - What exactly are they measuring? We can all do high reps every day for a muscle group, and those muscles will appear bigger, but that's stored glycogen and not actual myofibril growth. Whereas we can train heavy low reps and not see any immediate size. That's why I do a few sets of lower reps "2-5" followed by a few sets of higher reps "10-20" each workout, that way I get the best of both worlds in terms of strength and size 👍
@@joojotinI know exactly what he is saying, he was asking how they measured hypertrophy, he said that higher reps cause more glycogen/water to be stored, and that it isn't actual myofibril growth. I gave him a reply saying what reps i use in my training. Where's the problem? I think you're getting confused.
Based on the current evidence, I'd argue it's likely both higher reps and lower reps do a comparable job at promoting contractile and non contractile increases. Why do I speculate this? After all, some people say given lower reps increase strength more (measured by one rep max on a dynamic exercise like the bench press or squat) this is proof they produce greater contractile increases. However, I don't think this is a good argument whatsoever. Consistently training with lower reps on an exercise will more effectively produce skill and neural adaptations that help your dynamic one-rep max strength, and I think this is the primary reason behind more strength gains with lower reps. As opposed to looking at dynamic one-rep max strength tests, looking at isometric strength tests may be a bit better (since there's a lower skill componenet). What happens when we compare isometric strength gains between training with lower and higher reps? well, it seems they end up producing very comparable increases: journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/fulltext/2017/12000/strength_and_hypertrophy_adaptations_between_low_.31.aspx This would lead me to speculate both lower and higher reps are producing comparable increases in contractile proteins (and by extension non contractile proteins as well since overall size increases are also similar between them on average). Now, since that meta analysis, some data may indicate lower reps produce a slightly better isometric strength gains versus higher reps, but I actually think this would more likely be explained by neural adaptations that increase your voluntary activation (this would be present regardless of a dynamic or isometric strength test), and not more contractile increases.
@@HouseofHypertrophyInformed and speaking with evidence. As always. I can tell you're not taking this out of your ass Because I've been watching almost every video of you for a long time now. Always citing, telling the names of the authors of each study showing most if not all of the data. The only problem I see, is beyond your control, and that is some of the variables they avoid during said studies. Nevertheless, you always try to share those variables that haven't been in mind in the video itself or the comments. Great work as always!
Of course you want to vary the rep ranges otherwise you’re creating weak points meaning you are setting yourself up to grow quickly if you were to focus on those weak points, but you could just not allow them to develop in the first place and get that extra growth all along the way. Hard sets with loads less than 60%1rm are a bit less effective for growth than those with over that, so maybe do most work in the 6-15 rep range (60%1rm may be a 20RM but with fatigue and tempo it’s probably going to be 15-18 reps, unless the ROM is very short), but still some 16-30’s (and 4-5’s) so you can get that extra 1% or so of growth that comes from not letting weak points develop. Also, making sure to actually get to failure or beyond like with lengthened partials is very conducive to getting closer to your maximum potential.
Yes yes lets decipher the studies on what anyone with a logical brain and a little experience in the weight room can tell you. Provided the person talking isnt biased by trash influencers or literrature (Not talking about House of Hypertrophy with that statement just to be clear).
The answer is no. Periodization is not necessary and does not boost hypertrohpy. Just do a dynamic progression or dynamic double progression, swap lifts when they feel stale, train close enough to failure with relevant volume at an appropiate loading percentage. Swap the rep schemes if it feels stale or select the rep ranges that feel best for a particular lift in your rotation and thats It. Detrain for a week to 12 days every 6-8 weeks or so, closer to 4-6 the more advanced you are and thats it. Thats the most "periodization" anyone needs for hypertrophy. If one could argue this is periodizing to begin with. Just autoregulate using a modicum of brain power and you are good. None of it matters, the Split the exercice selection (as long as its reasonable and you are not doing some bullshit such as triceps kickbacks as isolation) if you train the relevant muscle functions with a good enough effort and volume, you are good to go.
In my opinion. It's not periodization directly it's novelty. Each time you periodization and change the stimulus, you're providing the muscles with a new adaptation signal.
I thought periodisation is about longjevity in strenght training. Stemming from the idea that your body cant handle only a limited number of sessions or weeks doing max strength work
dude, you spilled the beans on the last min of the video on the however bit ruclips.net/video/H-DffGucBNk/видео.html. if Periodization builds strength, then you will have more hypertrophy if you switch to hypertrophy reps and sets after you build the extra strength. how is this hard to understand? First you build the strength, you keep the weight same and you do more reps (8-35 as you mentioned) and you have hypertrophy faster, since periodization builds strength faster. are you overcomplicating it on purpose?
Hey dude, appreciate the comment! The research absolutely does NOT indicate more strength equals more size. If you're thinking stronger = more weights or higher reps with a submaximal load, this doesn't enhance the hypertrophy stimulus. We know proximity to failure is the key independent of load and reps (hence why similar hypertrophy is seen on average between heavier and lighter weights). Moreover, your reason for being able to lift heavier loads or do more reps is likely neural or skill related, and these things aren't super important for hypertrophy at all. If you're thinking that strength gains = neural adaptations that can enhance fiber recritment, this notion is only supported really by one paper with others conflicting on it. The reverse, however, is likely true - muscle growth is what directly contributes to strength gains (at least in the very long-term). This is what was mentioned in the video :)
I can really guide your logic through facts NOT indications you have already mentioned to understand the association of strength and hypertrophy. I will not do it cause it is your journey but I will give you a clue in a form of statement. Strength occurs when adding more load than your existing ability in a specific range of motion, designed within body building parameters for targeting and Isolating a muscle IS micro-hypertrophy (adaptative response) of all the muscle groups responsible for stabilizing and controlling the movement including of course the main targeted muscle. Once the adaptation is complete you achieved strength with the new load. Now that the new load can be lifted, stabilized and controlled for the whole range of the motion, the muscle that the exercise is Isolating/focusing/targeting with a large % of recruitment in comparison to the stabilizing or helping muscles, Hypertrophy training begins. Long story short strength is ALWAYS before hypertrophy and the volume of hypertrophy is very much dependent on your existing strength for the specific range of motion. There are an almost infinite amount of factors that both and hypertrophy can be stalled but the main limitation of volume of hypertrophy as a common denominator is strength @@HouseofHypertrophy
(this is an example for body building strength) it is similar to any other sports but always is associated to the range of motion and is time is a factor, the duration as well. It is extremely hard to express what I know with only a few words, so disclaimer: there is an infinite amount of factors that can influence but this is how I can describe the association strength - hypertrophy
a lot of the studies u show practically cannot be applied in most cases. And theres a lot of basic explanations for the rep range phenomenon, almost like they enjoyed the higher rep ranges and some people do not have the endurance to do high reps, whilst others have. 4-8 reps is the best, no matter who you are, that is the actual practical science that we know today. 4 reps is 4 effective reps. 30 reps, 3/4 of them do not do anything that goes toward the actual mechanical tension process that occurs and the Only way to build muscle. Muscle damage and metabolic stress have been debunked very easily, im surprised you still believe it in, studies can easily prove something when it is not designed well and practically is not accounted for. If metabolic stress really mattered, why are strongmen and powerlifters are jacked. You cannot train for type 1 and 2 muscle fibre size. That again is just trivial. Every powerlifter I know does sets of 5 for quads, and their quads are always bigger than those that do everything else. The metabolic stress "muscle growth' will be temporary inflammation. The best thing to do would be to actually take time off after these studies for 2-3 weeks to see the actual lean tissue gained after a period of training.
But good programming would include periodization! Training linearly with just adding weight and reps over time, will lead to stagnation, a plateau and eventually to injuries. We need to mix things up because we can't stay doing exact same things over and over. I'm guessing you're still a beginner?
@@NaturalBornWinner- No and no, thats not how it works. There isnt anything else you can do other than increase reps, weights, change exercises, use different volumes and intensities. But they dont have periodized since you cant know when you will stop progressing. You only change something when its not working not just because. There is zero application, science or data to back up periodization for hypertrophy. Thats for powerlifting training since its unsustainable at same intensity to go for heavy weights.
@@NaturalBornWinner- " Training linearly with just adding weight and reps over time, will lead to stagnation, a plateau and eventually to injuries." No it wont when you change your programming accordingly when you start to plateau. No smart programming will lead to long term plateaus or injuries. There is no point in "overreaching" and deloading either.
The evidence for benefits of periodization presented here is the weakest of any video you've ever produced (that I have viewed). You've killed whatever small interest I had in trying it. Bottom line: As long as one is progressing, there is no reason to try periodization.
Hey All! - Alpha Progression App: alphaprogression.com/HOUSEOFHYPERTROPHY + Click Read More for further discussion on "periodization"
Timestamps:
0:00 Intro
1:37 Part I: More Muscle Growth?
3:28 Part II: More Strength Gains?
6:47 Part III: Returning to Muscle Growth
12:17 Part IV: Summary
Other Periodization Styles for Hypertrophy or Strength:
- Block, reverse linear, and mixed session are some other styles of periodization. Unfortunately, these are a lot less studied currently so not strong conclusions can be made about their effectiveness for strength or size.
- We could even "periodize" our training through other ways. For example, across a training block, you may add more sets across weeks. Technically, a recent study somewhat explored this, we dissected it in a previous video: ruclips.net/video/yrtsa3swsAo/видео.html - It did lead to more hypertrophy and strength! but there are crucial considerations as detailed in the video. For example, the groups that added sets across weeks also ended up performing a higher number of average sets overall, so this could explain the findings.
- You could also "periodize" by varying the exercises you perform across sessions or weeks. However, we have research suggesting this probably just produces similar hypertrophy to training with the same exercises every week, these ideas were touched on in this video: ruclips.net/video/H3IN8yUHTeY/видео.html
Examining the Term “Periodization” More:
Periodization suggests dividing your training into "periods", so undulating approaches may not strictly fit this. Instead, some may say undulating is just a form of "programming" and not "periodization"
Some may define periodization as making long-term changes in volume (sets x reps) and intensity. The linear approach does this (increases intensity and decreases volume over time), but the undulating approach may not as we're performing the same sessions every week. Due to this, some might suggest undulating models are just a form of "programming".
However, it is actually possible for you to combine linear and undulating models. You do this by varying the rep ranges you perform in a week, but still decreasing the number of reps across weeks. For example, week 1 you may perform 12 reps on Monday, 10 reps on Wednesday, and 8 reps on Friday, in week 2 you perform 10 reps on Monday, 8 reps on Wednesday, and 6 reps on Friday, and so on). Fewer studies have used this approach, the large majority just involve comparing the linear and undulating approaches as described in the video.
Finally, some might say periodization can only really be applied over 6 or more months, and since most studies are 12 weeks or less, they fail to provide a true insight into periodization and are instead just providing insight into shorter-term "programming" strategies.
So overall, it's clear that there's no single way to think about periodization.
Such a fascinating topic!
I combined both linear and undulating periodization for training as well.
It helps me gain a few pounds of lean muscles in 3 months.
I will keep tracking the results in the next few months to see if it is really beneficial for both muscles and strength gain in long term.
Why do you think some professionals such as Dr. Mike Israetel see periodization as such a fundamental practice?
The more I read/watch on sports and muscle physiology, the more I am convinced we should train whatever we want.
Many paths can lead you to the same destination, and the literature on hypertrophy has certainly made this clear. Though I would still argue there are important things worth keeping in mind (exercise selection, set numbers, rest intervals, etc. ) - things covered in other videos.
agree with you, after all, im doing pushups, pull up, dips , body row, and bodyweight squats , and some arm movements with 5 kg each hand only..do daily this sets and im on my best body at 36 years without even suplements.. just do some moves and reach failure sometimes.. and keep constant
@@LuizGustavo-tf7qrmost supplements are just snake oil. That’s why I take 40 different ones a day; that way I can make sure I get the one that’s actually beneficial. I’m also 36 and at peak sexiest for my lifespan.
How much sleep and food do they eat…?
fr as long as we can manage sleep, nutrition, and stress levels, theres no need to overthink the minor details of training (unless you're a bodybuilder lol)
To any beginners/people that just started lifting.
Hypertrophy, sets, reps, splits, nutrition and fitness in general are one of the biggest rabbitholes to fall into.
If you are just starting out, stick with exercises you like doing and structure your workouts how they suit your lifestyle, not the other way around.
Don’t do the same mistake i did when i first started Lifting, by trying to do the best, most effective workouts my body could take. I stopped enjoying lifting and quit after a few months.
We’re all in it for the long run. And consistency is key. Don’t forget to have fun. And dont confuse yourself by trying to optimize everything from the getgo. Enjoy the ride.
consistency is key for sure!!
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
00:00 🏋️♂️ *Introduction to Periodization*
- Periodization is a key component for accelerating gains and minimizing plateaus in physique and strength development.
- Linear and daily undulating periodization are common approaches, involving manipulation of training variables over time.
- Linear periodization decreases volume and increases intensity over weeks, while daily undulating periodization varies the number of reps each session.
01:37 📊 *Meta-analysis on Muscle Growth*
- A 2022 meta-analysis found no significant difference in muscle growth between periodized and non-periodized training.
- The analysis included both trained and untrained subjects.
- Muscle growth did not significantly differ between linear and undulating periodization models.
03:32 💪 *Effects of Periodization on Strength Gains*
- Periodization led to greater one-repetition maximum (1RM) strength gains compared to non-periodized training.
- Limitations exist in the studies, and the potential influence of lower reps and heavier loads on strength gains is discussed.
- Undulating periodization may be more effective for increasing 1RM strength, especially in trained individuals.
06:47 🤔 *Long-term Considerations and Muscle Hypertrophy*
- Studies with suboptimal periodization for muscle building may influence results, indicating the need for further research.
- Limited evidence suggests that varying rep ranges, especially avoiding very low reps, could be beneficial for long-term muscle growth.
- Individual differences in muscle response to different rep ranges emphasize the potential benefits of varying rep ranges.
08:51 📚 *Studies on Rep Range Variation*
- Studies, such as the Kramer study over 9 months, indicate that varying rep ranges may lead to greater fat-free mass and indirect muscle growth.
- Ascending pyramid training with a wider rep range showed superior muscle mass gains in older untrained women.
- Individual differences in response to specific rep ranges suggest the importance of flexibility in rep range selection.
10:15 🏋️♀️ *Practical Recommendations for Rep Range Variation*
- Varying rep ranges may optimize muscle growth by addressing potential individual differences in response.
- The evidence is not strong enough to mandate rep range variation, and personal preference in training style remains valid.
- Suggestions include linear, undulating, pyramid approaches, or different exercises for the same muscle with varying rep ranges.
13:18 🤯 *Summary and Considerations*
- Periodized programs show similar muscle growth compared to non-periodized programs, and hypertrophy does not significantly differ between linear and undulating periodization.
- Strength gains are generally greater with periodization, especially undulating periodization in trained individuals.
- Personalized considerations for rep range variation should be based on individual responses, and there is no one-size-fits-all approach.
Made with HARPA AI
This is one of the best channels on youtube
Thank you so much! :)
Here supporting this AMAZING channel.
Thank YOU for the support!
What about periadization vs none in the context of accumulated fatigue and stress - week 1: 50% of max, week 2: 75%, week 3-8: 90-100% then repeat vs always do 90-100%
Get a doctor.. no serious natty or drug Lifter Trains this way
@@djjankov6667 which way? You dont like deload week or not having them?
@@freezerain Bodybuilding is gentics ... Train a Muscle with Volume 10-20 Sets a week near to failure big Lifts and isolation...then sleep eat repeat thats all you need Some day high Reps some Low you dont need 21.,5% of your Max blablabla bullshit
@@djjankov6667 Thank you for your expertise….
how about stop reinventing the bodybuilding wheel and actually get gains doing things old school..
Really cool! The future research I'm most looking forward to is how to identifying the individuals who do best with different volumes and rep ranges
100% agreed!
Gold content. 📚🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻
Enjoyed every second!
For that reason in my training program is undulating in every session. Example: bench press 6-8 tô failure, next, super set Peck deck 15 reps 30seconds rest. After The last set, i take a 3 mins rest and Go to incline bechpress 8-12 tô failure.
Every session, the First exercice is with more load and less rep, and this one is my benchmarking to see If i progressing week by week.
Seeing great results with this. In 4 weeks my bench went from 20kgs in each side to 35kgs.
for me I feel periodization helps me get some improvements when I stuck, unable to increase more weight but when add more sets or add more reps with the same weight (or even more weight with less reps) later on I can lift heavier in the subsequent weeks. other than that I feel it helps me not get too boring, too.
In general periodization is definitely a good tool for long term sustainability especially for people who consider themselves strength athletes because no matter what genetic freak someone is
They can’t handle the weight that’s heavy for them for too long
I like using daily periodization. It helps me to work on strength, while also using my final set to do 12+ reps, and focus on the stretch and mind-muscle connection.
I have so many question on what you just said, but I ll keep them to myself. I believe you do not understand that strength and hypertrophy cannot be achieved on trained individuals on the same training session as efficiently as separating the 2. It is one or the other or none. some reasons are:1. your stored glucose levels that will be turned into ATP to fuel your mostly anaerobic weight lifting has a limit until it constitutes overtraining 2. How you reach mind muscle when you have exausted your motor unit on first or second set?
@aethaerial8212 What you are saying isn't entirely factual. Under the right conditions, the intermediate and advanced lifter could achieve both hypertrophy and strength gains just as effectively as separating those styles of training. Lastly, you can reach MTM connection on every set you perform. I really don't understand why you're confused with his comment. Not everyone trains the same way. And even if someone trains with an objectively worse approach than other styles, that approach can still be better performed by them than the other. You have to understand even with general research data, most lifters respond differently to different styles of training methodology. There's no, on size fits all, to training. There's many factors we can't even account for, from the human anatomy and its vast array of traits and differences. If you're going to use absolutism, atleast provide concrete data supporting it. And by concrete, I mean we shouldn't see outliers. The problem is even with the studies we have access to now there is still so much that we haven't discovered and data that is constantly being revised.
Periodization has been powerlifting protocol forever.. and the starting sets and reps were often called the "hypertrophy" phase
It all works, just use them all at some point, it adds variety. Over analyzing over 10% differences not worth the time and energy, doing what suits you at any given time is more productive.
This is a REALLY well done channel man! I just subscribed. I love training with science. And this channel feeds me exactly what I need
Really thorough research, thank you for that
Undulating splits is by far the best. The downside to bodybuilding is how personalized it needs to be. There about 3 dozen things you need to be doing all at once for it to work.
This app looks absolutely awesome!
Ondulating reps with a few select exercises weekly, is the best thing i ever did in my training career so to speak.
Thank you HoH for another interesting video - I always look forward to the next video. Since watching the channel I've also been reading various sports science papers, including those you kindly give links to. Sadly I have to say that based on the papers I've read over the past 18 months I've concluded that sports science research is surprisingly poor.
It seems that various issues, that should never happen in a research paper, are very common - badly designed "experiments", ill-defined or even undefined concepts, data recording & data analysis not being done blind - thus introducing the possibility of bias & deliberate manipulation of the data and results, inappropriate statistical analysis etc., etc.
These issues often occurring in papers from very well known names. Therefore the HoH is absolutely necessary to point out these shortcomings & separate the wheat from the chaff. 👍
I think it depends on which studies we're talking about. Over time, my opinon is that the general design of most resistance training papers is improving, such as using within subject designs to assess hypertrophy (which can increase statistical power and reduce confounders like nutrition). These can also shed light on to individual differences (as shown by a paper by Schoenfeld in this video on some people growing better with either 6-10 or 20-30 reps).
Some papers are starting to ditch null hypothesis testing, which I think might be quite a good thing due to the over reliance on p-values and the misinterpretaion. Even if a paper does report them, we're also seeing confidence intervals and effect sizes also being presented which are always super useful.
Moreover, as we accumulate more papers on a given topic, meta-analyses become possible and can be a solid overview, such as the meta-analysis in this video on periodization for strength and size :)
Another vid well done friend. Great info. My legs have always responded to 20 rep squats. Other body parts respond to 8-12 reps (arms). Change is good.
Thank you so much, and that's very interesting to hear!
Periodization definitely works, but i dont subscribe to it for two key reasons:
1- it typically requires an overtraining period, followed by a deload. Id rather train below the threshold of overtraining, and maintain it for much longer.
2- it assumes linear progess. We aren't machines. We often experience things outside the gym that affect our performance. It also assumes you are in perfect health every day. I prefer to train intuitively, avoiding things that cause pain, pushing hard when im fresh, pulling back when i feel "off". Just my take
Back in high school, this is the method my weights coach implemented for our weights program. We normally started our "working sets" around 65%-75%, and increased the load while decreasing the reps per set. All I'll say is I was so much stronger using that method as opposed to a standard method of weightlifting. I managed to reach 300lb bench in high school as a 220 pound male. 🤷♂️
Thank you for your excellent work, I always enjoy watching your content!!
I typically have two to three exercises per muscle group. For example, chest = incline dumbells, incline flys, flat bench. Each chest workout the reps flip. workout one: heavy incline dumbells, medium weight/rep flys, higher rep bench. Workout two = heavy bench, medium flys, higher rep incline dumbells. I hit each muscle twice a week so I find in each week im doing a low rep bench and a higher rep bench and a low rep incline dumbells and a higher rep incline dumbells. But I am not ultra rigid either. Sometimes the thought of doing a heavy bench press is just beyond me some days. I just have the mindset that as long as the chest is targetted heavy with something, any one of the three exercises, then it will be fine until the next workout a few days later. And it is.
This sounds excellent.
Make a video on hyperplasia and hypertrophy studies thanks
I think the best thing would be to vary the rep ranges and see which one works best for you, very good video
It has become abundantly clear that one size does not fit all, therefore an individual must experiment with 1. What's effective for them, and 2. What their goals are. Clearly a budding powerlifter will not be spending the majority of their time in the 8-12 rep range, however to completely ignore it would be short sighted.
Your sentiment is right, but the example isn't. Most powerlifters including newbs mostly train in the hypertrophic rep ranges. The big three, bench, squat, and deadlift will be trained in the power specific range of 1-5 rep sets, but the assistance work will typically be in the 6+ rep ranges eg: one might perform a 3×3 in the bench, but then they'll do incline fry-presses, dips, over head presses and tricep presses in the 6-12 rep ranges. Almost no one trains every lift in the power specific rep range.
@@rustyshackleford735 You raise a fair point. I could have worded it better, but I also considered rest between sets. Including that, I might spend 65% of my workout on the primary lift for the day. Assistance work goes relatively quickly.
Are there any studies of inverted pyramids? That is, starting heavy and then lowering the set weight, because naturally you can lift a lot more if a small warm set is done before.
Well, idk chainging volume overtime just seems like too much of a hassle, especially if you wanna hit your muscles as equally as possible (via load). But i do believe in periodizing rep ranges because well when we're more bulky, we tend to progress a little easier in terms of strength but definently harder in terms of reps, but when i'm leaner, harder with weight but easier to progress with reps, and i think that is because when i'm bulky i tend to put my stress on my cardiovascular system so it makes sense that i tend to get tired faster, but when i'm leaner it's less stress so i can push more reps and potentially get closer to failure via higher rep ranges.
Can you make a video where you collect all the best undisputed facts about muscle gains that we know of so far. Not the ones that are open for discussion, but the facts that we know are cemented.
Follows
Hello! Please, could you share the source on the pyramid image on 2:15, the one about research methods. Thanks
PeriodiSation.
I have a question i couldn't find an answer to on Google.
If there is a difference between gains made by training for example my arms only vs training full body for a long period.
I tried searching but all google shows me is full body vs split but I'm not interested in split training because it's training all muscles in a whole week but each muscle group once a day, that's not what interesting to me
I meant if arms trained alone would show more gains than training my arms while other muscles like my quads competing for proteins and natural anabolic hormones
I always thought periodization was a term more geared towards advanced trainers. Personally, I find that maintaining non-periodized approach is sufficient for me.
Nah, it’s used more in advanced athletes. But you can even use it to train endurance for a block then speed for another or strength then hypertrophy…etc etc. It’s a general term used in sports training to focus on something specific by cycling through variables for periods of time. I.e. I use it for 2-3 month blocks to focus on running vs lower body strength (leg day once a week instead of 2x, run 4x week instead of 2x)
It's sufficient for 99% of us. Periodization is chalkboard stuff for academics and very advanced lifters whose lives are dedicated to this.
@@comingverysoon I disagree, it’s lifestyle based. I hunt in the fall - backcountry type hunting where it’s literally rucking many miles in then hiking with a day pack after making camp. I need to be strong and have stamina to do that. 3 months before I prioritize stamina (hence my comments on running). I’m 55 so have to lift yr round to maintain strength. This not new advanced technology, but if u just lift to look kinda good, then meh, but if u actually have some practical application to train, then it’s really useful regardless of level
@@glenoh88 So periodization is a versatile approach that can benefit various aspects. I'll keep it in my mind. Thanks for additional insight.
7:31 GYATTT
Still waiting about velocity loss threshholds for strength and hypeprtrophy😅
When will the series on strength training arrive?
I usually train with DUP, it's the bulk of training sessions.
But when I'm getting ready for competition or hitting a PR, I use linear periodization.
Individual differences on rep ranges should (at least partially) be because every person has different lactate threshold so their muscles could fatigue earlier.
A study comparing rep ranges between two groups:
*20 long distance runners, 20 sprinters, with rep ranges 6-12 reps.
*The same amount for each but with rep ranges from 30-35.
*The same groups but the rep ranges are beyond optimal for building muscle, with rep ranges over 50.
Would they find differences between responses from long and short distance runners?, long distance runners would see better hypertrophy response with more rep ranges?, sprinters would see better results with less rep ranges?
Can you make a video about how much does cardio affect muscle growth?
I'd love to see that too. I am very reliant on cardio anyway because I ride by bike to the gym and need to be warmed up very well because otherwise my muscles harden and I get tendinopathy.
I'd just love to know how much I am losing, if I am at all.
@@AllisterCaine I have the answer now, we don't need "cardio" or "aerobic" (which are fitness buzzwords) because both of those systems are significantly stimulated with High Intensity Training.
1. We get the most cardiovascular benefits when we lift weights, we engage more muscle motor units, therefore, we pump more oxygen-rich [and more] blood (this is cardiac output), that's the reason why we don't gasp that much while lifting, but it's recommended to breathe faster (through mouth) as the set gets more intense.
2. The aerobic metabolism works in equivalent to and often greater than low-intensity locomotive activities maximum when at rest after a High Intensity Training. As you recover, the stacked up lactic acid gets converted into pyruvate again. Pyruvate is a chemical form that can be transported into mitochondrion, which is then metabolized aerobically.
3. When you jog, you will only improve in jogging, there's no general endurance, skills are very specific. Try jogging on a treadmill for 3 months, then try doing it on land, you'd notice that you've not adapted to it.
Check the book "body by science".
@@AllisterCaine I'm not encouraging you to stop those activities, they're fun, but they're not exercises.
Wonder what Dr Mike thinks?
Since the body has 3 energy systems , should we not focus on tut instead of rep range? Coz tempo can change reps in sets, instead I try keep sets between 15 and 90 seconds as over 2 mins you enter oxidative energy system and therefore better o2 turn over rather than stored glucose for energy which means endurance training over hypertrophy training. Just a thought
Hey. Check the hypertrophy study from Enes, De Souza on 52 sets per week per muscle group as the most hypertrophy building. Apparently, new studies point towards going one rep shy from Rhabdo.
Did they control for whether the periodization was renaissance or not? That's my question
I usually do 2 sets to failure but I might try to do one low one high and see if I see any better progress
I have been at a Plato on preacher curl for some time 3 weeks
I'll try this and see if it change anything
I will continue to write lifts down
Reps and weight (energy levels too)
If uve been doing preacher for a long time have u considered switching the exercise for a while? Maybe a dumbbell or barbell curl for a like 2 months
@@joezyadeh4805 i haven't been doing this one for more than 1-2 months I usually run with exercises for 3-4 months depending
It's a preacher curl machine
I hit 50 kgs for 6 reps and been a little stuck since
So I'll try to put the weight down and see if I can progress with 8-12 rep range instead of 6-10 as I been doing
@@joezyadeh4805 okay I went up today with a rep and a half 🥳
How do they measure hypertrophy ? Sets of 4-5 reps build less size than sets of 10-12 reps everyone can verify that but it is mostly because of water/glycogen. It seems that when they measure hypertrophy they cannot tell the difference between contractile components and non-contractile components. So higher reps will always appear to be superior while they are not. There was also a study with a few sets of 2-4 reps leading to some size gains but when another group added a set with 50% of 1RM to failure they had nearly 2x more size gains. Once again that is not “real size”.
Exactly! The higher reps work more on the sarcoplasmic, and the lower reps hit the myofibrils. So yes the question is - What exactly are they measuring? We can all do high reps every day for a muscle group, and those muscles will appear bigger, but that's stored glycogen and not actual myofibril growth. Whereas we can train heavy low reps and not see any immediate size. That's why I do a few sets of lower reps "2-5" followed by a few sets of higher reps "10-20" each workout, that way I get the best of both worlds in terms of strength and size 👍
@@NaturalBornWinner- No, thats not what he is saying at all, you cant choose between sarcoplasmic and myofibrillar hypertrophy.
@@joojotinI know exactly what he is saying, he was asking how they measured hypertrophy, he said that higher reps cause more glycogen/water to be stored, and that it isn't actual myofibril growth. I gave him a reply saying what reps i use in my training. Where's the problem? I think you're getting confused.
Based on the current evidence, I'd argue it's likely both higher reps and lower reps do a comparable job at promoting contractile and non contractile increases. Why do I speculate this?
After all, some people say given lower reps increase strength more (measured by one rep max on a dynamic exercise like the bench press or squat) this is proof they produce greater contractile increases. However, I don't think this is a good argument whatsoever.
Consistently training with lower reps on an exercise will more effectively produce skill and neural adaptations that help your dynamic one-rep max strength, and I think this is the primary reason behind more strength gains with lower reps.
As opposed to looking at dynamic one-rep max strength tests, looking at isometric strength tests may be a bit better (since there's a lower skill componenet). What happens when we compare isometric strength gains between training with lower and higher reps? well, it seems they end up producing very comparable increases: journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/fulltext/2017/12000/strength_and_hypertrophy_adaptations_between_low_.31.aspx
This would lead me to speculate both lower and higher reps are producing comparable increases in contractile proteins (and by extension non contractile proteins as well since overall size increases are also similar between them on average).
Now, since that meta analysis, some data may indicate lower reps produce a slightly better isometric strength gains versus higher reps, but I actually think this would more likely be explained by neural adaptations that increase your voluntary activation (this would be present regardless of a dynamic or isometric strength test), and not more contractile increases.
@@HouseofHypertrophyInformed and speaking with evidence. As always. I can tell you're not taking this out of your ass Because I've been watching almost every video of you for a long time now. Always citing, telling the names of the authors of each study showing most if not all of the data.
The only problem I see, is beyond your control, and that is some of the variables they avoid during said studies. Nevertheless, you always try to share those variables that haven't been in mind in the video itself or the comments. Great work as always!
Of course you want to vary the rep ranges otherwise you’re creating weak points meaning you are setting yourself up to grow quickly if you were to focus on those weak points, but you could just not allow them to develop in the first place and get that extra growth all along the way.
Hard sets with loads less than 60%1rm are a bit less effective for growth than those with over that, so maybe do most work in the 6-15 rep range (60%1rm may be a 20RM but with fatigue and tempo it’s probably going to be 15-18 reps, unless the ROM is very short), but still some 16-30’s (and 4-5’s) so you can get that extra 1% or so of growth that comes from not letting weak points develop.
Also, making sure to actually get to failure or beyond like with lengthened partials is very conducive to getting closer to your maximum potential.
Yes yes lets decipher the studies on what anyone with a logical brain and a little experience in the weight room can tell you. Provided the person talking isnt biased by trash influencers or literrature (Not talking about House of Hypertrophy with that statement just to be clear).
The answer is no. Periodization is not necessary and does not boost hypertrohpy. Just do a dynamic progression or dynamic double progression, swap lifts when they feel stale, train close enough to failure with relevant volume at an appropiate loading percentage. Swap the rep schemes if it feels stale or select the rep ranges that feel best for a particular lift in your rotation and thats It. Detrain for a week to 12 days every 6-8 weeks or so, closer to 4-6 the more advanced you are and thats it. Thats the most "periodization" anyone needs for hypertrophy. If one could argue this is periodizing to begin with. Just autoregulate using a modicum of brain power and you are good. None of it matters, the Split the exercice selection (as long as its reasonable and you are not doing some bullshit such as triceps kickbacks as isolation) if you train the relevant muscle functions with a good enough effort and volume, you are good to go.
Ayo bro what’s with the green thumbnail guys?
Just trying it out to see it's effects! Do you like it or not quite?
It’s definitely pretty sick, now that I notice it it looks like you did a bit the same thing with yellow a bit back lol
bro,is dumbell curl better than strict curl?
What about varying loads combined with varying rep ranges? Like on a last set of 3 x 10 at 70% 1RM you add 2.5kg on the last set.
Does the Alpha Progession app allow this kind of training techniques?
Hi
What do you think about cable pull through exercise? Is it good gor glutes hypertrophy?
HI is there a study about people who can build muscle with heavy weights only like kevin levrone🙋🏽♂️
In my opinion. It's not periodization directly it's novelty. Each time you periodization and change the stimulus, you're providing the muscles with a new adaptation signal.
That's the principle thinking behind periodization :)
JUST realized that smart-sounding commentators on here didnt/dont even WATCH the videos lol 😂 😂
Pretty sure you can easily become a good sport's physiology professor.
Long 2 weeks😣
🙏
Thank YOU for your continued support my friend, it means a lot to me 🙏
I thought periodisation is about longjevity in strenght training. Stemming from the idea that your body cant handle only a limited number of sessions or weeks doing max strength work
One answer:
Hypertrophy Clusters.
Why did the low rep group did less volume? That is another anomali in the studies
So basically, hit the gym for weight lifting and get close to failure. 👍🏻😚 got it
So always use pyramids?
the thumbnails will soon be completely green
4 reps is fine for hypertrophy
👍🏻
dude, you spilled the beans on the last min of the video on the however bit ruclips.net/video/H-DffGucBNk/видео.html. if Periodization builds strength, then you will have more hypertrophy if you switch to hypertrophy reps and sets after you build the extra strength. how is this hard to understand? First you build the strength, you keep the weight same and you do more reps (8-35 as you mentioned) and you have hypertrophy faster, since periodization builds strength faster. are you overcomplicating it on purpose?
Hey dude, appreciate the comment!
The research absolutely does NOT indicate more strength equals more size.
If you're thinking stronger = more weights or higher reps with a submaximal load, this doesn't enhance the hypertrophy stimulus. We know proximity to failure is the key independent of load and reps (hence why similar hypertrophy is seen on average between heavier and lighter weights). Moreover, your reason for being able to lift heavier loads or do more reps is likely neural or skill related, and these things aren't super important for hypertrophy at all.
If you're thinking that strength gains = neural adaptations that can enhance fiber recritment, this notion is only supported really by one paper with others conflicting on it.
The reverse, however, is likely true - muscle growth is what directly contributes to strength gains (at least in the very long-term). This is what was mentioned in the video :)
have you ever researched what is strength and how it is associated with any specific range of motion? @@HouseofHypertrophy
I can really guide your logic through facts NOT indications you have already mentioned to understand the association of strength and hypertrophy. I will not do it cause it is your journey but I will give you a clue in a form of statement. Strength occurs when adding more load than your existing ability in a specific range of motion, designed within body building parameters for targeting and Isolating a muscle IS micro-hypertrophy (adaptative response) of all the muscle groups responsible for stabilizing and controlling the movement including of course the main targeted muscle. Once the adaptation is complete you achieved strength with the new load. Now that the new load can be lifted, stabilized and controlled for the whole range of the motion, the muscle that the exercise is Isolating/focusing/targeting with a large % of recruitment in comparison to the stabilizing or helping muscles, Hypertrophy training begins. Long story short strength is ALWAYS before hypertrophy and the volume of hypertrophy is very much dependent on your existing strength for the specific range of motion. There are an almost infinite amount of factors that both and hypertrophy can be stalled but the main limitation of volume of hypertrophy as a common denominator is strength @@HouseofHypertrophy
(this is an example for body building strength) it is similar to any other sports but always is associated to the range of motion and is time is a factor, the duration as well. It is extremely hard to express what I know with only a few words, so disclaimer: there is an infinite amount of factors that can influence but this is how I can describe the association strength - hypertrophy
a lot of the studies u show practically cannot be applied in most cases. And theres a lot of basic explanations for the rep range phenomenon, almost like they enjoyed the higher rep ranges and some people do not have the endurance to do high reps, whilst others have. 4-8 reps is the best, no matter who you are, that is the actual practical science that we know today. 4 reps is 4 effective reps. 30 reps, 3/4 of them do not do anything that goes toward the actual mechanical tension process that occurs and the Only way to build muscle. Muscle damage and metabolic stress have been debunked very easily, im surprised you still believe it in, studies can easily prove something when it is not designed well and practically is not accounted for. If metabolic stress really mattered, why are strongmen and powerlifters are jacked. You cannot train for type 1 and 2 muscle fibre size. That again is just trivial. Every powerlifter I know does sets of 5 for quads, and their quads are always bigger than those that do everything else. The metabolic stress "muscle growth' will be temporary inflammation.
The best thing to do would be to actually take time off after these studies for 2-3 weeks to see the actual lean tissue gained after a period of training.
Basically HIT training
.
This video was just confusing.
second or something
Training for hypertrophy doesnt need any kind of periodization ever if everything is already good in the programming.
But good programming would include periodization! Training linearly with just adding weight and reps over time, will lead to stagnation, a plateau and eventually to injuries. We need to mix things up because we can't stay doing exact same things over and over. I'm guessing you're still a beginner?
@@NaturalBornWinner- No and no, thats not how it works. There isnt anything else you can do other than increase reps, weights, change exercises, use different volumes and intensities.
But they dont have periodized since you cant know when you will stop progressing.
You only change something when its not working not just because.
There is zero application, science or data to back up periodization for hypertrophy.
Thats for powerlifting training since its unsustainable at same intensity to go for heavy weights.
@@NaturalBornWinner- " Training linearly with just adding weight and reps over time, will lead to stagnation, a plateau and eventually to injuries."
No it wont when you change your programming accordingly when you start to plateau.
No smart programming will lead to long term plateaus or injuries.
There is no point in "overreaching" and deloading either.
The evidence for benefits of periodization presented here is the weakest of any video you've ever produced (that I have viewed). You've killed whatever small interest I had in trying it.
Bottom line: As long as one is progressing, there is no reason to try periodization.
first or something
This comment contains nine words consisting of at least three symbols.
Only if you can't count that is. There's actually Eleven words in your comment!
I didn't say how many words in total, I said that it contains a certain number of certain words.
@@beekey9501Ok, and what are the three symbols? All I see are words that are made up of letters.
@perfection-0__0_18 Isn't letter a symbol?
Video says nothing,,,blah, blah
First
poes