# Long workouts on cycle?



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

Do long workouts affect your gains when you're on cycle? I know that for a natty, cortisol starts kicking in after 45-60 minutes, but how much of a problem is that when you're juicing?

I ask because I'm doing Layne Norton's PHAT workout, and it tends to take 1.5 - 2 hours to get through some of the workouts. Should I cut down the volume, increase the intensity, or keep it as it is?


----------



## Yes (May 4, 2014)

I Thought anabolics, like tren for example, reduce cortisol?


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

Yes said:


> I Thought anabolics, like tren for example, reduce cortisol?


 As far as I understand, they don't reduce it, they just counteract it, thereby reducing its effect. But I'm not sure if that means cortisol is completely blocked..


----------



## BritishPitbull (Oct 9, 2008)

Tomahawk said:


> Do long workouts affect your gains when you're on cycle? I know that for a natty, cortisol starts kicking in after 45-60 minutes, but how much of a problem is that when you're juicing?
> 
> I ask because I'm doing Layne Norton's PHAT workout, and it tends to take 1.5 - 2 hours to get through some of the workouts. Should I cut down the volume, increase the intensity, or keep it as it is?


 Not sure if they affect gains but I would say your ok in there that long with the longer rest times the programme uses, I've been doing my own routine that consists of more volume and sets than the phat programme and my body has felt so run down and sore the last few days, I've have had to reevaluate my whole split, I do a heavy physical job to so that hasn't helped on the gains front.


----------



## zyphy (Jun 23, 2014)

not really, getting plenty of rest and food count for more


----------



## A4RON (Apr 19, 2010)

Rarely train over 60 minutes... 45-60 mins HIGH INTENSITY even on gear.

Only human-grade pharma drugs should be used. Get legit human-grade pharma drugs if you ever want to get big. Muscle big. When aiming at adding/building mass on your frame there is no replacement for LEGIT pharma human-grade deca, test and dianabol.

You must have 3-4 solid meals a day. Rest of the meals can be liquid as in protein powders and raw egg whites pepti food cartons and powder oats. It will give you the 500-700 calories desired in good shake for putting on the right amount of calories so your costly drugs can work their "magic".

Digestive enzymes are a must with every meal! buy digestive enzymes that have LACTASE inside!! take them as many times as possible so everything gets digested. especially past 28 years old.

Anyone can be 5ft 10in 95kg+ of muscle - Aim for it and prepare accordingly. It will come pretty fast if solid 2-3 years in the gym training hard before going on peds.

Lifting heavy weights has nothing to do with how big your muscle will be. you need to lift correctly and try to lift to a failure in order to make the drugs work to an optimal level. Lifting heavy will never put more muscle on you unless you can lift this heavy weight correctly.

Fish oil and olive oil are good for you. Use a lot.

In conclusion - the less time you are in the gym (minimum of 45 minutes / 4 sessions a week while on) the bigger you will get. The more intense and shorter your work out is the more impressive you will look and the better your newly PEDs will work on your physique.

Feel free to eat your dirty meals once a week... by dirty meals i mean Subways, pizza and chinese and whatever you feel like on that 1 day - it will keep you sane.


----------



## Mogadishu (Aug 29, 2014)

There're no benefits of long workouts if you are looking to build muscle. Drop volume and inc intensity.

Powerlifting however is different.


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

A4RON said:


> Rarely train over 60 minutes... 45-60 mins HIGH INTENSITY even on gear.
> 
> Only human-grade pharma drugs should be used. Get legit human-grade pharma drugs if you ever want to get big. Muscle big. When aiming at adding/building mass on your frame there is no replacement for LEGIT pharma human-grade deca, test and dianabol.
> 
> ...


 That you in your Avi?


----------



## con1981 (Aug 18, 2013)

Interested in this too, I've swapped from Dorian Yates blood and guts routine to arnies level 1 mass builder which is double the length. Strength continues to go up but my mass isn't changing. Infact I think I'm a bit leaner


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

Mogadishu said:


> There're no benefits of long workouts if you are looking to build muscle. Drop volume and inc intensity.
> 
> Powerlifting however is different.


 Then why do long workout programs such as PHAT exist? Or in Arnold's time, apparently 3-4 hour workouts were commonplace.


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

A4RON said:


> Rarely train over 60 minutes... 45-60 mins HIGH INTENSITY even on gear.
> 
> Only human-grade pharma drugs should be used. Get legit human-grade pharma drugs if you ever want to get big. Muscle big. When aiming at adding/building mass on your frame there is no replacement for LEGIT pharma human-grade deca, test and dianabol.
> 
> ...


 Thanks buddy, that's a lot of information, but I don't see how any of that leads to the conclusion you made. What's the rationale for "the less time you spend in the gym, the better" ?


----------



## MrBishi (Mar 10, 2016)

Tomahawk said:


> Then why do long workout programs such as PHAT exist? Or in Arnold's time, apparently 3-4 hour workouts were commonplace.


 They may well be the exception rather than the rule.


----------



## Mogadishu (Aug 29, 2014)

Tomahawk said:


> Then why do long workout programs such as PHAT exist? Or in Arnold's time, apparently 3-4 hour workouts were commonplace.


 First of all Layne Norton is a bellend and you shouldn't listen to that clown.

Its quiet simple, intense workouts blows longer workouts by a mile in terms of results and recovery. You don't need 500 exercise pick 2 per muscle and 2-3 set x 2 times per week.


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

Tomahawk said:


> Thanks buddy, that's a lot of information, but I don't see how any of that leads to the conclusion you made. What's the rationale for "the less time you spend in the gym, the better" ?


 Cortisol will still have some effect if you are juicing but not as much as if you were natural due to the fact your testosterone levels will remain steady throughout instead of dropping, helping to preserve muscle.

Saying that regardless of whether you will lose mass or not, if you are still physically able to carry on with your workout after an hour then you are not working hard enough. This is my opinion.

Try running 20 rep squats once a week for Legs followed by some heavy RDL's and see if you want to keep going after that, 25 minutes maximum that should take. Intensity is king as far as I am concerned.


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

Quackerz said:


> Cortisol will still have some affect if you are juicing but not as much as if you were natural due to the fact your testosterone levels will remain steady throughout instead of dropping, helping to preserve muscle.
> 
> Saying that regardless of whether you will lose mass or not, if you are still physically able to carry on with your workout after an hour then you are not working hard enough. This is my opinion.
> 
> Try running 20 rep squats once a week for Legs followed by some heavy RDL's and see if you want to keep going after that, 25 minutes maximum that should take. Intensity is king as far as I am concerned.


 There seems to be a very polarized set of views on this. On the other extreme, some other people on this forum have told me that they tend to rest 3 minutes between sets and never break a sweat during a workout.


----------



## Mergal (Nov 7, 2013)

Tomahawk said:


> There seems to be a very polarized set of views on this. On the other extreme, some other people on this forum have told me that they tend to rest 3 minutes between sets and never break a sweat during a workout.


 i agree, iv tried both going balls to the wall so intense that after an hour i want to spew everywhere

and iv tried the 3-5 mins rest between sets

honestly dont see much difference except i seem to stay a little leaner with balls to the wall intensity and i feel like 'iv left it all in the gym' where as the 3-5 mins i often leave the gym with energy even tho i often lift heavier


----------



## Mingster (Mar 25, 2011)

There's no good reason for long workouts imo.

People don't do them for better results, more likely for prolonging the training buzz, or because it makes them feel like a martyr. People who promote long workout systems do so just to have an alternative approach so they can make money from those who long for that 'secret' to fast gains that doesn't exist.


----------



## con1981 (Aug 18, 2013)

I agree that intensity is the key however I also feel that a greater volume can also be beneficial in increasing endurance. Once you have a good level of endurance surely your workouts can be more intense?


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

Tomahawk said:


> There seems to be a very polarized set of views on this. On the other extreme, some other people on this forum have told me that they tend to rest 3 minutes between sets and never break a sweat during a workout.


 You can still rest 2-3 minutes between sets, high intensity does not necessarily mean doing things quickly, it just means going balls to the wall with minimal exercises. Here is an example for Chest and Triceps:

Bench Press - Max set of 3-5

Dumbbell Bench - 3 sets of 8

Dips - 3 sets of 8

Pick a weight that is hard and go to failure on every set for the last two exerices, use the bench to increase your raw strength without failure training. I will be following a training style along these lines with Tren in a few months so should be interesting.


----------



## FuqOutDaWhey (Apr 29, 2015)

A4RON said:


> Rarely train over 60 minutes... 45-60 mins HIGH INTENSITY even on gear.
> 
> Only human-grade pharma drugs should be used. Get legit human-grade pharma drugs if you ever want to get big. Muscle big. When aiming at adding/building mass on your frame there is no replacement for LEGIT pharma human-grade deca, test and dianabol.
> 
> ...


 Where did you get your PhD in Brotology? :lol:


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

Mingster said:


> There's no good reason for long workouts imo.
> 
> People don't do them for better results, more likely for prolonging the training buzz, or because it makes them feel like a martyr. People who promote long workout systems do so just to have an alternative approach so they can make money from those who long for that for that 'secret' to fast gains that doesn't exist.


 I agree, these volume workouts all seem to be marketing directed at selling supplements, nothing more.


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

Quackerz said:


> You can still rest 2-3 minutes between sets, high intensity does not necessarily mean doing things quickly, it just means going balls to the wall with minimal exercises. Here is an example for Chest and Triceps:
> 
> Bench Press - Max set of 3-5
> 
> ...


 OK, well that's about 1/3 of an upper body power day in my current workout.

Rows 3 sets 3-5

Weighted Pull ups 2 sets 6-10

Weighted Rack chin 2 sets 6-10

Bench 3 sets 3-5

Weighted Dips 2 sets 6-10

Military press 3 sets 6-10

Curls 3 sets 6-10

Skull Crusher 3 sets 6-10

I have no problem doing the full workout, so I'm not sure if I agree with you when you say that if you can train longer than an hour you're not working hard enough.


----------



## con1981 (Aug 18, 2013)

Quackerz said:


> I agree, these volume workouts all seem to be marketing directed at selling supplements, nothing more.


 what about the old school workouts. These guys didn't do it for marketing. Twice a day in the gym for some


----------



## Mogadishu (Aug 29, 2014)

Tomahawk said:


> OK, well that's about 1/3 of an upper body power day in my current workout.
> 
> Rows 3 sets 3-5
> 
> ...


 "Stimulate don't annihilate"

- Lee Haney


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

Mogadishu said:


> "Stimulate don't annihilate"
> 
> - Lee Haney


 So you're saying that one needs to work hard, but not too hard?


----------



## Fluke82 (Sep 10, 2015)

A4RON said:


> Rarely train over 60 minutes... 45-60 mins HIGH INTENSITY even on gear.
> 
> Only human-grade pharma drugs should be used. Get legit human-grade pharma drugs if you ever want to get big. Muscle big. When aiming at adding/building mass on your frame there is no replacement for LEGIT pharma human-grade deca, test and dianabol.
> 
> ...


 Are you fu**ing serious

just as I was in a good mood again


----------



## Mingster (Mar 25, 2011)

con1981 said:


> what about the old school workouts. These guys didn't do it for marketing. Twice a day in the gym for some


 How didn't they?

They were all signed up Weider athletes, training professionally. Arnold, Robbie Robinson et al. They wouldn't have been in the magazines if they weren't signed up.


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

Mingster said:


> How didn't they?
> 
> They were all signed up Weider athletes, training professionally. Arnold, Robbie Robinson et al. They wouldn't have been in the magazines if they weren't signed up.


 Regardless of whether or not there was marketing involved, one could make the second point that the longer workouts still seemed to be effective. Even if they could have gotten similar results with shorter workouts, does it not still serve to prove that you can gain significant muscle mass with long workouts?


----------



## con1981 (Aug 18, 2013)

Good point you got me there on the finer detail. Bodybuilding though was pretty much underground there wasn't the supplement market there is today. They did it I presume (because I want there) because athletically it less then to winning bodybuilding competitions and then gaining sponsorship


----------



## con1981 (Aug 18, 2013)

Mingster said:


> How didn't they?
> 
> They were all signed up Weider athletes, training professionally. Arnold, Robbie Robinson et al. They wouldn't have been in the magazines if they weren't signed up.


----------



## Mingster (Mar 25, 2011)

Tomahawk said:


> Regardless of whether or not there was marketing involved, one could make the second point that the longer workouts still seemed to be effective. Even if they could have gotten similar results with shorter workouts, does it not still serve to prove that you can gain significant muscle mass with long workouts?


 You could suggest that the extremely short workouts popularised by Mike Mentzer were even more effective.

The only way you could get results from 4 hour twice a day workouts is if you were sponsored, thus ruling out 99% of trainers in practical terms. How else could you afford to live.


----------



## con1981 (Aug 18, 2013)

Mingster said:


> You could suggest that the extremely short workouts popularised by Mike Mentzer were even more effective.
> 
> The only way you could get results from 4 hour twice a day workouts is if you were sponsored, thus ruling out 99% of trainers in practical terms. How else could you afford to live.


 I think that's a valid point. If you can devote yourself to the gym and have plenty of rest inbertween 4 hours is doable. For those who work perhaps not


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

Mingster said:


> You could suggest that the extremely short workouts popularised by Mike Mentzer were even more effective.
> 
> The only way you could get results from 4 hour twice a day workouts is if you were sponsored, thus ruling out 99% of trainers in practical terms. How else could you afford to live.


 I'm not quite sure if I follow your point. What I'm saying is that the guys who were lifting 4 hours a day, still got amazing results. So are long workouts really that bad?

Basically, I'm very interested to know whether it is the case that a 1.5 hour workout is simply suboptimal (i.e. wasting a bit of time), or if it's detrimental in comparison to a shorter workout.


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

Tomahawk said:


> OK, well that's about 1/3 of an upper body power day in my current workout.
> 
> Rows 3 sets 3-5
> 
> ...


 The kinds of weights you use when you are training for that length of time will be greatly reduced, providing less stimulus and recruiting less muscle fibres as a result of it. Can you get big and strong with this methodology? Of course, but in my opinion it is sub-optimal compared to lower volume, failure training.

There are three guys only in my gym worth any mention as to their condition, they come in, do two or three exercises and f**k off within 40 minutes tops. The rest of what I see is a bunch of skinny kids grinding out endless sets and reps for hours getting absolutely nowhere. This to me, speaks volumes.

We also have a collection of Olympic lifters and PL's but obviously this is a different kettle of fish and should not be taken into consideration when addressing this topic.


----------



## Mogadishu (Aug 29, 2014)

Tomahawk said:


> I'm not quite sure if I follow your point. What I'm saying is that the guys who were lifting 4 hours a day, still got amazing results. So are long workouts really that bad?
> 
> Basically, I'm very interested to know whether it is the case that a 1.5 hour workout is simply suboptimal (i.e. wasting a bit of time), or if it's detrimental in comparison to a shorter workout.


 The same guys would grow better/same with 75% less time in the gym and greatly reduce risk of injuries.

"It works for me" is a result of this ridiculous approach.


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

Quackerz said:


> The kinds of weights you use when you are training for that length of time will be greatly reduced, providing less stimulus and recruiting less muscle fibres as a result of it. Can you get big and strong with this methodology? Of course, but in my opinion it is sub-optimal compared to lower volume, failure training.
> 
> There are three guys only in my gym worth any mention as to their condition, they come in, do two or three exercises and f**k off within 40 minutes tops. The rest of what I see is a bunch of skinny kids grinding out endless sets and reps for hours getting absolutely nowhere. This to me, speaks volumes.
> 
> We also have a collection of Olympic lifters and PL's but obviously this is a different kettle of fish and should not be taken into consideration when addressing this topic.


 I might disagree with you regarding the weights, because on a power day the program has 3-5 minute rests between sets -- I've tried changing the order of the exercises and I haven't noticed a significant difference in the amount of weight I can move. I would agree with you on volume days though, where it's just a bunch of exercises for reps.

So what kind of lifting program would you suggest as an alternative? I've made some decent gains on PHAT but I'm starting to plateau, so I've been trying to find out if I'm doing something wrong (the long workout time is a prime suspect), and see if there is an alternative out there.


----------



## Mingster (Mar 25, 2011)

Tomahawk said:


> I'm not quite sure if I follow your point. What I'm saying is that the guys who were lifting 4 hours a day, still got amazing results. So are long workouts really that bad?


 In my first post in this thread I opened with... imo I don't see any good reason to doing long workouts. My point is why do 7 days work for 3 days pay?

I've been training over 30 years and 95% of the big guys I have known have trained for 45 minutes to an hour, 3/4 times a week.


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

Tomahawk said:


> I might disagree with you regarding the weights, because on a power day the program has 3-5 minute rests between sets -- I've tried changing the order of the exercises and I haven't noticed a significant difference in the amount of weight I can move. I would agree with you on volume days though, where it's just a bunch of exercises for reps.
> 
> So what kind of lifting program would you suggest as an alternative? I've made some decent gains on PHAT but I'm starting to plateau, so I've been trying to find out if I'm doing something wrong (the long workout time is a prime suspect), and see if there is an alternative out there.


 This is because on the strength days it is exactly that, strength, MMF does not really come into the equation. Stength workouts are designed to rate code your muscles and stimulate your CNS.

What kind of weights are you lifting and what are your specific goals?


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

Quackerz said:


> This is because on the strength days it is exactly that, strength, MMF does not really come into the equation. Stength workouts are designed to rate code your muscles and stimulate your CNS.
> 
> What kind of weights are you lifting and what are your specific goals?


 I'm 69kg, I can do 110x5 in bench press, 140x5 Squat, 165x5 Deadlift. I'm a bit small though, I only have 14.5" arms. I want to get bigger primarily, but I wouldn't mind getting stronger as well. You can see what I look like in my journal:

https://www.uk-muscle.co.uk/topic/261122-chronicles-of-tomahawk-gains-log?do=embed


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

Mingster said:


> In my first post in this thread I opened with... imo I don't see any good reason to doing long workouts. My point is why do 7 days work for 3 days pay?
> 
> I've been training over 30 years and 95% of the big guys I have known have trained for 45 minutes to an hour, 3/4 times a week.


 OK, I see what you mean now, thanks. What kind of workouts do most of these big guys do?


----------



## mrwright (Oct 22, 2013)

A4RON said:


> Rarely train over 60 minutes... 45-60 mins HIGH INTENSITY even on gear.
> 
> Only human-grade pharma drugs should be used. Get legit human-grade pharma drugs if you ever want to get big. Muscle big. When aiming at adding/building mass on your frame there is no replacement for LEGIT pharma human-grade deca, test and dianabol.
> 
> ...


 I cant be 5 10 an 95kg+

Im 6 1


----------



## Mingster (Mar 25, 2011)

Tomahawk said:


> OK, I see what you mean now, thanks. What kind of workouts do most of these big guys do?


 Push/Pull/Legs or Upper/Lower are the most effective ime.


----------



## dd.172 (Nov 4, 2009)

OP have a read of Mike Mentzers High Intensity Training, great read.


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

Tomahawk said:


> I'm 69kg, I can do 110x5 in bench press, 140x5 Squat, 165x5 Deadlift. I'm a bit small though, I only have 14.5" arms. I want to get bigger primarily, but I wouldn't mind getting stronger as well. You can see what I look like in my journal:
> 
> https://www.uk-muscle.co.uk/topic/261122-chronicles-of-tomahawk-gains-log?do=embed





Tomahawk said:


> I'm 69kg, I can do 110x5 in bench press, 140x5 Squat, 165x5 Deadlift. I'm a bit small though, I only have 14.5" arms. I want to get bigger primarily, but I wouldn't mind getting stronger as well. You can see what I look like in my journal:
> 
> https://www.uk-muscle.co.uk/topic/261122-chronicles-of-tomahawk-gains-log?do=embed


 With those kind of lifts I would recommend exactly what I am planning on doing after I have finished with GVT. Wendlers 5/3/1 with two compounds to MMF at the end of each workout, some HIIT with the prowler on my off days and that is going to be it. Will be making a log on here when I actually start. If your interested I will give you the outline. CBF writing it out otherwise though. :lol:


----------



## A4RON (Apr 19, 2010)

FuqOutDaWhey said:


> Where did you get your PhD in Brotology? :lol:


 University of life pal  Na 

Mike Mentzer was The Man. Superior physique and should've won the Olympia at least twice - he got robbed!

The high-volume routines you see in mags are BS - they are supposedly Pro BBer routines from their mouth but are in fact ghost written by the staff writers of that mag. Those same pros are pumping pharma-grade HGH, Deca, Masteron, Insulin, Anavar, Dianabol etc - best PEDs available to them and costs of £800+ a month even more. And it is their life and profession. The only way high-volume routines could work thoroughly is if you're an endomorph BBer with a goal to drop bf%.

I say to the odd younger bodybuilder at the gym with ego, leave your ego outside gym. It doesn't matter what the 3 fat 120kg guys on the corner think about your poundage, the girls don't even care because they are insecure themselves, so make sure you lift right! This is key for anything. I'm not saying that lifting heavy is not good because it is and I believe in it, but first and foremost is to lift the weight right and strict.

Op, you are very strong pound-for-pound for your weight - fair play to you and that is key towards a solid foundation to build upon. But don't get tied up on strength numbers over your physique results, unless you are specifically training for strength/powerlifting. When I was 18, I weighed 70kg and benched 110kg, squat 145kg, deadlift 190kg - but I wasn't gaining mass or growing.


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

dd.172 said:


> OP have a read of Mike Mentzers High Intensity Training, great read.


 OK, thanks, I'll check it out!


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

Quackerz said:


> With those kind of lifts I would recommend exactly what I am planning on doing after I have finished with GVT. Wendlers 5/3/1 with two compounds to MMF at the end of each workout, some HIIT with the prowler on my off days and that is going to be it. Will be making a log on here when I actually start. If your interested I will give you the outline. CBF writing it out otherwise though. :lol:


 I'd be interested in a little bit more information if you don't mind. I've been doing PHAT for 12 weeks so I'm in the market for a change. But isn't Wendler's program more geared toward strength?

And what's MMF? I googled it and I just got porn and references to threesomes.


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

A4RON said:


> University of life pal  Na
> 
> Mike Mentzer was The Man. Superior physique and should've won the Olympia at least twice - he got robbed!
> 
> ...


 Cheers buddy, I appreciate your insight and comments. So did you make gains when you switched to a high intensity, lower weight, higher rep-count workout?


----------



## Smitch (Dec 29, 2008)

Mingster said:


> There's no good reason for long workouts imo.
> 
> People don't do them for better results, more likely for prolonging the training buzz, or because it makes them feel like a martyr. People who promote long workout systems do so just to have an alternative approach so they can make money from those who long for that 'secret' to fast gains that doesn't exist.


 Like @banzi says, simple doesn't sell.


----------



## Smitch (Dec 29, 2008)

Tomahawk said:


> Cheers buddy, I appreciate your insight and comments. So did you make gains when you switched to a high intensity, lower weight, higher rep-count workout?


 Mate, like I said, get on TM and ask this shiz.


----------



## A4RON (Apr 19, 2010)

Tomahawk said:


> Cheers buddy, I appreciate your insight and comments. So did you make gains when you switched to a high intensity, lower weight, higher rep-count workout?


 Lots of variation and finding out what works for your body and genetic make-up. I was a hard-gainer up to 20 years old - I put this down to my body still growing and me still learning - you can never stop learning. My body responded considerably better to shorter, more intense workouts (like it feels the muscle is bleeding almost) and stricter form, but still lifting as heavy as possible with as good form as possible (slow contractions/moderate pace/variation). But you have to be patient and give it time to see the results and you will


----------



## Smitch (Dec 29, 2008)

A4RON said:


> Lots of variation and finding out what works for your body and genetic make-up. I was a hard-gainer up to 20 years old - I put this down to my body still growing and me still learning - you can never stop learning. My body responded considerably better to shorter, more intense workouts (like it feels the muscle is bleeding almost) and stricter form, but still lifting as heavy as possible with as good form as possible (slow contractions/moderate pace/variation). But you have to be patient and give it time to see the results and you will


 So were you a hard gainer or did it just take time to work out what type of training worked for you?


----------



## A4RON (Apr 19, 2010)

I'd say both. I'm closer to Ectomorph. And like most of us on here, it took more than two years of gym training at first before I started putting the puzzle together. Also, I think patience is one of the most underrated qualities in BBing/weight training/throwing weights around. Most people aren't fully developed until they hit 23-25 years old. I made my most progress in that time for me. But obvs everyone is different. I'm sure majority of guys on here want(ed) to be muscular, defined and lean by the time we're 19yo, but this sh!t takes time etc huh.

Rome wasn't built in a day as you all know


----------



## Fluke82 (Sep 10, 2015)

A4RON said:


> I'd say both. I'm closer to Ectomorph. And like most of us on here, it took more than two years of gym training at first before I started putting the puzzle together. Also, I think patience is one of the most underrated qualities in BBing/weight training/throwing weights around. Most people aren't fully developed until they hit 23-25 years old. I made my most progress in that time for me. But obvs everyone is different. I'm sure majority of guys on here want(ed) to be muscular, defined and lean by the time we're 19yo, but this sh!t takes time etc huh.
> 
> Rome wasn't built in a day as you all know


 You know body types are a myth.

ypou didn't gain because you didn't eat in a calorie surplus - that's all.

Not because you're some special person that cannot gain weight.


----------



## A4RON (Apr 19, 2010)

Drogon said:


> You know body types are a myth.
> 
> ypou didn't gain because you didn't eat in a calorie surplus - that's all.
> 
> Not because you're some special person that cannot gain weight.


 Body types and genetics are not myths. Some people grow muscle quicker than others.


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

Tomahawk said:


> I'd be interested in a little bit more information if you don't mind. I've been doing PHAT for 12 weeks so I'm in the market for a change. But isn't Wendler's program more geared toward strength?
> 
> And what's MMF? I googled it and I just got porn and references to threesomes.


 Maximum muscle failure.

Wendler's is geared to strength but weather or not you want to gain size will be heavily dependant on your assistance and how you are performing it.

I am going to be following the basic outline of Wendler's exactly how it is written, with an additional two compounds to complete failure after the main lift. The failure exercises with be 3-5 sets of 6-10 reps, whatever it takes to get me there apart from legs, where I will be stopping just shy of failure for safety purposes with the exercises I have chosen, assistance will be de-loaded with the main lifts.

*Mon - Legs*

Squat

Split Squat

RDL

*Tues - Chest and Triceps*

Bench

Dumbbell Bench

Dips

*Wed - Conditioning*

Rear Delt Work

Heavy Abs

HIIT with Prowler

*Thurs - Back*

Deadlift

Weighted Pull-ups

Rows

*Friday - Shoulders and Biceps*

Overhead Press

Dumbbell Press

Barbell Curls

*Sat - Conditioning*

Rear Delt Work

Heavy Abs

HIIT with Prowler

That is going to be it.


----------



## Fluke82 (Sep 10, 2015)

A4RON said:


> Body types and genetics are not myths. S*ome people grow muscle quicker than others.*


 Yes, I didn't say that. Ofc people do

But the point is every SINGLE person is different, it's ludicrous to put 7 billion people all with different genetics into *three categories :lol: *


----------



## A4RON (Apr 19, 2010)

Drogon said:


> Yes, I didn't say that. Ofc people do
> 
> But the point is every SINGLE person is different, it's ludicrous to put 7 billion people all with different genetics into *three categories :lol: *


 There's more than three categories though - ecto-mesomorph, endo-mesomorph etc etc etc, and it's a guideline


----------



## Fluke82 (Sep 10, 2015)

A4RON said:


> There's more than three categories though - ecto-mesomorph, endo-mesomorph etc etc etc, and it's a guideline


 Okay fella


----------



## RedStar (Aug 8, 2014)

Drogon said:


> Yes, I didn't say that. Ofc people do
> 
> But the point is every SINGLE person is different, it's ludicrous to put 7 billion people all with different genetics into *three categories :lol: *


 I am with you on this.

I also know from my own personal experience, higher volume gives me better results than lower volume training. That is why I am currently doing the PHUL routine to try and get the benefits of higher and lower volume.

I would also suggest that products such as insulin, HGH and certain peptides aid recovery a lot quicker, thus allowing people to train for much longer.

I swear I have heard and read that Arnie and bodybuilders of that generation trained for hours on end?!? Look at their physiques, in my view they had the most aesthetic muscular bodies I have seen.


----------



## Mogadishu (Aug 29, 2014)

Simon 88 said:


> I swear I have heard and read that Arnie and bodybuilders of that generation trained for hours on end?!? Look at their physiques, in my view they had the most aesthetic muscular bodies I have seen.


 Less drugs & dwarfs.


----------



## Bish83 (Nov 18, 2009)

A4RON said:


> Rarely train over 60 minutes... 45-60 mins HIGH INTENSITY even on gear.
> 
> Only human-grade pharma drugs should be used. Get legit human-grade pharma drugs if you ever want to get big. Muscle big. When aiming at adding/building mass on your frame there is no replacement for LEGIT pharma human-grade deca, test and dianabol.
> 
> ...


 Read when your on, you increase the volume to spare ur joints.

Unless that's stopped being necessary now....


----------



## lewdylewd (May 18, 2015)

A4RON said:


> Anyone can be 5ft 10in 95kg+ of muscle - Aim for it and prepare accordingly. It will come pretty fast if solid 2-3 years in the gym training hard before going on peds.


 No matter what I do I will never be 5ft 10 in.


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

Quackerz said:


> Maximum muscle failure.
> 
> Wendler's is geared to strength but weather or not you want to gain size will be heavily dependant on your assistance and how you are performing it.
> 
> ...


 Thanks buddy, I appreciate that.

One thing I don't quite understand is the rep ranges for your workout: Aren't they quite low? I was under the impression that around 1-6 reps is what you do if you want to build strength, and 10-15 for hypertrophy, with 6-10 being something of a hybrid. Is that what you're aiming for? Would you not get more gains with higher rep ranges?

What is Prowler? Is that the big thing you push/pull for cardio?


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

Tomahawk said:


> Thanks buddy, I appreciate that.
> 
> One thing I don't quite understand is the rep ranges for your workout: Aren't they quite low? I was under the impression that around 1-6 reps is what you do if you want to build strength, and 10-15 for hypertrophy, with 6-10 being something of a hybrid. Is that what you're aiming for? Would you not get more gains with higher rep ranges?
> 
> What is Prowler? Is that the big thing you push/pull for cardio?


 A prowler is a sled you load weight on and push around until you feel like throwing up, best HIIT ever. Good for recovery also. It will destroy you. Look it up.

As for the rep ranges I would start off with a set of 10, rest 2 mins or so, making sure that the last rep was all I could manage, after that I might get a set of 8, then 7, then maybe 6 on my 4th set, the last rep of that last set is where the magic happens, you have so many muscles fibres firing at this point that your body is working on overdrive to get that weight up, I will just push as much as I can until I literally cannot push any more, might even take 7 seconds or more just to try and squeeze out that last rep, I will be practically hyperventilating by the end of it. That is MMF. If I pick that same weight up afterwards and try to lift it I might get 1 or 2 reps at most. This is what can be achieved through intensity.

Ronnie and Culter trained almost excursively in this way, as do many other pro's.


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

Tomahawk said:


> Thanks buddy, I appreciate that.
> 
> One thing I don't quite understand is the rep ranges for your workout: Aren't they quite low? I was under the impression that around 1-6 reps is what you do if you want to build strength, and 10-15 for hypertrophy, with 6-10 being something of a hybrid. Is that what you're aiming for? Would you not get more gains with higher rep ranges?
> 
> What is Prowler? Is that the big thing you push/pull for cardio?


 As stated in a few month I will be starting a journal running this program. You will be able to see first hand the kind of results I will get.


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

Quackerz said:


> A prowler is a sled you load weight on and push around until you feel like throwing up, best HIIT ever. Good for recovery also. It will destroy you. Look it up.
> 
> As for the rep ranges I would start off with a set of 10, rest 2 mins or so, making sure that the last rep was all I could manage, after that I might get a set of 8, then 7, then maybe 6 on my 4th set, the last rep of that last set is where the magic happens, you have so many muscles fibres firing at this point that your body is working on overdrive to get that weight up, I will just push as much as I can until I literally cannot push any more, might even take 7 seconds or more just to try and squeeze out that last rep, I will be practically hyperventilating by the end of it. That is MMF. If I pick that same weight up afterwards and try to lift it I might get 1 or 2 reps at most. This is what can be achieved through intensity.
> 
> Ronnie and Culter trained almost excursively in this way, as do many other pro's.


 Thanks mate. So do you do all the reps with the same weight, or do you decrease weights in order to keep it in the rep range? I ask because often if I do 2 sets to failure, I can't really do any more than 1-2 reps of the same weight anymore, not with a 2 minute rest period.



Quackerz said:


> As stated in a few month I will be starting a journal running this program. You will be able to see first hand the kind of results I will get.


 OK, I'll check it out. What kind of results are you expecting ?


----------



## sniper83 (Jun 21, 2012)

A4RON said:


> Rarely train over 60 minutes... 45-60 mins HIGH INTENSITY even on gear.
> 
> Only human-grade pharma drugs should be used. Get legit human-grade pharma drugs if you ever want to get big. Muscle big. When aiming at adding/building mass on your frame there is no replacement for LEGIT pharma human-grade deca, test and dianabol.
> 
> ...


 My way of thinking bro


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

Tomahawk said:


> Thanks mate. So do you do all the reps with the same weight, or do you decrease weights in order to keep it in the rep range? I ask because often if I do 2 sets to failure, I can't really do any more than 1-2 reps of the same weight anymore, not with a 2 minute rest period.
> 
> OK, I'll check it out. What kind of results are you expecting ?


 I would pick a weight I could get for 10 reps as stated going to near failure (finishing each set with a hard rep) and when you get to about 5 reps after a few sets that is going to be you 'balls to the wall' set. You can ramp the weights up also if you like to one top end set and this method can also be applied with lighter weights if you prefer to get a feel for it, it simply will not stimulate as many muscle fibres though (as far as I am aware, someone correct me if I am wrong?). You can always increase the rest intervals also, you just need to find what works for you to make sure you are reaching complete failure.

Look up DC training, this is one of the most successful cookie cutter BB routines out there. It employs this method utilising rest paused intervals with extremely heavy weight, it is one of the most proven methods there is.

It is just a case of finding out the best method for you, but in my opinion MMF high intensity is always going to trump volume, this is my opinion and I will not ignore the fact that some people do work differently to others though, high volume can and does have a place.

As for results, I intend to gain as much mass as possible, hopefully 7-10kg in the first blast as a goal, whilst gaining as much strength as possible. Will be running 4-6 weeks of D-Bol or Anadrol, 500mg Test and 350 Tren Ace a week. 10 week cycle, then into a 12 week cruise on 150-250mg Test and then onto 10 weeks of NPP with an oral and 500 test again, then onto a lower cruise dose for a good 20 weeks or so to give myself a break. Will be less aggressive with the assistance work whist cruising, using lighter weights for tendon health and working slowly on strength. I plan on sticking with this for at least a year. Will change assistance exercises as and when progression in weight stagnates to similar exercise. eg: pull-ups for chins and dips for CGBP etc.


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

Quackerz said:


> I would pick a weight I could get for 10 reps as stated going to near failure (finishing each set with a hard rep) and when you get to about 5 reps after a few sets that is going to be you 'balls to the wall' set. You can ramp the weights up also if you like to one top end set and this method can also be applied with lighter weights if you prefer to get a feel for it, it simply will not stimulate as many muscle fibres though (as far as I am aware, someone correct me if I am wrong?). You can always increase the rest intervals also, you just need to find what works for you to make sure you are reaching complete failure.
> 
> Look up DC training, this is one of the most successful cookie cutter BB routines out there. It employs this method utilising rest paused intervals with extremely heavy weight, it is one of the most proven methods there is.
> 
> ...


 Hey mate, thanks again for this.

I've been looking into this and currently trying to decide whether to go with something like your workout or a PPL, and to be honest I think my knowledge is a bit weak. Is there any resource you can recommend so that I can understand what's going on "under the hood" with these training methods? It's one thing to follow DC or Madcow or Wieder, etc., but I'd like to get a better understanding of what's going on. (No offense, and you seem very knowledgeable, but if someone at the gym asks me why I'm doing this training, I want to have a better answer than "a guy on the internet called Quackerz said so".  )

Do you have any reading recommendations? If you don't mind me asking, what was your input to this, i.e. what did you read in order to come up with this workout?


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

Tomahawk said:


> Hey mate, thanks again for this.
> 
> I've been looking into this and currently trying to decide whether to go with something like your workout or a PPL, and to be honest I think my knowledge is a bit weak. Is there any resource you can recommend so that I can understand what's going on "under the hood" with these training methods? It's one thing to follow DC or Madcow or Wieder, etc., but I'd like to get a better understanding of what's going on. (No offense, and you seem very knowledgeable, but if someone at the gym asks me why I'm doing this training, I want to have a better answer than "a guy on the internet called Quackerz said so".  )
> 
> Do you have any reading recommendations? If you don't mind me asking, what was your input to this, i.e. what did you read in order to come up with this workout?


 http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Abstract/publishahead/Muscle_activation_does_not_increase_after_a.97493.aspx

This is just an Abstract but I will see if I can find the actual PDF for you, there was a link I found to all these articles for free a while back. One of the best articles I have read on the matter. The study basically concludes that fatigue is not necessary to fully recruit all motor units, hence stimulating growth. Muscle exhaustion is not necessary. The research was done with EMG to gauge motor unit recruitment and found no correlation between this and muscular fatigue.

There is plenty more good information out there, you just have to look for it, the internet is an expansive place. I am just a bit of an information junkie and training and strength training in particular is becoming a big interest of mine, so I read a lot on it. 

This would not necessarily mean you have to stick with 10 rep sets either, sets of 5 up to 100 can all stimulate growth, I just like the idea of training fast and heavy, it does not mean heavy is the 'best' way though. Some of the best growth in my chest I have seen was just bench pressing up to a max set of 5 and then doing 2 sets of max reps for 20-25 reps with dumbbells whist running WS4SB. The idea is simply to stimulate in a short space of time, but you have to work f**king hard.

High volume training does work, there are many testaments to it's success but I just see a more optimal way of doing things in a shorter space of time. To quote something I have seen @Mingster say on here a few times, 'why do 7 days work for 3 days pay?' It just makes no sense to me.

I also get more of an adrenaline rush when I am training balls to the wall, I prefer it that way.


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Tomahawk said:


> There seems to be a very polarized set of views on this. On the other extreme, some other people on this forum have told me that they tend to rest 3 minutes between sets and* never break a sweat during a workout.*


 They are not working hard enough.


----------



## andyboro (Oct 1, 2006)

Tomahawk said:


> OK, well that's about 1/3 of an upper body power day in my current workout.
> 
> Rows 3 sets 3-5
> 
> ...


 how long do you rest between sets dude?

my leg session yesterday was 23 sets and I was out in just over an hour.. the above is 21.


----------



## Fluke82 (Sep 10, 2015)

Natty Steve'o said:


> They are not working hard enough.


 I never sweat while lifting, making gains and progress daily


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Drogon said:


> I never sweat while lifting, making gains and progress daily


 Really...Well done. Just think how much more you could grow with more stimulation.


----------



## gymfreak2010 (Jan 6, 2016)

Tomahawk said:


> Then why do long workout programs such as PHAT exist? Or in Arnold's time, apparently 3-4 hour workouts were commonplace.


 how the hell can you give 100% for 3-4 hours, that's crazy lol I know I couldn't or wouldn't even try that , may be it's for some but not for me.


----------



## andyboro (Oct 1, 2006)

gymfreak2010 said:


> how the hell can you give 100% for 3-4 hours, that's crazy lol I know I couldn't or wouldn't even try that , may be it's for some but not for me.


 I think this is one of those occasions where normal people think that they need to train like Arnold in order to get anywhere and forget that he probably trained like us normos once upon a time.


----------



## Fluke82 (Sep 10, 2015)

Natty Steve'o said:


> Really...Well done. Just think how much more you could grow with more stimulation.


 Well I won't grow at all, I'm in a large calorie deficit (something you do not know about...  )


----------



## BoomTime (Feb 19, 2009)

Tomahawk said:


> Do long workouts affect your gains when you're on cycle? I know that for a natty, cortisol starts kicking in after 45-60 minutes, but how much of a problem is that when you're juicing?
> 
> I ask because I'm doing Layne Norton's PHAT workout, and it tends to take 1.5 - 2 hours to get through some of the workouts. Should I cut down the volume, increase the intensity, or keep it as it is?


 There is no magic workout, or ''the best'' workout.

Choose a routine, stick to it, lift weights, increase weights, then sets and reps after that, eat in a surplus. You will grow,

Do not over think it, don't get drawn in by what works for someone else.

Diet, consistency and progressive overloads, rest. That is all you ever need.


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Drogon said:


> Well I won't grow at all, I'm in a large calorie deficit (something you do not know about...  )


 Correct.

I'm in this game to build a large muscular well balanced physique.


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

I train 45 - 60 mins 4 x per week.


----------



## Fluke82 (Sep 10, 2015)

Natty Steve'o said:


> Correct.
> 
> I'm in this game to build a large muscular well balanced physique.


 Aren't we all.

sweating does not mean you're working hard and vice versa.

If I do the exact same workout in a gym without Air Con I sweat much more than in a gym with Air Con

does that mean I make more gains with the former?


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Drogon said:


> Aren't we all.
> 
> sweating does not mean you're working hard and vice versa.
> 
> ...


 No it means it's hot.


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

This guy is sweating buckets. I wonder why...


----------



## Fluke82 (Sep 10, 2015)

Natty Steve'o said:


> No it means it's hot.


 :beer:


----------



## Fluke82 (Sep 10, 2015)

Natty Steve'o said:


> This guy is sweating buckets. I wonder why...


 Air con is broke, obviously.


----------



## genetik (Mar 13, 2014)

sometimes I just workout 2 hours, not because I think it is better for my gains or anything just because I love to train and I love this feeling during the training


----------



## gymfreak2010 (Jan 6, 2016)

andyboro said:


> Natty Steve'o said:
> 
> 
> > This guy is sweating buckets. I wonder why...
> ...


 D man


----------



## UK2USA (Jan 30, 2016)

Tomahawk said:


> I'd be interested in a little bit more information if you don't mind. I've been doing PHAT for 12 weeks so I'm in the market for a change. But isn't Wendler's program more geared toward strength?
> 
> And what's MMF? I googled it and I just got porn and references to threesomes.


 I wondered why it took you so long to come back


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

UK2USA said:


> I wondered why it took you so long to come back


 Yeah mate, when I learn about a new kind of porn I disappear for a few days, then resurface looking like this:


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

Quackerz said:


> http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Abstract/publishahead/Muscle_activation_does_not_increase_after_a.97493.aspx
> 
> This is just an Abstract but I will see if I can find the actual PDF for you, there was a link I found to all these articles for free a while back. One of the best articles I have read on the matter. The study basically concludes that fatigue is not necessary to fully recruit all motor units, hence stimulating growth. Muscle exhaustion is not necessary. The research was done with EMG to gauge motor unit recruitment and found no correlation between this and muscular fatigue.
> 
> ...


 Thanks again mate, I really appreciate your response.


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

andyboro said:


> how long do you rest between sets dude?
> 
> my leg session yesterday was 23 sets and I was out in just over an hour.. the above is 21.


 That was an example of a power day on PHAT, in which you rest up to 5-6 minutes between sets in order to be able to lift maximum amounts of weights. PHAT has 2 power days and 3 hypertrophy days. The hypertrophy days have more sets, more volume and less rest time between sets.



andyboro said:


> I think this is one of those occasions where normal people think that they need to train like Arnold in order to get anywhere and forget that he probably trained like us normos once upon a time.


 I can't speak for everyone else, but generally my workouts have been between 1.5 and 2 hours -- I mentioned 3-4 hour workouts from Arnold's era as a possible counterexample to the idea that one cannot gain from long workouts due to overtraining factors.


----------



## andyboro (Oct 1, 2006)

Tomahawk said:


> That was an example of a power day on PHAT, in which you rest up to 5-6 minutes between sets in order to be able to lift maximum amounts of weights. PHAT has 2 power days and 3 hypertrophy days. The hypertrophy days have more sets, more volume and less rest time between sets.
> 
> I can't speak for everyone else, but generally my workouts have been between 1.5 and 2 hours -- I mentioned 3-4 hour workouts from Arnold's era as a possible counterexample to the idea that one cannot gain from long workouts due to overtraining factors.


 5-6 minutes? Stuff that lol.

I quite like the look of the routine but that seems daft to me, that's significantly more time stood around than it is doing something


----------



## Tomahawk (Dec 24, 2014)

andyboro said:


> 5-6 minutes? Stuff that lol.
> 
> I quite like the look of the routine but that seems daft to me, that's significantly more time stood around than it is doing something


 You should see powerlifters, those guys wait 10-15 minutes between sets. Takes them 3 hours just to do a few bench presses and squats.


----------



## andyboro (Oct 1, 2006)

Tomahawk said:


> You should see powerlifters, those guys wait 10-15 minutes between sets. Takes them 3 hours just to do a few bench presses and squats.


 Aren't you tempted to cut the breaks down to 'normal' amounts? You could take half an hour out of there easy!


----------

