# Training Twice a week?



## brickhoused (Mar 12, 2008)

Does anyone on here train twice a week, a few local big motherf*ckerz i know train twice a week and seems to work really well.

Whts everyones opinion on training every bodypart twice a week?


----------



## 1988-s.leeson (Feb 24, 2008)

i personally dont have the time to train everything twice a week.

i do often double up on certain bodyparts for a month or so priority training, and it does work.


----------



## brickhoused (Mar 12, 2008)

1988-s.leeson said:


> i personally dont have the time to train everything twice a week.
> 
> i do often double up on certain bodyparts for a month or so priority training, and it does work.


Do you thinkg that if you were to have the time, it would work better or do you thin k if u did this with every bodypart u may burn out?


----------



## 1988-s.leeson (Feb 24, 2008)

i personally think that if u structure it properly s u have enough rest, and make sure u rotate your training maybe on a 10 day cycle not a 7 day cycle. i think u would benefit.

i think 2ce a week is difficult to structure, but 10days may be more feasible.

monday-quads hams calves

tues-chest bis

weds-rest

thurs-back tris

fri-shoulders calves

sat-chest bis

sun-rest

mon-quads hams calves

tues-back tris

weds-shoulders

?? not sure really, i think that is perfectly workable, no major muscle groups trained together.


----------



## wogihao (Jun 15, 2007)

Yea its perfectly feisable, with enough rest, food and drugs it can be done. Assuming you had the time splitting it into AM/PM would be even more effective.

Thats how advanced guys used to train, now only the pros and competitive amatures seem to do it.

Now that full body workouts, HIT, dogcrapp, Brawn style workouts are now in-vogue its come full circle and its now a very unpopular method to admit to useing.

Myself i think they all have there good points, but to rely on one to the exclusion of the others seems problamatic.

Anyway training the bodypart 2x a week realy assumes that you:

1. have been training for awhile.. (at least 1 year)

2. are assisted or a genetic freak with a recovery ability and responce to exersise that nasser/dorrian would envy.

3. have lots of time to rest (unlimited rest time is optimal)

4. have lots of food (unlimited food access is optimal)

5. your not going to positive failure on the sets (rember you dont want to cain your CNS any more than you have to)


----------



## 1988-s.leeson (Feb 24, 2008)

im def considering a 10 day rotation after my cut.

if i do i will let u knw how it goes.

im lucky cos i have summer hlidays so i get 6 weeks where i can train morn and eve. will be making the most of my growing oppertunities 

should be on a fiar amount of chemcals by then aswell, so recovery time should be good allong with massive strength increases


----------



## wogihao (Jun 15, 2007)

1988-s.leeson said:


> im def considering a 10 day rotation after my cut.
> 
> if i do i will let u knw how it goes.
> 
> ...


Going for the rebound after the show eh.. very nice.


----------



## Big_Dan (Jan 26, 2008)

tried it , gained a little , but got over trained too easily , is just stick to training each body part once a week!!


----------



## chrisj22 (Mar 22, 2006)

Don't know about training each bodypart twice a week, but I train twice a week due to my poor recovery abilities.


----------



## cellaratt (Jul 16, 2008)

I train every body part twice a week ..except legs but thats just coz I hate em...


----------



## Five-O (May 21, 2006)

brickhoused said:


> Do you thinkg that if you were to have the time, it would work better or do you thin k if u did this with every bodypart u may burn out?


Burnout, less is more.

Obviously volume works for some, but for most, id wager 2 or 3 times per week is adequate, its all about applying intensity during the visits IMO.


----------



## gym rat (Jul 10, 2007)

i would only train smaller bodyparts twice a week, like calfs, arms etc,


----------



## Jock (Apr 8, 2003)

I do a full body workout 2x a week, probably because I don't bother training bodyparts directly.


----------



## ah24 (Jun 25, 2006)

I went through 6 weeks of training every bodypart except for arms and calves twice a week.

One day was strength type stuff, 5x5's and compound only movements. The next were more traditional BBer workouts focusing on getting a good pump.

Had some pretty good results I like to think


----------



## fozyspilgrims (Oct 22, 2007)

I am going to change my routine to training each muscle group twice a week.


----------



## Wee G1436114539 (Oct 6, 2007)

Timescale for elevated protein synthesis after training is 24-48 hours. After 72 hours protein synthesis is back to baseline, so yes, everyone should train bodyparts at least twice a week.


----------



## Aftershock (Jan 28, 2004)

wogihao said:


> Yea its perfectly feisable, with enough rest, food and drugs it can be done. Assuming you had the time splitting it into AM/PM would be even more effective.
> 
> Thats how advanced guys used to train, now only the pros and competitive amatures seem to do it.
> 
> ...


Point 1-4 I can agree with, but I cant understand the logic of not going to positive failure. I don't see what would be achieved without doing this apart from getting a pump and burning some calories.

Do you mean don't go to failure on every set or don't go to failure at all? I would have thought you could treat some sets as warm ups but the final set of each exercise has to be done to failure surely?


----------



## Wee G1436114539 (Oct 6, 2007)

Why?

Overload causes adaptation, not fatigue. Overload can easily be applied without failure, so why incur unneccesary fatigue?

cheers,

g


----------



## Aftershock (Jan 28, 2004)

Wee G said:


> Why?
> 
> Overload causes adaptation, not fatigue. Overload can easily be applied without failure, so why incur unneccesary fatigue?
> 
> ...


I don't see how lots of sets none done to failure will cause overload?

I would have thought this would be more likely to cause fatigue without overload?


----------



## wogihao (Jun 15, 2007)

Aftershock said:


> I don't see how lots of sets none done to failure will cause overload?
> 
> I would have thought this would be more likely to cause fatigue without overload?


Even Mentzer said that anything over 50% would cause growth.


----------



## Aftershock (Jan 28, 2004)

50% of what mate?

When do you judge failure? Positive, static, negative?

Or you could say failure is when you know you cant do another rep in good form without assistance?

I would say that several sets done in this fashion could cause an adaptive response, but I cant see how pulling up short in a set is productive.

Maybe in getting the wrong end of the stick here?


----------



## wogihao (Jun 15, 2007)

Aftershock said:


> 50% of what mate?
> 
> When do you judge failure? Positive, static, negative?
> 
> ...


effort i think, hang on i will check later.

but to say that its not effective, there are plenty of guys that got huge not going to failure.


----------



## Aftershock (Jan 28, 2004)

wogihao said:


> but to say that its not effective, there are plenty of guys that got huge not going to failure.


I'm sure there are but I bet they are outnumbered 10 to 1 by guys that stayed small.

I'm not saying this methodology cant cant work but I think I believe that they would have got there a damn site quicker by other means.

I'm biased I guess. I know HIT works best for me, and the demands this puts on the system would make it impossible for me to train each body part twice a week.

I would prefer to train twice a week and hit each body part once every 10-11 days.

Each to their own.

I'm not blinkered to anybody else's opinions I'm happy to listen and try and learn and incorporate new ideas.


----------



## Wee G1436114539 (Oct 6, 2007)

Simplest way to look at it...the same amount of volume with the same load provides the same adaptive response (in myofibril hypertrophy terms at least) regardless of whether any fatigue is incurred or not.

So, for example, 10x3 with 100Kg is the damn same as 100kg x 3 x 10.

Now, say you can bench 100kg x 10,9,9 , with all sets being to failue. It will take you a few workout to increase load or volume...say

10,9,9

10,9,9

10,10,9 (added 1 rep Vs starting point; 100kg)

10,10,10 (added 2 reps Vs starting point; 200kg)

Over the course of 4 weeks, if training once a week. Every workout incurs massive fatigue, and you only train once a week. Total added load is 200kg. 50kg of progress a week, with tons of fatigue.

Now, take 100kg and do 10 x 3 instead. Next few workouts look like this...

10x3 (Mon)

5x4, 5 x 3 (Thurs) Added 500kg Vs baseline

10 x 4 (Mon) Added 1000kg vs baseline

5 x 5, 5 x 4 (Thurs) Added 1500kg Vs baseline

10 x 5 (Mon) Added 2000kg since baseline

5x3 (Thurs) Deload.

10 x 3 105Kg.....repeat cycle or drop volume add load or whatever.

Anyway, one way you've added 2000+kg of total load to your pressing muscles in 4 weeks, whilst avoiding fatigue. Done the other way you've added 200kg of load in the same time frame, whilst getting knackered and delaying CNS recovery. It's a no brainer.

Cheers,

G


----------



## Aftershock (Jan 28, 2004)

I could certainly see how that couple be applied when you reach a plato in your normal training, or as a change of stimulation.

However in not sure I'd agree that 3*10 is the same as 10*3. The main reason I'd disagree with this is because intensity (yes I keep coming back to this word, simply because I believe this is what builds the most muscle in the shortest time) is measured as weight moved/time.

Its going to take a lot longer to complete 10*3 than 3*10 just in terms of just preparing for each set, getting on and off the bench etc. Although I do acknowledge you would need less rest between sets.

Now in very broad terms If the total weight moved/time taken to was greater than in the 3*10 approach (which it theoretically could be I suppose) then yes I can see the logic.

Anyway thanks for that mate I'll go and think about it :lift:


----------



## South Champ Jnr (Mar 26, 2008)

dude i work the door with, has a solid physique, not bodybuilding standard but way way above average and trains once every 9 days!!! he follows a system similair to the Mentzer way of 1 set to absoulte failure, but does entire body in one session! ill get more details and post them!


----------



## chrisj22 (Mar 22, 2006)

I train twice a week & I'm dieting, & my strength is still going up. There is no way on this earth could I ever train EACH bodypart twice a week - I'd end up in hospital, lol.

I don't know how anyone can do it with work commitments etc. CNS should be battered if training with enough intensity.


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

I have still not had time to read Wee G's book he kindly sent me, so I can't comment on that yet.

However 2 days per week worked very well for me, for years, constant progress, and now we are training each bodypart every 9 days (training 3 days per week), pretty much one set to failure for each muscle, maybe 2, and we are both feeling over trained to an extent already.


----------



## Deca Devil (Oct 31, 2003)

Nytol,

How did your split look when training twice a week?


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

Mon: Back and Biceps, (Inc Deadlifts)

Thurs: Chest and Triceps

Mon: Legs

Thurs: Delts and Traps


----------



## Deca Devil (Oct 31, 2003)

Nytol said:


> Mon: Back and Biceps, (Inc Deadlifts)
> 
> Thurs: Chest and Triceps
> 
> ...


Cheers Nytol, did you use High or low volume? What kind of reps (More powerlifting type of range??)

Thanks for the info


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

Deca Devil said:


> Cheers Nytol, did you use High or low volume? What kind of reps (More powerlifting type of range??)
> 
> Thanks for the info


An example of a chest and triceps session would be:

Bench Press

100kg x 8

150kg x 5

200kg x 5+1 assisted rep

Incline DB press (50 degrees)

45kg x 6

60kg x 8+1 assisted rep

That is it for chest.

Triceps start after a 5 minute rest and carb/amino drink

Seated Over Head EZ Extentions, (AKA French Press)

40kg x 12

60kg x 8

80kg x 9+1 assisted rep, drop weight

50kg x 5+1 assisted rep.

Parallel Bar Dips

Bodyweight x 10

+ 40kg x 12+1 partial rep, drop weight

Bodyweight x 5+1 partial rep.

That is it all done.

I am normally sore for about 3 days after this.


----------



## paulo (Feb 17, 2007)

this is what we do currently

day 1- chest,back triceps

rest day

day 2- legs shoulders biceps

rest day

repeat

always fresh for workouts,if our shifts clash as we both on shifts we take extra rest days instead of trying to squeeze more work in,it is producing gains and we enjoy workouts as feel rested-and do different things on rest days


----------



## meathead1987 (Apr 5, 2007)

Aftershock said:


> However in not sure I'd agree that 3*10 is the same as 10*3. The main reason I'd disagree with this is because intensity (yes I keep coming back to this word, simply because I believe this is what builds the most muscle in the shortest time) is measured as weight moved/time.
> 
> :lift:


Weight moved/time = power.

Intensity is the percentage of your 1RM you are using.

Training 2x per week will work well providing you dont overdo it and just double your volume. An upper/lower split generally works well, varying the rep ranges, some 4-6rep sets (compounds) and some 10-12 (mainly isolations).

Failure should be avoided on the heavy compounds (to alleviate CNS fatigue) but its not going to matter if you hit failure on a few of the high rep sets per week.


----------



## brickhoused (Mar 12, 2008)

meathead1987 said:


> Weight moved/time = power.
> 
> Intensity is the percentage of your 1RM you are using.
> 
> ...


Not hitting failure on the compound lifts......???

What a load of crap, your CNS will adjust and gains will be constant and progress will be a steady uphill increase.


----------



## Bulk1 (Apr 12, 2007)

Twice a week for me! specially as I am natural... getting more rest to 'grow' is working well for me. High intensity training and then rest for 3 days at a time. I think the main reason newbies dont make good progress is they fail to realise just how much stress the body is put under when trained with high intensity and just HOW much TIME it really does need to recover and grow. By training more than required... is completely counter productive. (if you take gear you can recover much faster but natural newbies still follow guys on gears routines blindly thinking that they will benifit the same results).


----------



## wogihao (Jun 15, 2007)

At the end of the day, all these things are just tools.

They all have there place, and in my opinion have there uses its knowing when and how to use the tools that seperates sucess from failure.

Why is it we have to support one technique/method over another is supriseing to me.

cant we all just get along?:beer1:


----------

