# Do you guys agree with this guy?? regarding volume and sets?



## johnnymctrance (Nov 21, 2012)

i do far more in the gym than this guy recommends?


----------



## Monkey skeleton (Jul 8, 2012)

Not that my opinion means much, but yeah, I prefer higher frequency with relatively low volume.


----------



## FangedWang (Feb 26, 2014)

Eric Helms is 1 of the smarter guys in the industry so I would certainly listen.

But best results come from training how you enjoy and will be most consistent with. Especially as a natural as you will eventually hit a wall with your gains anyway.


----------



## johnnymctrance (Nov 21, 2012)

Monkey skeleton said:


> Not that my opinion means much, but yeah, I prefer higher frequency with relatively low volume.


See i go all out and for example when i train arms i really squeeze in a serious amount of sets, and what he is saying is that i will grow more with doing less... would feel weird going to the gym doing less


----------



## johnnymctrance (Nov 21, 2012)

bump


----------



## Monkey skeleton (Jul 8, 2012)

johnnymctrance said:


> See i go all out and for example when i train arms i really squeeze in a serious amount of sets, and what he is saying is that i will grow more with doing less... would feel weird going to the gym doing less


Plenty of guys have got huge training either way, I've tried both and am still a long way from being huge. Lol

There was a quote in one of Arnies books, the gist being. "Design the worst program possible, put a guy on it, train him hard enough and he'll make progress!" If you've got a training style that works, keep at it!


----------



## Mingster (Mar 25, 2011)

johnnymctrance said:


> See i go all out and for example when i train arms i really squeeze in a serious amount of sets, and what he is saying is that i will grow more with doing less... would feel weird going to the gym doing less


I'm a big fan of low volume training. It's not how much you do but how you do it that gets results imo. And as the weights you lift grow heavier the less you can do regardless. 1-3 sets for arms a week and my arms aren't small so there must be something in it


----------



## Hendrix (Sep 16, 2009)

I agree, 90% of BB to do much volume and really slow down gains imo.


----------



## johnnymctrance (Nov 21, 2012)

Hendrix said:


> I agree, 90% of BB to do much volume and really slow down gains imo.


i have always found progress with my arms kind of slow even when on cycle.. like they do grow but no where near as quick as i think they should... im thinking of doing 2 x low volume and 1 x high volume arm work out per week?


----------



## big silver back (Jan 17, 2009)

I did the old Dorian yates style training for donkeys years but since ive been doing high volume training its like ive just starting training all over again!!


----------



## johnnymctrance (Nov 21, 2012)

big silver back said:


> I did the old Dorian yates style training for donkeys years but since ive been doing high volume training its like ive just starting training all over again!!


do u mean the high volume is working well for u?


----------



## big silver back (Jan 17, 2009)

Yeah i find it better in all aspects of training, gaining lean tissue due to the amount of fibers recruited in a workout, fitness, strength because your muscles are stronger when fitter and you also burn sh1t loads of bodyfat to!!


----------



## johnnymctrance (Nov 21, 2012)

big silver back said:


> Yeah i find it better in all aspects of training, gaining lean tissue due to the amount of fibers recruited in a workout, fitness, strength because your muscles are stronger when fitter and you also burn sh1t loads of bodyfat to!!


could u give an example of one of your workouts? including the number of sets and reps etc?? thanks a mil


----------



## Fishheadsoup (Apr 15, 2013)

I've never gained as fast in my life than I have following Dorian Yates method. That's why I've stuck with it...now I lift heavy 3-4 reps max..but I also belive that are bodies learn to adapt to the damage where causing it, so switching it up is always better for gains. My opinion anyway


----------



## johnnymctrance (Nov 21, 2012)

Fishheadsoup said:


> I've never gained as fast in my life than I have following Dorian Yates method. That's why I've stuck with it...now I lift heavy 3-4 reps max..but I also belive that are bodies learn to adapt to the damage where causing it, so switching it up is always better for gains. My opinion anyway


What exactly is dorian yeats way of training.. ive heard of him but no seen his routines?? thanks


----------



## big silver back (Jan 17, 2009)

This was legs earlier, 10x20 leg extensions, 5x20 single leg press 5x15 heavy double leg press, 5x15 heavy hack squats, 10x20 squats and lunges supersetted with front squats 3x50 each exercise. I do hams with back and calfs with chest and arms. I try up the reps every set and do forced reps when needed


----------



## johnnymctrance (Nov 21, 2012)

big silver back said:


> This was legs earlier, 10x20 leg extensions, 5x20 single leg press 5x15 heavy double leg press, 5x15 heavy hack squats, 10x20 squats and lunges supersetted with front squats 3x50 each exercise. I do hams with back and calfs with chest and arms. I try up the reps every set and do forced reps when needed


haha thats like 900reps if my maths is correct... how do u find recovery? you obviously only do that once a week ye?


----------



## big silver back (Jan 17, 2009)

I just keep going till im either sick or cant stand up! ha ha yeah recovery is good but i put that down to good nutrition :whistling:


----------



## Bull Terrier (May 14, 2012)

big silver back said:


> I just keep going till im either sick or cant stand up! ha ha yeah recovery is good but i put that down to good nutrition :whistling:


From my years in the gym I think that usually the guys who do well on high volume training (especially when combined with high intensity) are the guys with naturally good genetics for bodybuilding/strength training.

I think that it's fair to say that the lesser gifted guys and hardgainer types do far better on far lower volume training, and I'd go out on a limb and say also with a somewhat higher frequency whilst also cycling intensity in some way.

I think that Dorian Yates was one of the exceptions in the upper echelon of bodybuilders who did so well on far lower volume than most of his peers. I would also bet though that with his superman-genetics he would have strived on much any training program.


----------



## FangedWang (Feb 26, 2014)

Bull Terrier said:


> From my years in the gym I think that usually the guys who do well on high volume training (especially when combined with high intensity) are the guys with naturally good genetics for bodybuilding/strength training.
> 
> I think that it's fair to say that the lesser gifted guys and hardgainer types do far better on far lower volume training, and I'd go out on a limb and say also with a somewhat higher frequency whilst also cycling intensity in some way.
> 
> I think that Dorian Yates was one of the exceptions in the upper echelon of bodybuilders who did so well on far lower volume than most of his peers. I would also bet though that with his superman-genetics he would have strived on much any training program.


Agree 100% on this.

Also Eric Helms isn't saying take your current intensity and volume and do that more frequently. When I switched to none failure training I basically just did the same volume for most muscles but over 2 workouts instead.

I think learning to not train to failure can be a great asset for naturals especially with not great genetics.


----------



## Bull Terrier (May 14, 2012)

FangedWang said:


> Agree 100% on this.
> 
> Also Eric Helms isn't saying take your current intensity and volume and do that more frequently. When I switched to none failure training I basically just did the same volume for most muscles but over 2 workouts instead.
> 
> I think learning to not train to failure can be a great asset for naturals especially with not great genetics.


Yes I also agree with you on not training to failure, or at least not too often. Alot of people - especially noobs - have the notion that if you don't totally obliterate your muscles each workout that you won't make progress.


----------



## Major Eyeswater (Nov 2, 2013)

Bull Terrier said:


> I think that usually the guys who do well on high volume training (especially when combined with high intensity) are the guys with naturally good genetics for bodybuilding/strength training.


An interesting hypothesis that makes a lot of sense. That would explain why low-volume / high-intensity training is much more popular with the average lifter than it is with the top professionals.

I switched to Full Body 3x week last autumn & have been gaining size & strength consistently since. This is a high-intensity, high-frequency, low-volume approach - basically 2 sets to failure 3x per week.

I've tried high-volume not-to-failure before, and it just doesn't turn in the results.


----------



## Tinytom (Sep 16, 2005)

big silver back said:


> This was legs earlier, 10x20 leg extensions, 5x20 single leg press 5x15 heavy double leg press, 5x15 heavy hack squats, 10x20 squats and lunges supersetted with front squats 3x50 each exercise. I do hams with back and calfs with chest and arms. I try up the reps every set and do forced reps when needed


Nice.


----------



## Tinytom (Sep 16, 2005)

I think a lot of the 'best training methods' issues stem from

1. Trainer has become mediocre in their routine so any change gives results.

2. A change in programme means a momentary increase in motivation so effort is increased temporarily yielding results.

3. The person responds better as genetically their fibre type favours the new method of training.

I incorporate a number of different training methods in my workouts. I use low reps high weight. High volume with medium weight. Push pull supersets.

Each exercise I do has a purpose. I think a lot of people neglect to think why they are doing an exercise and just do it without real attention to the volume/weight issue.

Each exercise I do I'm thinking 'what am I trying to accomplish here?' I hardly ever think 'I just want to lift as much weight' that mentality had led me to injury in the past.


----------



## Mingster (Mar 25, 2011)

I think most people add stuff to their workouts for no good reason, or 'just to be on the safe side', or 'why not'.

IMO anything that is included in a workout that isn't absolutely necessary is detrimental to the results produced by that workout.


----------



## Hoddsy (Oct 9, 2008)

Personally my best results have come from the first couple of sets pushing for PBs then another couple of sets afterwards that include supersets to failure.


----------



## lachu543 (Dec 2, 2013)

big silver back said:


> This was legs earlier, 10x20 leg extensions, 5x20 single leg press 5x15 heavy double leg press, 5x15 heavy hack squats, 10x20 squats and lunges supersetted with front squats 3x50 each exercise. I do hams with back and calfs with chest and arms. I try up the reps every set and do forced reps when needed


How many days in a week are you training?


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

I honestly believe that the best long term progress comes from not sticking to a single frequency/loading/volume protocol but to vary it - even for the hard gainer or the natty. I think stagnation comes when you only stick to progressive overload within the same rep/set/frequency parameters.


----------



## big silver back (Jan 17, 2009)

I train every day mate one major bodypart and a small bodypart a day, im just one of these people who love training!!


----------



## Bull Terrier (May 14, 2012)

dtlv said:


> I honestly believe that the best long term progress comes from not sticking to a single frequency/loading/volume protocol but to vary it - even for the hard gainer or the natty. I think stagnation comes when you only stick to progressive overload within the same rep/set/frequency parameters.


I agree totally. All of the popular powerlifting programs (Smolov, Sheiko, Wendler, Russian Masters program) which I know all vary the volume and reps within the training blocks.


----------



## Big Man 123 (Aug 1, 2013)

Yes, I do agree.

Gaining muscle is a matter of breaking the fibers and letting them to recover.

1.- The more times you break them, the more you will gain.

2.- You don't need to do 43843897 sets to break the fibers, only 3 or four.


----------



## Bear2012 (Jan 19, 2012)

I train every last set to failure and some times it will be 6 sets 5 reps and sometimes 4 sets 10 reps. I gauge every workout on how I feel at that moment in time. I can't go into the gym with a plan of committing myself to 5 sets of 5 as I think that limits you. If I get to the 5th set and think I could do another set and add say another 5kg and did not really push into the failure zone on the last set I'll so an extra set.

I think I train like that as everything I do in life I have to try and push it to the max


----------



## IGotTekkers (Jun 6, 2012)

johnnymctrance said:


> See i go all out and for example when i train arms i really squeeze in a serious amount of sets, and what he is saying is that i will grow more with doing less... would feel weird going to the gym doing less


I normaly do like 2 to 3 sets per excersize, 2 to 3 exersizes per muscle. In the gym for less than 2 hours per week and iv always grown and cut fine. If you can do set after set after set then stop lifting baby weights


----------

