Thanks for watching guys, hope you found this video helpful. I know another big fitness channel uploaded a video on the same topic last week and came to a similar conclusion as me, but just want to note that I recorded this 3 weeks ago so this was purely a coincidence. Anyway, how close to failure do you personally train on your sets, and how much weekly volume do you use per muscle? Comment below. Also don't forget to follow me over on Instagram as well where I post useful daily content and other updates that you'll get a lot of value from: instagram.com/sean_nalewanyj See you in the next vid!
Honestly, i don't think you are the type to watch a video and then remake it. I too watch that other channel with the letter X at the end and im finding your videos to be more straight foward, with the stransparent truth easier to understand.
Sean Nalewanyj I’ve tried volume training long term and it actually led to muscle loss and CNS overload. I went back to my tried and limited number of sets and reps per muscle. Overload over time, and it does take time, and incremental added load works for me. Please don’t go their with Dorian Yates training. He was taking a shit load of drugs and his joints are now a mess. You’ve been in the right track with your recommendations, though you may have just confused many listeners. Intensity doesn’t = failure.
@@juliogomez9145 And if I was gonna remake someone's content I surely wouldn't be stupid enough to post it 1 week after the original was posted. And thanks, glad you like my videos.
On compound lifts with heavier weights I tend to keep failure to the last set/2 sets(on a bad day) of said exercise. With isolations I tend to go to failure on all but 1 sets(usually 4 sets with isolations)
Steve Wise I specifically said that I don’t recommend that type of training and that it would increase the chances for injury. I was only using it to demonstrate the fact that intensity is primary over volume. I very clearly stated that I recommend training 1-3 reps short of failure on a moderate volume approach.
Incomplete advice is what most people are giving out . This guy actually completes the advice and specified what’s needed for the audience to really capture the training method . Great info as always .
Yeah thats because everyone keeps preaching this 8-12 reps thing without underlying the fact you need to move weights that actually cause muscular failure within this range.
@@benjaminprince6424 whenever i bench heavy i do about 10 reps but from the first rep i struggle to get the weight up, so basically my near failure is like half my reps which i dont understand why
thank you, Sean -- this makes so much sense I've been a Mike Mentzer/Arthur Jones 1-set/last rep-is-a-screamer devotee for forty years. Recently, thanks to you and some other coaches, I've come to realize that at age 71, I'm better off aiming for two (or more) sets with the recommended 1 or 2 sub-max rep range. As I've gotten older, I simply take too long to recover from a work-out when it's grind all the way. The easy part of push-to-you-drop is that there's no doubt of what's enough -- duh, you can't do any more. The tricky part for me now is learning what is an honest 1-2 sub max effort. Again, thank you -- appreciate your willingness to share your knowledge.
Rarely do I come across such quality advice from people in the Body Building and Fitness scene, and therefore, I couldn't resist praising this video (as well as many others that Sean puts out). Considering I started exercising back in 1994 when we didn't have the internet or a large number of appropriate books or workout guidelines, I regretfully acknowledge that many of us wasted a significant number of years in the gym without realizing the importance of intensity and overly emphasizing the significance of volume.
You’re so right bro! I always thought of it as intensity = a multiplier, and if volume is multiplied by 0 (shit intensity) then: 100reps x 0intensity = 0hypertrophy
I mean that's just stupid the way you said it. That's just you being a smart aleck kid. Literally, even the worst youtuber won't tell you to bench press a bar with 0 plates for 2500 reps.
When it is said that "volume is the primary driver of hypertrophy", this needs to be understood as "volume is the primary driver of hypertrophy GIVEN you are taking sets near (or to) failure", and it most certainly is. Intensity in and of itself is the primary driver within ONE given set, but when we look at training programs as a whole, it's a nuanced balance between intensity, volume, and frequency. The more volume you do, the more gains you will get (so long as you can recover), but the same is not true of intensity. In fact, I would argue against putting intensity too high because it will put he volume and frequency (used to accumulate more volume) in jeopardy. Intensity is more of a threshold factor, where the sets needs to be difficult ENOUGH to allow for a hypertrophic response, but this idea of intensity being the primary driver within the context of a training program is misguided. All of the factors are important, but once intensity is set at a proper level, the way you get more gains is focusing on how you can fit more recoverable volume in, and that's why it's the "primary driver".
I agree completely with what you said. Some people are misinterpreting me and thinking I’m saying “more intensity is better” which I clearly didn’t. I was merely pointing out that sufficient intensity has to be there first and foremost before volume has any effect. So therefore it’s the absolute primary baseline factor in stimulating growth. But of course in the practical sense you need both intensity and volume, which I outlined. The only purpose here is to help novices understand that set quality needs to be there before quantity has any usefulness, and that more volume is only beneficial up to a certain point.
@@Sean_Nalewanyj thanks for the clarification, Sean. In that context, I'm with you all the way. The true problem is black/white thinking about the variables, and I think whereas you were combatting the notion that you can pump away in the gym well away from failure and make great gains, I was hesitant for novices to train balls to the wall with intensity and become enamored with the urge to try HIT/DC style training due to this innate human desire for suffering to achieve our goals when the evidence is pretty clear that for most people, this is not the path for the best growth and sustainability. For novices, quality form, proper intensity of effort at lower volumes, then add weekly sets from there as tolerated (or desired) for max growth.
The most success I’ve had weight lifting has been 4-5 sets a week for muscle group, all the way to failure. I use a 4 week cycle starting with 12 reps for each exercise the first week, progressively increasing weight and decreasing reps each week from 12 to 9, and 9 to 6, ending the final week with 3 reps with the heaviest working sets. I just tracked my weights each week and every time I started the cycle over I just tried to add at least 5 lbs if not more to each lift. I broke month long plateaus with this method and went from benching 2 plates for 4 sets of three to 4 sets of six. For me that was really good. Life got in the way since then but I’m working to get back to that strength now and fortunately now I know how to do it
Great video Sean, informative and straight to the point as always. Intensity is the key to growth, you see many people who don’t even exceed RPE 6 and wonder why they don’t grow.
Yep. I'm not denying that more volume produces more growth up to a certain point, but it all hinges on the fact that you're training hard enough in the first place.
So in short - "No pain no gain". Sometimes we hear clichés and they go right over our heads either because they've been rinsed or they're considered outdated, but that one still holds relevance.
@@ernoeskeli1139 There should be no pain during a workout, but there should be a burn that you feel to failure as lactic acid builds up. The pain really comes a day or so after your workout and you can't really avoid it, as it's supposed to happen. If you're not tearing muscle fibres, you're not going to build newer and bigger ones.
@@Longlostpuss doms (delayed onset muscle soreness) isn't really pain, it's just soreness. If the soreness is literally painful, then you did too much and aren't building muscle effectively. There should be mild soreness after a lot of work but if you're doing the same exercise many times, you won't get very sore even though you're progressing and building new muscle tissue.
My test just went up from this video alone! Thanks for finally staying what ive been waiting for! The dogma of volume permeates fitness lately, and the details of intensity, rest time, tut, etc are never explained. Just hype for a study no one ever reads, well done sir.
Thank you. I've been spending 2 hours in the gym doing 3 sets to failure. I think I will cut my sets down to 2 sets to failure. I've been keeping track just like you've said. I've been gaining muscle but I think that extra set isn't needed since I'm going to true failure every set.
@@meocats What's this 'trying'? You complete reps or you fail them. No trying. If you struggle to complete a rep and you don't, it's not a rep. Since I said 'struggle reps' pluralized, you can deduce that there's more than 1 completed. Struggle reps are the hard reps. Nobody will excel past noob gains as a natural lifter by only doing easy reps. 'try' to comprehend
@Coolest Guy On The Internet there are positive reps (lifting a weight), isometric, then negative reps where the weight is more than you can pull and rather pulling you down and you're fighting it. Mike Mentzer was a big fan of negative reps (aka going to failure) and isometrics in his earlier days.
@@PF_ROB "shut" the "fuck up", dumb shit. None of your "trying" is accurate. There are concentric, eccentric, and isometric reps. Don't even reply, i'm out of this echo chamber cancer thread and you can keep your stance and "shove it" too.
1:46 I think it is more accurate to say that repair of the various types of tissues involved in locomotion, i.e., the musculoskeletal system, which gets short-handed as "muscle growth," is a response to strain, or tension than it is to say it is a response to stress. Stress is when you find out your wife is divorcing you or you get fired or your kid gets run over by a locomotive. Strain or tension is when you push/pull a mass that is high on a particular musculoskeletal organ's maximum force generation capacity. Maximum force generation capacity is not a static trait, and it changes over the life course, from day to day, throughout a day and with each exertion. If I perform a motion with 25% of my one-rep max mass resistance, the actual force generation capacity of the musculoskeletal system performing that motion is lower after 10 reps than it was after 1, and the effect is likely non-linear as the number of exertions increases. This is why it is possible to train to failure with almost any degree of imposed resistance. It is worth noting there that the reasons for this "failure" are not mechanical or structural, i.e., the "damage" being done to the tissues is not necessarily at the level of "injury." Failure resulting from a "As Many Reps As Possible" regimen is more a result of intra- and inter-cellular transport, metabolism, waste management and energy availability. This type of "failure" is ostensibly distinct from the "failure" which occurs when a system is exposed to a level of resistance under exertion that is at the systems current "one rep max" and then a second rep is attempted, though to the best of my knowledge, the exact details of HOW these two types of failure differ are still only partially understood. If you can elucidate that question I would appreciate it.
This is true I get the best results doing full body workouts 2 sets to failure and I have enough energy to get through my workout and adding weight or reps every workout
Damn right, it's time under tension and intensity. If you're a beginner to weight lifting, do Starting Strength before anything else! Getting strong first facilitates much greater hypertrophy gains later
Training intensity coupled with percentages of your 1RM has worked for me over the years. I usually split my routines up with 1)Main Movers 2)Accessory Work 3) Finishers. I then vary intensity with Heavy, Light, Medium with them throughout the week. You vary the intensity and volume. It takes both!
I've been lifting for 10 years now, and I stalled and have been stalled for the last 4 years because I was so focused on intensity. Changing my approach to volume has helped me get more results. Basically I was stuck at a specific weight on my main lifts and could not get past it. I would do deloads and take a week off, but was stuck. I started t on lighten the weight slightly and do more sets. That's when the gains started again. Instead of struggling to bench 315 for 3 sets of 8, drop the weight to 275 and do sets of 10 until you can no longer get I clean reps. You will be surprised how many sets you can do and over time the gains you can get.
You could also have changed to 5x5 lets say you can do 335 for 5 reps which i think you can if you can hit 315 for 8. That would be 8375 for the 5x5 of volume from bench alone, where as the 315 for 8 is 7560, changing to a 5x5 would both increase volume and intensity. That being said i have no clue if you are someone who responds better to higher volume or someone who responds better to higher intensity, however a 5x5 tends to be very good middle ground for the both.
I agree with Morten Larsen.. It seems like your muscles respond better with higher reps for growth, but if you want to continue to increase your strength, doing a lower rep rang like your 5 rep max would be better
@@denyxrunner intensity can mean a few things, however you are wrong mate. Increasing the weight also increase intensity. Something being intense is a desprictive word to say hey this is really hard. Following that means he makes the training more intense, and if he wanna focus on strenght then it is better. 5x5 is both a volmune and intenseity practice.
Great video! I can personally vouch for this, I used to chase volume and have minimal results... I saw biggest changes when I dropped my volume and frequency and really uped the intensity. I hardly hear anyone talking about this... Lot's of volume Bros out there!
Volume feels better, you feel like you accomplished more. Volume is also less prone to get you injured. Meanwhile intensity is really vague due to cheating, differences in definition, crappy exercises and diet.
you're not doing your favourite channels any favours by doing this. the youtube algorithm discounts likes clicked in the first couple of minutes of a video because it knows they're just fan-boy likes and won't use them to recommend the video to other viewers. Always watch beyond the first two minutes before smashing that like button!
At the other end of the extremes are Olympic lifters and power lifters. They lift huge poundages but they don't have huge muscles like body builders. Some don't even look like they lift weights. And most powerlifters have thin legs. So to get the best anabolic effect you gotta find that sweet spot of intensity-volume-frequency-poundage. Basically take the middle ground and you will build the most muscle that way.
With the Mentzer 1 set approach you really have to go beyond failure or what will happen is you’ll feel your muscles deflating over time. That 1 set has to be executed very well and it’s best to have a training partner so you don’t waste the workout. Since I can’t have a consistent training partner I find it’s best to do 2-3 sets per exercise to failure (dumbbells) or near failure (barbells). 12-18 sets per week
Thanks Sean , my name too!😮, I was doing high volume for 6 years , grew very little , in retrospect I was constantly overtraining , now I do hardly any sets , but extreme intensity and focus. Getting bigger and stronger now finally
Great video. Its like you said. Volume and intensity go hand in hand. If you just focus on volume without actually pushing to failure, you will not see hypertrophic gains as the body has no incentives to grow. On the other hand, if you focus on intensity (AKA sets to failure) keeping cumulative volume to a minimum (AKA low consistency), you will see gains but very slow gains compared to someone who kept good volume and intensity.
I think there's a confusion of vocabulary here. "Intensity" defined as relativity against 1rm (percent-based training), is one thing. People consider "intensity" in that case as close proximity to 1rm. 90%, for example, is considered high intensity, where 50% is considered low intensity.... You're defining "intensity" a little differently. You are equating it with proximity to RPE 10. Which is fine. And your case is solid.... ....All the same, that's not the common dialogue when we often say "intensity." And some might be confused. Anyway, close proximity to RPE 10 = gains.
I'm a long haul truck driver and work out 6 days a week with my 5lbs to 50lbs dumbells plus heavy resistance cables up to 130lbs resistance. I go all out to failure every set because I'm so limited by time, don't have too much time for volume and have seen really good results over time even though its hard to find healthy foods on the road. The bulk of my meals is subway salad or sandwich, and protein shakes
This makes total sense.other youtubers have touched on this subject but spend more time arguing with other lifters than they do giving clear advice. Thanks for the video
I love volume training but I realize cutting back and doing just two exercises BUT VERY INTENSE gives me the best growth and strength gain, even though it's mentally tough to do less as a gym addict
I do full body. I am not a scientist but I think my body saving change like a piggyback. Now since I am resting I feel like my body is doing a full withdrawal.
Omg this is what my trainer advised me for this month workout routine. Intensity over volume, I’m focusing on increasing my lifting with the low rep sets.
Finally, someone is saying it, see we agree on something, people misinterpreted the Schoenfeld study, the study was also not practical, the research never accounted for the natural law of accommodation also, it was short, but generally you want to do more work over time (increase volume) and that can only be achieved by progressive overload
Ever since I bought your diet program and weights program I have succeeded beyond my expectations and continue to progress. Thanks for continuing to release great content.
There's confusion about intensity... in powerlifting the heavier the weight the more the intensity... however in bodybuilding intensity is measured differently it's measured in how much force is strategically applied... you have the concentric and eccentric Force... using momentum reduces the force... hence less intensity!
Never seen anyone suggesting increasing volume without reaching true muscular failure as a way to achieve muscular growth! They always have emphasized that muscular failure is the key to growth! For me personally I have found increased volume is the best way to reach MF!
I totally agree about the margin for error being very small with Mentzer style training. However, I disagree about it being more likely to cause injury.
David Jerome Yeah in the case of Mentzer style training where both the positive and negative are done 4 seconds each with very strict form then you could be right
Would have been awesome if you could have made an informative video about how much volume you should train with (how many sets every week on the different body-parts), where you talk about the volume measured by: weight x reps x sets. Would love to see a video about this topic! :-) Keep up all the good work! :-D
Sean could you do a video on periodization, i.e varying the volume/intensity, the different ways to do that (concurrent, block, etc) and especially whether it's advantageous for the beginner or intermediate to be concerned about it or just stick to the same set/rep range and focus on just adding weight. Thanks.
Thanks dude. I know it's a big topic, personally I'm just interested in whether to vary the rep range by doing 6-8 reps most of the time but every few weeks changing to 3-5 reps to try and spur some strength gain before going back to 6-8 reps for a few weeks. So switching back and forth every few weeks or maybe every month. Or alternatively vary in the same week, so for example if I'm squatting twice a week then do a 'heavy' day and 'lighter' day. All of this is for compound exercises; I do a bit of isolation stuff for the shoulders and arms but will always stick to 8-12 reps for those. What I'm talking about with periodization is the big lifts that I want to progress on. If I stick to the same rep range then I'm finding that I tend to stall eventually. Cheers.
You dont go to failure on every set. You have one to 2 warm up sets. They one all out working set. And then MOST IMPORTANTLY. You must rest long enough to ALLOW the muscles to recover and GROW. And few people do that properly. Because if they did. They would reach the upper end of their genetic potential inside 12 months not 5 years. I see guys who have been training for 5 years and look no better than they did when they started. And when you see how they train. And how often. You understand why. You must keep the workouts SHORT BUT INTENSE. Then rest long enough to recover FULLY. My bench press went up 120lbs in one year once I learnt this. Having been stuck on 225lbs for over a year before. When I was overtraining.
Lol doing less intensity and less sets lead you to have better results? Then you were clearly over training vecause normally training "more like a pussy" will not have more gainz...
Great stuff. What I rarely hear however is what ACTUALLY, scientificaly, causes muscle growth. Intensity is a level of exertion...but what does that exertion actually do? Some say it triggers an "adaptive response"? Which is....what? If intensity is required to damage the muscle, initiating repair, and that repair is the actual growth, that makes some logical sense. So often however, there's this mysterious "threshold" that must "trigger hypertrophy", without a biochemical description of what that actually is.
There really is so much too it. Starting out you want simple instructions you can follow. But that quickly becomes a limiting factor. Volume is important for energy efficiency, intensity for strength. 8-15 sets for larger muscle groups seems excessive to me. I think 5-8. More than eight is useful when you reach a plateau to encourage greater efficiency before dropping back to train for more strength gains. I do generally prefer higher rep ranges but strength building is no longer my priority.
I'm a novice/intermediate that totally does low volume, high intensity, moderate frequency. It's working quite well for me, but I do need to take care, I've had to take breaks from a few muscle strains in the process. Nowadays it's 6 sets a week per muscle group with a heavy single at the end of the big 3 lifts, couple accessory exercises, going 4x per week repeating a variation of upper/lower twice each.
I'm not a novice anymore since I train for 15 years now and I train very similiar like you. Without the heavy singles of course but I usually am between 3 to 6 sets per muscle/week and it also works well for me. Even until today.
In my personal Excel sheet, I have a column that I call "quadratic volume". I first square the weight that I use and then multiply it by reps and sets. This way, doubling the reps or sets doubles the volume. But doubling the weight increases the volume by a factor of 4. I am therefore more motivated increasing weight, even if it pushes me back on reps.
One of your best videos to date, im a bit of a high volume high intensity junkie and afraid that if i do less sets il lose gainz or not gain as much :(
100% agree Sean.I see guys who have used the gym for years,just going through the motion,and still look the same as they did on the day they joined!I see some people for example advocating training legs 3 or 4 times a week!What?!!!There's no way anyone can train with any sort of intensity training that way.IMO opinion,if you wanna stimulate muscle growth,you gotta go to failure.
Sean you're the best 🔥👍 your explanation is a gift for us !!! Love from India ..... a request is to Please make a video on "Why I'm getting stronger but not getting big " ?? Pls make a video on this as most of the intermediate lifters face this !
I started doing slow controlled reps on most of my stuff and a weight heavy enough to still do the exercise correctly and I feel it’s been working way better than doing a ton of low weight reps or doing super heavy reps
The primary factor for muscle growth is contraction... on the concentric and eccentric portion of the Reps... full reps partial reps... mid-range reps stretch reps contraction rep's!
Basically if your just counting off reps you'll kill your gains, it's what your feeling from those reps, if your mind muscle connection is good and your really feeling that muscle work your ok.
This is why I do DC training. I hear loads of people say it's not enough volume?? Trust me, if you don't think a DC workout is enough, you're not doing it right! Never have I got to the end of a DC day and thought, I want to do more 🤣
Volume is a Key component of bodybuilding... Going heavy is not always the answer... Most people will give their most favorite body parts, The most volume... Hence, they lack symmetry!
at over 70 y.o.- TUT session of 40 sec or more, several sets, even if weight is reduced very close to failure full rep, partial rep, isometric holds, extended negatives D: all of the above stimulate- don't annihilate fine tune your Recovery .
That makes sense. Our bodies are designed to be the most efficient with resources under the prevailing environmental circumstances. Unless your body perceives a need to grow more muscle, it will try to avoid doing so because building muscle uses precious resources and maintaining it over the long run is even more expensive.
So a mix of high volume - high intensity is the key. High intensity without enough volume doesn't work. Otherwise just do isometrics for 10 sec as hard as possible against an immovable object. High volume without any intensity is not effective - otherwise people doing lots of "6 oz curls" would be monsters. Seems you are back to suggesting using approximately 80% of 1 or 5 rep max; then do a good number of reps for 2 - 3 or more sets.
Progressive overload is the key here, i normally gauge myself if the weight that i carry was achievable at 10 reps at 5 sets then i move to heavier weight. There will be a point your body just adapts to what ever stress level, then its time to go higher to increase the intensity and tell your body to re-adapt but form is important or else we will get injured.
U just changed my way of weight lifting. I use do wht ur saying but only on my bench. 4 I got hurt now starting back over I've been doin way to many reps and not enough lbs..great vid!! MAN.
Intensity, yeah. That's why I love Mike Mentzer, he was so intensity driven. I usually go to failure pretty much on every set and beyond failure on the final set (rest-pause technique) sometimes.
Mentzer was a hack. His programs don't work... the quality of the sets is superb, but there is not enough volume to cause any serious changes. I think the bare minimum volume wise is something like a Dorian Yates style program... you still do multiple exercises per bodypart, you do a couple of warmup sets and then one balls deep set beyond failure. I personally prefer more volume than this, but this is the least amount of volume I have ever seen any results on.
@@darthghitza8037 but Mike Mentzer's program worked with a lot of guys, including Dorian yates (early). Yeah, sure his Heavy Duty was very low on volume, but it was innovative and still produced good results.
Thanks man im stuck at 90 kgs in bench press as my one max. Used to do 8 sets on bench press cause i wanted volume.. so i did 16 sets a week on chest.. gonna reduce it down to 10 sets per week and focusing on adding weights and reps instead of adding more sets. Thank you very much you are the best fitness RUclipsr man
Look at most furniture movers. Specifically the guys/girls doing the heavy lifting. A lot of them have really strong arms and legs etc. and whenever I ask them about working out, they tell me that they never formally workout in a gym etc. They just lift furniture.
High intensity training on a consistent basis leads to overtraining... High-volume training also leads to overtraining... Training should be cycled between high intensity and high volume!
Historical a pyramid sets used to be the norm... you drop reps increase wait on the subsequent sets... it's always better to go up in Reps before you go up in weight... you start out with warm up sets... then into prep sets.... before you do your actual work sets... most people will always start out above their work sets using Body English!
Hmm. On another thread I mentioned that I do a few one rep sets. I got challenged a little. I explained that I discovered quite by accident that a one rep said, often taking 30 seconds to complete, can be effective. A few static holds, really forms of one rep sets, can be included ... Thanks Sean being one of the most logical and reasoning of all the online sources.
Good video Sean. Recent research by Cody Haun and others shows that you can build muscle by increasing the total number of sets performed without increasing load (which they kept constant at around 60% 1 RM). This study is reviewed comprehensively at Stronger by Science. There seems to be a lot of confusion surrounding the concept of 'volume'. Some define it as number of sets per week, others as sets x reps, others as 'volume-load' or sets x reps x load. Even 'progressive overload' has various meanings. Some count increasing sets as 'progressive overload' even when load itself is kept constant. The way I look at it, the bottom line for muscle growth is that you are doing more and more mechanical work in the gym over time. That increase in work can come either in the form of more sets or more load.
Maybe what the volume guys are experiencing is higher volumes [say 10 total sets at 90% of failure vs 2 sets to failure]] may create more capillary/veins and help training intensity in the future and therefore more growth.
Thanks for watching guys, hope you found this video helpful. I know another big fitness channel uploaded a video on the same topic last week and came to a similar conclusion as me, but just want to note that I recorded this 3 weeks ago so this was purely a coincidence. Anyway, how close to failure do you personally train on your sets, and how much weekly volume do you use per muscle? Comment below.
Also don't forget to follow me over on Instagram as well where I post useful daily content and other updates that you'll get a lot of value from: instagram.com/sean_nalewanyj
See you in the next vid!
Honestly, i don't think you are the type to watch a video and then remake it. I too watch that other channel with the letter X at the end and im finding your videos to be more straight foward, with the stransparent truth easier to understand.
Sean Nalewanyj I’ve tried volume training long term and it actually led to muscle loss and CNS overload. I went back to my tried and limited number of sets and reps per muscle. Overload over time, and it does take time, and incremental added load works for me. Please don’t go their with Dorian Yates training. He was taking a shit load of drugs and his joints are now a mess. You’ve been in the right track with your recommendations, though you may have just confused many listeners. Intensity doesn’t = failure.
@@juliogomez9145 And if I was gonna remake someone's content I surely wouldn't be stupid enough to post it 1 week after the original was posted. And thanks, glad you like my videos.
On compound lifts with heavier weights I tend to keep failure to the last set/2 sets(on a bad day) of said exercise. With isolations I tend to go to failure on all but 1 sets(usually 4 sets with isolations)
Steve Wise I specifically said that I don’t recommend that type of training and that it would increase the chances for injury. I was only using it to demonstrate the fact that intensity is primary over volume. I very clearly stated that I recommend training 1-3 reps short of failure on a moderate volume approach.
I increased volume and now I'm partially deaf.
Damn, I increased volume and now I have stage IV hypertension
What did you say? I can't hear you...😛
ah, my friends Great Great Great Gran Father died in the year 1753 and he just voted for Joe Biden.....so sad
lol
😂
Incomplete advice is what most people are giving out . This guy actually completes the advice and specified what’s needed for the audience to really capture the training method . Great info as always .
Thank you
It isn’t rocket science and that’s exactly what Sean Nalewanyj emulates in his videos.
I swear I thought that was a pigeon in the background just shakin' its ass.
Haha I didn't even notice it there until afterwards
what is that?
@@ok92computer your mom
Did we get an answer?..😮
@@boomer2095
Yes. It was a pigeon shakin' its ass
I think lack of intensity is the most common cause for people to quit because of no/poor gains. Without them even realizing it.
People want things quickly and as easily as possible
Yeah thats because everyone keeps preaching this 8-12 reps thing without underlying the fact you need to move weights that actually cause muscular failure within this range.
@@theiriscen yeah I don't think a lot of people realise that, those last 2 reps should be near or on failure
Benjamin Prince indeed
@@benjaminprince6424 whenever i bench heavy i do about 10 reps but from the first rep i struggle to get the weight up, so basically my near failure is like half my reps which i dont understand why
You can workout hard or workout long, you can't do both. I prefer quality, not quantity. Good stuff as always Sean
Or you can do both if you are in your 20s lmao
@@ludapecurka102 If I was in my 20s now, half of that time would be spent taking selfies in the mirror lol
I see 50-60 year olds working out hard as shit in the gym every day
As an advanced trainee I can do both
thanks for the tip JEFF
"Musccles don't count, they FEEEL"
They are like a finga pointing the way to the moon...
😂😂😂
"Be Buff my friend"
thank you, Sean -- this makes so much sense
I've been a Mike Mentzer/Arthur Jones 1-set/last rep-is-a-screamer devotee for forty years. Recently, thanks to you and some other coaches, I've come to realize that at age 71, I'm better off aiming for two (or more) sets with the recommended 1 or 2 sub-max rep range.
As I've gotten older, I simply take too long to recover from a work-out when it's grind all the way. The easy part of push-to-you-drop is that there's no doubt of what's enough -- duh, you can't do any more. The tricky part for me now is learning what is an honest 1-2 sub max effort. Again, thank you -- appreciate your willingness to share your knowledge.
I love how articulate Sean is. He explains with science and then ‘dumbs it down’ in case we don’t understand some terms, words etc.
Sean Navexehsidbldjbsndlyj is my favorite natty.
I’m so confused but this is funny lol
Rarely do I come across such quality advice from people in the Body Building and Fitness scene, and therefore, I couldn't resist praising this video (as well as many others that Sean puts out). Considering I started exercising back in 1994 when we didn't have the internet or a large number of appropriate books or workout guidelines, I regretfully acknowledge that many of us wasted a significant number of years in the gym without realizing the importance of intensity and overly emphasizing the significance of volume.
You’re so right bro!
I always thought of it as intensity = a multiplier, and if volume is multiplied by 0 (shit intensity) then:
100reps x 0intensity = 0hypertrophy
Nicely put 😅
@prvnce kari Yea, when both are properly planned out in a program, leads to amazing strength and hypertrophic benefits.
@@adilmuscle I'm glad you appreciate the analogy bro :) sean always puts things so well!
@prvnce kari amen bro preach it!
I mean that's just stupid the way you said it. That's just you being a smart aleck kid. Literally, even the worst youtuber won't tell you to bench press a bar with 0 plates for 2500 reps.
When it is said that "volume is the primary driver of hypertrophy", this needs to be understood as "volume is the primary driver of hypertrophy GIVEN you are taking sets near (or to) failure", and it most certainly is.
Intensity in and of itself is the primary driver within ONE given set, but when we look at training programs as a whole, it's a nuanced balance between intensity, volume, and frequency.
The more volume you do, the more gains you will get (so long as you can recover), but the same is not true of intensity. In fact, I would argue against putting intensity too high because it will put he volume and frequency (used to accumulate more volume) in jeopardy. Intensity is more of a threshold factor, where the sets needs to be difficult ENOUGH to allow for a hypertrophic response, but this idea of intensity being the primary driver within the context of a training program is misguided.
All of the factors are important, but once intensity is set at a proper level, the way you get more gains is focusing on how you can fit more recoverable volume in, and that's why it's the "primary driver".
I agree completely with what you said.
Some people are misinterpreting me and thinking I’m saying “more intensity is better” which I clearly didn’t. I was merely pointing out that sufficient intensity has to be there first and foremost before volume has any effect. So therefore it’s the absolute primary baseline factor in stimulating growth. But of course in the practical sense you need both intensity and volume, which I outlined.
The only purpose here is to help novices understand that set quality needs to be there before quantity has any usefulness, and that more volume is only beneficial up to a certain point.
@@Sean_Nalewanyj thanks for the clarification, Sean. In that context, I'm with you all the way.
The true problem is black/white thinking about the variables, and I think whereas you were combatting the notion that you can pump away in the gym well away from failure and make great gains, I was hesitant for novices to train balls to the wall with intensity and become enamored with the urge to try HIT/DC style training due to this innate human desire for suffering to achieve our goals when the evidence is pretty clear that for most people, this is not the path for the best growth and sustainability.
For novices, quality form, proper intensity of effort at lower volumes, then add weekly sets from there as tolerated (or desired) for max growth.
Saw my best gains for sure from low volume, 4-7 reps per set, 4-5 min rests between sets.
Same here
You did not really address volume at all, only the rep range; how many sets per body part, how many rest days between like workouts?
The most success I’ve had weight lifting has been 4-5 sets a week for muscle group, all the way to failure. I use a 4 week cycle starting with 12 reps for each exercise the first week, progressively increasing weight and decreasing reps each week from 12 to 9, and 9 to 6, ending the final week with 3 reps with the heaviest working sets. I just tracked my weights each week and every time I started the cycle over I just tried to add at least 5 lbs if not more to each lift. I broke month long plateaus with this method and went from benching 2 plates for 4 sets of three to 4 sets of six. For me that was really good. Life got in the way since then but I’m working to get back to that strength now and fortunately now I know how to do it
You did 1 set per excersise?
@@EduardoSanchez-hg3oc oh no sorry I worded that wrong. 4-5 sets per exercise usually about six different exercises
Sean always on point, debunking the common myths. Progressive tension overload trumps all else 👌💯.
Great video Sean, informative and straight to the point as always. Intensity is the key to growth, you see many people who don’t even exceed RPE 6 and wonder why they don’t grow.
Yep. I'm not denying that more volume produces more growth up to a certain point, but it all hinges on the fact that you're training hard enough in the first place.
So in short - "No pain no gain".
Sometimes we hear clichés and they go right over our heads either because they've been rinsed or they're considered outdated, but that one still holds relevance.
Not really, pain is almost always bad and indicates that you're hurting yourself. It should be called "discomfort", that is pretty much necessary.
@@ernoeskeli1139 There should be no pain during a workout, but there should be a burn that you feel to failure as lactic acid builds up.
The pain really comes a day or so after your workout and you can't really avoid it, as it's supposed to happen.
If you're not tearing muscle fibres, you're not going to build newer and bigger ones.
@@Longlostpuss doms (delayed onset muscle soreness) isn't really pain, it's just soreness. If the soreness is literally painful, then you did too much and aren't building muscle effectively. There should be mild soreness after a lot of work but if you're doing the same exercise many times, you won't get very sore even though you're progressing and building new muscle tissue.
My test just went up from this video alone! Thanks for finally staying what ive been waiting for! The dogma of volume permeates fitness lately, and the details of intensity, rest time, tut, etc are never explained. Just hype for a study no one ever reads, well done sir.
Thank you. I've been spending 2 hours in the gym doing 3 sets to failure. I think I will cut my sets down to 2 sets to failure. I've been keeping track just like you've said. I've been gaining muscle but I think that extra set isn't needed since I'm going to true failure every set.
2 hours is too much, by about 45 minutes. Also, go to just UNDER failure.
You gotta get the struggle reps people!
Yea struggle reps feels amazing, its like accomplishing something worth while. As arnold said, "The last reps are those that count"
No one grew from trying to tip a car over. Struggle with isometric reps totally useless.
@@meocats
What's this 'trying'?
You complete reps or you fail them. No trying. If you struggle to complete a rep and you don't, it's not a rep. Since I said 'struggle reps' pluralized, you can deduce that there's more than 1 completed. Struggle reps are the hard reps. Nobody will excel past noob gains as a natural lifter by only doing easy reps.
'try' to comprehend
@Coolest Guy On The Internet there are positive reps (lifting a weight), isometric, then negative reps where the weight is more than you can pull and rather pulling you down and you're fighting it. Mike Mentzer was a big fan of negative reps (aka going to failure) and isometrics in his earlier days.
@@PF_ROB "shut" the "fuck up", dumb shit. None of your "trying" is accurate. There are concentric, eccentric, and isometric reps. Don't even reply, i'm out of this echo chamber cancer thread and you can keep your stance and "shove it" too.
1:46 I think it is more accurate to say that repair of the various types of tissues involved in locomotion, i.e., the musculoskeletal system, which gets short-handed as "muscle growth," is a response to strain, or tension than it is to say it is a response to stress. Stress is when you find out your wife is divorcing you or you get fired or your kid gets run over by a locomotive. Strain or tension is when you push/pull a mass that is high on a particular musculoskeletal organ's maximum force generation capacity. Maximum force generation capacity is not a static trait, and it changes over the life course, from day to day, throughout a day and with each exertion. If I perform a motion with 25% of my one-rep max mass resistance, the actual force generation capacity of the musculoskeletal system performing that motion is lower after 10 reps than it was after 1, and the effect is likely non-linear as the number of exertions increases. This is why it is possible to train to failure with almost any degree of imposed resistance. It is worth noting there that the reasons for this "failure" are not mechanical or structural, i.e., the "damage" being done to the tissues is not necessarily at the level of "injury." Failure resulting from a "As Many Reps As Possible" regimen is more a result of intra- and inter-cellular transport, metabolism, waste management and energy availability. This type of "failure" is ostensibly distinct from the "failure" which occurs when a system is exposed to a level of resistance under exertion that is at the systems current "one rep max" and then a second rep is attempted, though to the best of my knowledge, the exact details of HOW these two types of failure differ are still only partially understood. If you can elucidate that question I would appreciate it.
Mike Menzter was always right.
Agree with you Sean 💪 , would like to see a video about Insulin Resistance , it's a topic that might be underrated
Check Dr Berg.com. He’s one of the experts
@@robblanks2141 i agree brother
This is true I get the best results doing full body workouts 2 sets to failure and I have enough energy to get through my workout and adding weight or reps every workout
Damn right, it's time under tension and intensity. If you're a beginner to weight lifting, do Starting Strength before anything else! Getting strong first facilitates much greater hypertrophy gains later
Hmm i understand, how long should a newbie focus on strength roughly?
yessir alot of these newbs see these ig pages and go straight to a 5 day split and most of them quit when their tendons or ligaments give out first.
Training intensity coupled with percentages of your 1RM has worked for me over the years. I usually split my routines up with 1)Main Movers 2)Accessory Work 3) Finishers. I then vary intensity with Heavy, Light, Medium with them throughout the week. You vary the intensity and volume. It takes both!
I've been lifting for 10 years now, and I stalled and have been stalled for the last 4 years because I was so focused on intensity. Changing my approach to volume has helped me get more results. Basically I was stuck at a specific weight on my main lifts and could not get past it. I would do deloads and take a week off, but was stuck. I started t on lighten the weight slightly and do more sets. That's when the gains started again. Instead of struggling to bench 315 for 3 sets of 8, drop the weight to 275 and do sets of 10 until you can no longer get I clean reps. You will be surprised how many sets you can do and over time the gains you can get.
You could also have changed to 5x5 lets say you can do 335 for 5 reps which i think you can if you can hit 315 for 8. That would be 8375 for the 5x5 of volume from bench alone, where as the 315 for 8 is 7560, changing to a 5x5 would both increase volume and intensity. That being said i have no clue if you are someone who responds better to higher volume or someone who responds better to higher intensity, however a 5x5 tends to be very good middle ground for the both.
I agree with Morten Larsen.. It seems like your muscles respond better with higher reps for growth, but if you want to continue to increase your strength, doing a lower rep rang like your 5 rep max would be better
Morten Larsen with the 5x5 the volume increased but that’s it. Doing that 3 extra rep at 315 is way more intense vs 5x5 at 335
@@denyxrunner intensity can mean a few things, however you are wrong mate. Increasing the weight also increase intensity. Something being intense is a desprictive word to say hey this is really hard. Following that means he makes the training more intense, and if he wanna focus on strenght then it is better. 5x5 is both a volmune and intenseity practice.
Lol bye bye joints
Great video! I can personally vouch for this, I used to chase volume and have minimal results... I saw biggest changes when I dropped my volume and frequency and really uped the intensity.
I hardly hear anyone talking about this... Lot's of volume Bros out there!
Volume feels better, you feel like you accomplished more. Volume is also less prone to get you injured. Meanwhile intensity is really vague due to cheating, differences in definition, crappy exercises and diet.
I loved the fact that you mentioned my favorite bodybuilder Mike Mentzer.
I remember when I did 5/3/1 and made great strength gains. I'm going to try it again and change my routine up
I'm a simple guy. Sean uploads, me like before i watch.
Haha for real bro
Why bother researching when you got idol worship?
yup you are simple alright be FUCKIN ORIGINAL!!!!!
you're not doing your favourite channels any favours by doing this. the youtube algorithm discounts likes clicked in the first couple of minutes of a video because it knows they're just fan-boy likes and won't use them to recommend the video to other viewers. Always watch beyond the first two minutes before smashing that like button!
World's most underrated bodybuilding channel
At the other end of the extremes are Olympic lifters and power lifters. They lift huge poundages but they don't have huge muscles like body builders. Some don't even look like they lift weights. And most powerlifters have thin legs. So to get the best anabolic effect you gotta find that sweet spot of intensity-volume-frequency-poundage. Basically take the middle ground and you will build the most muscle that way.
Easily the best channel for the regular guy. Your advice is always top shelf. Thanks a bunch, Sean.
With the Mentzer 1 set approach you really have to go beyond failure or what will happen is you’ll feel your muscles deflating over time. That 1 set has to be executed very well and it’s best to have a training partner so you don’t waste the workout. Since I can’t have a consistent training partner I find it’s best to do 2-3 sets per exercise to failure (dumbbells) or near failure (barbells). 12-18 sets per week
Thanks Sean , my name too!😮, I was doing high volume for 6 years , grew very little , in retrospect I was constantly overtraining , now I do hardly any sets , but extreme intensity and focus. Getting bigger and stronger now finally
Great video.
Its like you said. Volume and intensity go hand in hand.
If you just focus on volume without actually pushing to failure, you will not see hypertrophic gains as the body has no incentives to grow.
On the other hand, if you focus on intensity (AKA sets to failure) keeping cumulative volume to a minimum (AKA low consistency), you will see gains but very slow gains compared to someone who kept good volume and intensity.
I think there's a confusion of vocabulary here. "Intensity" defined as relativity against 1rm (percent-based training), is one thing. People consider "intensity" in that case as close proximity to 1rm. 90%, for example, is considered high intensity, where 50% is considered low intensity.... You're defining "intensity" a little differently. You are equating it with proximity to RPE 10. Which is fine. And your case is solid....
....All the same, that's not the common dialogue when we often say "intensity." And some might be confused.
Anyway, close proximity to RPE 10 = gains.
I'm a long haul truck driver and work out 6 days a week with my 5lbs to 50lbs dumbells plus heavy resistance cables up to 130lbs resistance. I go all out to failure every set because I'm so limited by time, don't have too much time for volume and have seen really good results over time even though its hard to find healthy foods on the road. The bulk of my meals is subway salad or sandwich, and protein shakes
Great well-thought out video, as always. It's great to see you back uploading.
It's good to be back
This makes total sense.other youtubers have touched on this subject but spend more time arguing with other lifters than they do giving clear advice. Thanks for the video
Mike Mentzer tried his damndest to get this thru peoples skulls all throughout the 80’s and 90’s.
I've been following you since 2009. Since I was just a noobie novice lifter....and I still find your content valuable af. Thank you
Eugene Choi Thanks dude, I appreciate it
Eugene Choi no need for the af word brother
I love volume training but I realize cutting back and doing just two exercises BUT VERY INTENSE gives me the best growth and strength gain, even though it's mentally tough to do less as a gym addict
Im so glad im able to do 30-40 sets a session with intensity and not overtrain
Key for me is in exercise selection
@@ludapecurka102 but are you sure it's maximising your potential?
@@ludapecurka102 update 3 years later?
@@ludapecurka102update 4 years later?
So a good potential strategy is combining both. So a sort of almost amrap style but instead 2-3 reps short, per each set, but adding a lot of sets.
I have worked out for a year straight but when I took a 1 month break. My body started to look better with rest.
That's why go with full body workout
I do full body. I am not a scientist but I think my body saving change like a piggyback. Now since I am resting I feel like my body is doing a full withdrawal.
So why do people build more muscle in 6-12 rep range and less in the 1-5 range if both are to failure?
I am confused
Omg this is what my trainer advised me for this month workout routine. Intensity over volume, I’m focusing on increasing my lifting with the low rep sets.
Finally, someone is saying it, see we agree on something, people misinterpreted the Schoenfeld study, the study was also not practical, the research never accounted for the natural law of accommodation also, it was short, but generally you want to do more work over time (increase volume) and that can only be achieved by progressive overload
Ever since I bought your diet program and weights program I have succeeded beyond my expectations and continue to progress. Thanks for continuing to release great content.
Glad to hear Jose!
There's confusion about intensity... in powerlifting the heavier the weight the more the intensity... however in bodybuilding intensity is measured differently it's measured in how much force is strategically applied... you have the concentric and eccentric Force... using momentum reduces the force... hence less intensity!
I just watch this guy now, not worth bothering with the others 😂
Never seen anyone suggesting increasing volume without reaching true muscular failure as a way to achieve muscular growth! They always have emphasized that muscular failure is the key to growth! For me personally I have found increased volume is the best way to reach MF!
I totally agree about the margin for error being very small with Mentzer style training. However, I disagree about it being more likely to cause injury.
David Jerome Yeah in the case of Mentzer style training where both the positive and negative are done 4 seconds each with very strict form then you could be right
Would have been awesome if you could have made an informative video about how much volume you should train with (how many sets every week on the different body-parts), where you talk about the volume measured by: weight x reps x sets. Would love to see a video about this topic! :-)
Keep up all the good work! :-D
Sean could you do a video on periodization, i.e varying the volume/intensity, the different ways to do that (concurrent, block, etc) and especially whether it's advantageous for the beginner or intermediate to be concerned about it or just stick to the same set/rep range and focus on just adding weight. Thanks.
Christian Langfield I’ll see what I can do
Thanks dude. I know it's a big topic, personally I'm just interested in whether to vary the rep range by doing 6-8 reps most of the time but every few weeks changing to 3-5 reps to try and spur some strength gain before going back to 6-8 reps for a few weeks. So switching back and forth every few weeks or maybe every month. Or alternatively vary in the same week, so for example if I'm squatting twice a week then do a 'heavy' day and 'lighter' day. All of this is for compound exercises; I do a bit of isolation stuff for the shoulders and arms but will always stick to 8-12 reps for those. What I'm talking about with periodization is the big lifts that I want to progress on. If I stick to the same rep range then I'm finding that I tend to stall eventually. Cheers.
I used to train to failure on every set. Lately I’ve been going for an rpe 7 or 8 with less sets and seen better results
You dont go to failure on every set. You have one to 2 warm up sets. They one all out working set.
And then MOST IMPORTANTLY. You must rest long enough to ALLOW the muscles to recover and GROW.
And few people do that properly. Because if they did. They would reach the upper end of their genetic potential inside 12 months not 5 years.
I see guys who have been training for 5 years and look no better than they did when they started. And when you see how they train. And how often. You understand why.
You must keep the workouts SHORT BUT INTENSE. Then rest long enough to recover FULLY.
My bench press went up 120lbs in one year once I learnt this. Having been stuck on 225lbs for over a year before. When I was overtraining.
PROJECT DX so how long did you rest between days to do the same workout, in this case bench press
Lol doing less intensity and less sets lead you to have better results? Then you were clearly over training vecause normally training "more like a pussy" will not have more gainz...
@@fender1000100 what does it mean all in set ?
@@fender1000100 elaborate please
Great stuff. What I rarely hear however is what ACTUALLY, scientificaly, causes muscle growth. Intensity is a level of exertion...but what does that exertion actually do? Some say it triggers an "adaptive response"? Which is....what? If intensity is required to damage the muscle, initiating repair, and that repair is the actual growth, that makes some logical sense. So often however, there's this mysterious "threshold" that must "trigger hypertrophy", without a biochemical description of what that actually is.
There really is so much too it. Starting out you want simple instructions you can follow. But that quickly becomes a limiting factor. Volume is important for energy efficiency, intensity for strength. 8-15 sets for larger muscle groups seems excessive to me. I think 5-8. More than eight is useful when you reach a plateau to encourage greater efficiency before dropping back to train for more strength gains. I do generally prefer higher rep ranges but strength building is no longer my priority.
I'm a novice/intermediate that totally does low volume, high intensity, moderate frequency. It's working quite well for me, but I do need to take care, I've had to take breaks from a few muscle strains in the process. Nowadays it's 6 sets a week per muscle group with a heavy single at the end of the big 3 lifts, couple accessory exercises, going 4x per week repeating a variation of upper/lower twice each.
I'm not a novice anymore since I train for 15 years now and I train very similiar like you. Without the heavy singles of course but I usually am between 3 to 6 sets per muscle/week and it also works well for me. Even until today.
This deserves 10 x its views very very important Info.
In my personal Excel sheet, I have a column that I call "quadratic volume". I first square the weight that I use and then multiply it by reps and sets. This way, doubling the reps or sets doubles the volume. But doubling the weight increases the volume by a factor of 4. I am therefore more motivated increasing weight, even if it pushes me back on reps.
One of your best videos to date, im a bit of a high volume high intensity junkie and afraid that if i do less sets il lose gainz or not gain as much :(
I bet part of your workout is junk volume. Don't overtrain.
100% agree Sean.I see guys who have used the gym for years,just going through the motion,and still look the same as they did on the day they joined!I see some people for example advocating training legs 3 or 4 times a week!What?!!!There's no way anyone can train with any sort of intensity training that way.IMO opinion,if you wanna stimulate muscle growth,you gotta go to failure.
Sean you're the best 🔥👍 your explanation is a gift for us !!! Love from India ..... a request is to Please make a video on "Why I'm getting stronger but not getting big " ?? Pls make a video on this as most of the intermediate lifters face this !
You need more protein. Also, stick to an 8-12 rep range and slow down a bit.
100% correct , I grew at double pace when I reduced volume and increased intensity , just two workouts a week program
Thank you for telling that it's about reaching mascular failure. I increased the weight by 40% and it still took 19 reps to reach failure
Mike Memtzer has sparked something in me and here I am
My man with the knowledge as always, good to find you again haven't seen you in a couple of years.
You are the Dave2D of fitness. Straight up no bullshit content. Keep it up!
I started doing slow controlled reps on most of my stuff and a weight heavy enough to still do the exercise correctly and I feel it’s been working way better than doing a ton of low weight reps or doing super heavy reps
Super slow especially in the concentric motion is what triggers muscle stress the most.
The primary factor for muscle growth is contraction... on the concentric and eccentric portion of the Reps... full reps partial reps... mid-range reps stretch reps contraction rep's!
Thank you, Sean. Your straight and direct content is really helpful.
Basically if your just counting off reps you'll kill your gains, it's what your feeling from those reps, if your mind muscle connection is good and your really feeling that muscle work your ok.
Also, to push your muscles to a high degree of fatigue, accompanied with adequate volume.
Well explained, no bullshit, really one of the top 3 guys on RUclips, great work buddy.
Who are the other 2? Just curious.
Perfect Sean. Intensity builds immensity. Fantastic videos bro
This is why I do DC training. I hear loads of people say it's not enough volume?? Trust me, if you don't think a DC workout is enough, you're not doing it right! Never have I got to the end of a DC day and thought, I want to do more 🤣
I’ve done DC training before and can concur
Volume is a Key component of bodybuilding... Going heavy is not always the answer... Most people will give their most favorite body parts, The most volume... Hence, they lack symmetry!
at over 70 y.o.- TUT session of 40 sec or more, several sets, even if weight is reduced very close to failure
full rep, partial rep, isometric holds, extended negatives D: all of the above
stimulate- don't annihilate
fine tune your Recovery .
That makes sense. Our bodies are designed to be the most efficient with resources under the prevailing environmental circumstances. Unless your body perceives a need to grow more muscle, it will try to avoid doing so because building muscle uses precious resources and maintaining it over the long run is even more expensive.
So a mix of high volume - high intensity is the key. High intensity without enough volume doesn't work. Otherwise just do isometrics for 10 sec as hard as possible against an immovable object. High volume without any intensity is not effective - otherwise people doing lots of "6 oz curls" would be monsters. Seems you are back to suggesting using approximately 80% of 1 or 5 rep max; then do a good number of reps for 2 - 3 or more sets.
Thats when periodization comes in.
Progressive overload is the key here, i normally gauge myself if the weight that i carry was achievable at 10 reps at 5 sets then i move to heavier weight. There will be a point your body just adapts to what ever stress level, then its time to go higher to increase the intensity and tell your body to re-adapt but form is important or else we will get injured.
I'd make that 4 sets.
U just changed my way of weight lifting. I use do wht ur saying but only on my bench. 4 I got hurt now starting back over I've been doin way to many reps and not enough lbs..great vid!! MAN.
Intensity, yeah. That's why I love Mike Mentzer, he was so intensity driven. I usually go to failure pretty much on every set and beyond failure on the final set (rest-pause technique) sometimes.
exactly!
Mentzer was a hack. His programs don't work... the quality of the sets is superb, but there is not enough volume to cause any serious changes. I think the bare minimum volume wise is something like a Dorian Yates style program... you still do multiple exercises per bodypart, you do a couple of warmup sets and then one balls deep set beyond failure. I personally prefer more volume than this, but this is the least amount of volume I have ever seen any results on.
@@darthghitza8037 but Mike Mentzer's program worked with a lot of guys, including Dorian yates (early). Yeah, sure his Heavy Duty was very low on volume, but it was innovative and still produced good results.
Thanks man im stuck at 90 kgs in bench press as my one max. Used to do 8 sets on bench press cause i wanted volume.. so i did 16 sets a week on chest.. gonna reduce it down to 10 sets per week and focusing on adding weights and reps instead of adding more sets. Thank you very much you are the best fitness RUclipsr man
there's much more to programming for hypertrophy than just plain keeping it further away from failure...
That bag on the meter flopping in the wind was so damn distracting lol. Great videos and truthful information for us beginners. Thank you.
I'm retiring 5x5 and 3x8. You make a lot of sense
High intensity coupled with volume separate the successful body builders from the also rans. Of course, that's something that is anything but easy. 😁😁
Don't forget the drugs
Quality over quantity
Look at most furniture movers. Specifically the guys/girls doing the heavy lifting. A lot of them have really strong arms and legs etc. and whenever I ask them about working out, they tell me that they never formally workout in a gym etc. They just lift furniture.
High intensity training on a consistent basis leads to overtraining... High-volume training also leads to overtraining... Training should be cycled between high intensity and high volume!
Dan Stafford yes!
Not if the high intensity work is low volume
Historical a pyramid sets used to be the norm... you drop reps increase wait on the subsequent sets... it's always better to go up in Reps before you go up in weight... you start out with warm up sets... then into prep sets.... before you do your actual work sets... most people will always start out above their work sets using Body English!
Key word INTENSITY! Thank you 🙏🏼
Hmm. On another thread I mentioned that I do a few one rep sets. I got challenged a little. I explained that I discovered quite by accident that a one rep said, often taking 30 seconds to complete, can be effective. A few static holds, really forms of one rep sets, can be included ... Thanks Sean being one of the most logical and reasoning of all the online sources.
Oh i hate static holds or lowering the weight slowly
Does nothing for me just inflames muscle and conective tissue
@@ludapecurka102 Sorry to hear that. The eccentric phase is usually considered better for muscle size. Each of has to do what works for us, as you do.
Good video Sean. Recent research by Cody Haun and others shows that you can build muscle by increasing the total number of sets performed without increasing load (which they kept constant at around 60% 1 RM). This study is reviewed comprehensively at Stronger by Science. There seems to be a lot of confusion surrounding the concept of 'volume'. Some define it as number of sets per week, others as sets x reps, others as 'volume-load' or sets x reps x load. Even 'progressive overload' has various meanings. Some count increasing sets as 'progressive overload' even when load itself is kept constant. The way I look at it, the bottom line for muscle growth is that you are doing more and more mechanical work in the gym over time. That increase in work can come either in the form of more sets or more load.
Mike Mentzer and Dorian Yates talks about intensity long time ago!
Maybe what the volume guys are experiencing is higher volumes [say 10 total sets at 90% of failure vs 2 sets to failure]] may create more capillary/veins and help training intensity in the future and therefore more growth.
Fatigue versus stimulation... you cannot let fatigue outpace the stimulation!