# So is low frequency actually good for steroids user?



## AgoSte (Apr 14, 2015)

I often hear that "bro split is better for assisted lifters, while high frequency is better for natty lifters".

One thing for sure is that high frequency is better for natties.

But is true that low frequency is great for steroid users?

Imo it's not. Why would something that is worse for natties, be better for assisted? Imo training muscles every 3/5 days is better also for steroid users.

I'd like to hear your opinion (supported by scientific studies if possible).


----------



## Mark2021 (Apr 13, 2012)

Train hard and heavy. Listen to your body. 5/6 on with 1 or 2 days rest works for me.

I don't believe in " over training "


----------



## AgoSte (Apr 14, 2015)

Mark2021 said:


> Train hard and heavy. Listen to your body. 5/6 on with 1 or 2 days rest works for me.
> 
> I don't believe in " over training "


 I was merely talking about frequency. In example, do you do a bro-split, low frequency, or a push/pull, high frequency?


----------



## AgoSte (Apr 14, 2015)

An Abstract of a thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in the Department of Kinesiology University of Central Missouri
May, 2011
ABSTRACT by Michael H. Thomas
Purpose: Determine the effect strength training frequency of equal volume has on improvements in lean mass and strength. Methods: Participants were 7 women and 12 men, age (��̅ = 34.64 years ± 6.91 years), training age (��̅ = 51.16 months ± 39.02 months). Participants were placed into one of two groups. High frequency training group (HFT) trained each muscle group 3 times per week. Low frequency training group (LFT) trained each muscle group one time per week. Results: HFT increased lean mass 1.06 kg ± 1.78 kg, (1.9%), LFT increased lean mass .99 kg ± 1.31 kg, (2.0%). HFT strength improvements on chest press 9.07 kg ± 6.33 kg, (11%) and hack squat 20.16 kg ± 11.59 kg, (21%). LFT strength improvements on chest press 5.80kg ± 4.26 kg, (7.0%) and hack squat 21.83 kg ± 11.17 kg, (24 %). No mean differences between groups were significant. Conclusion: HFT and LFT result in similar improvements in lean mass and strength, following 8 weeks of strength training.
Key Words: strength training frequency, exercise prescription, lean mass, hypertrophy.

I found this. What do you think?


----------



## ausmaz (Jul 14, 2014)

AgoSte said:


> I often hear that "bro split is better for assisted lifters, while high frequency is better for natty lifters".
> 
> One thing for sure is that high frequency is better for natties.
> 
> ...


 No studies, but as i understand it the reason increased frequency is more productivefor naturals is because elevated protein synthesis only remains for a brief period of time... so more frequent workouts= elevated protein synthesis over a longer period of time.... when you are assisted, the drugs keep those levels high anyway allowing you to train each bodypart more intensely but less frequently.... if you so choose....

I would say not that its 'worse' for assisted lifters, but just that its better for nattys..... drugs give a trainer 'more options' in terms of productive training.... like i say, just my 2 cents...


----------



## Mark2021 (Apr 13, 2012)

AgoSte said:


> I was merely talking about frequency. In example, do you do a bro-split, low frequency, or a push/pull, high frequency?


 Whats a bro split lol..


----------



## AgoSte (Apr 14, 2015)

Mark2021 said:


> Whats a bro split lol..


 Low frequency, train muscle groups just once a week.


----------



## Omen669 (Jun 11, 2015)

Rest is when you grow and repair, assisted or not

I've heard of guys on stage training a body part, once every 2weeks. Worked well for them.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

AgoSte said:


> An Abstract of a thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in the Department of Kinesiology University of Central Missouri
> May, 2011
> ABSTRACT by Michael H. Thomas
> Purpose: Determine the effect strength training frequency of equal volume has on improvements in lean mass and strength. Methods: Participants were 7 women and 12 men, age (��̅ = 34.64 years ± 6.91 years), training age (��̅ = 51.16 months ± 39.02 months). Participants were placed into one of two groups. High frequency training group (HFT) trained each muscle group 3 times per week. Low frequency training group (LFT) trained each muscle group one time per week. Results: HFT increased lean mass 1.06 kg ± 1.78 kg, (1.9%), LFT increased lean mass .99 kg ± 1.31 kg, (2.0%). HFT strength improvements on chest press 9.07 kg ± 6.33 kg, (11%) and hack squat 20.16 kg ± 11.59 kg, (21%). LFT strength improvements on chest press 5.80kg ± 4.26 kg, (7.0%) and hack squat 21.83 kg ± 11.17 kg, (24 %). No mean differences between groups were significant. Conclusion: HFT and LFT result in similar improvements in lean mass and strength, following 8 weeks of strength training.
> ...


 the problem with this study is the the subject number and the duration of th study would leave it open to it being flawed as we all know the body essentially does not change that quickly......

there is plenty of studies to show higher frequency the the typical Bro split to be beneficial (on my phone so don't have them to hand) plus res world results, i and many others use higher frequency training and it has worked and worked well (given adequate rest and Nutrition) look at the development Jordan Peters has achieved in the past 2-3yrs and then question the benefit of higher frequency training.....

for me it has never filed to produce better results, in both natural and assisted guys and girls


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

Not for Arnold... 6 hours a day 6 days a week.


----------



## Major Eyeswater (Nov 2, 2013)

AgoSte said:


> I often hear that "bro split is better for assisted lifters, while high frequency is better for natty lifters".
> 
> One thing for sure is that high frequency is better for natties.
> 
> ...


 The bro split is better for assisted lifters than for natty's, but not necessarily better than higher frequency for assisted lifters.

The bro split has become popular because a lot of guys quite like the idea of just going into the gym on Monday & hitting chest for an hour. Most guys who have been using for a while are about as big as they are going to get, so there is going to be little difference in terms of results.


----------



## AgoSte (Apr 14, 2015)

Acidreflux said:


> Not for Arnold... 6 hours a day 6 days a week.


 Lol it's true. He explained btw that he overtrained and he realized that only when Mentzer came up with his heavy duty


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

AgoSte said:


> Lol it's true. He explained btw that he overtrained and he realized that only when Mentzer came up with his heavy duty


 So if he hadn't he would have been even better?


----------



## Gavinmcl (Jul 1, 2010)

I found ppl took its toll on me after a few weeks so changed to 5 day split high reps 20/15/12,six weeks time I'll go back to 3x8 then change again to 5x5 changing it up is the key in my opinion , exercises are kept similar throughout with changes as to how I feel it if I get bored


----------



## AgoSte (Apr 14, 2015)

Acidreflux said:


> So if he hadn't he would have been even better?


 Who knows


----------



## AgoSte (Apr 14, 2015)

Gavinmcl said:


> I found ppl took its toll on me after a few weeks so changed to 5 day split high reps 20/15/12,six weeks time I'll go back to 3x8 then change again to 5x5 changing it up is the key in my opinion , exercises are kept similar throughout with changes as to how I feel it if I get bored


 Ppl 5 days a week?


----------



## Mogadishu (Aug 29, 2014)

The main problem is that ppl tend to train more instead of an intelligent approach. If someone tells you he need 25 set for chest he is doing something wrong whatever he says "works for me" is a classic argument.


----------



## Gavinmcl (Jul 1, 2010)

I found ppl took its toll on me after a few weeks so changed to 5 day split high reps 20/15/12,six weeks time I'll go back to 3x8 then change again to 5x5 changing it up is the key in my opinion , exercises are kept similar throughout with changes as to how I feel it if I get bored


----------



## Gavinmcl (Jul 1, 2010)

yeah ppl repeat then Sunday off was way too much the idea was increase frequency but lower volume but hit muscle twice a week it killed me was done in after two weeks


----------



## Tren's physique (Feb 13, 2016)

Mogadishu said:


> The main problem is that ppl tend to train more instead of an intelligent approach. If someone tells you he need 25 set for chest he is doing something wrong whatever he says "works for me" is a classic argument.


 Couldn't say better mate. I don't get all this volume to hammer a muscle group. The worst thing is when they say "I train muscle groups just once a week because after hammering them it takes 7 days to recover".

To OP: yeah low frequency is good, but it's not better... Some of those guys would grow even training once every two weeks (to exaggerate). Who says that if they trained twice or thrice a wike they wouldn't grow even better?


----------



## Sustanation (Jan 7, 2014)

AgoSte said:


> I often hear that "bro split is better for assisted lifters, while high frequency is better for natty lifters".
> 
> One thing for sure is that high frequency is better for natties.
> 
> ...


 If its purely scientific and not bro science then the main issue should be intensity once that is nailed frequency naturally needs to be reduced, now a lot of people disagree with that but put a man through a true Arthur jones HIT workout and everyone minus the stupid ones have the lightbulb moment of "Oh s**t so that's what intensity is"

http://www.amazon.co.uk/New-High-Intensity-Training-Ellington-Darden/dp/1594860009/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1456132438&sr=8-1&keywords=the+new+high+intensity


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

Training all day everyday! Off to the gym at ten.... :beer:


----------



## simonboyle (Aug 5, 2013)

Acidreflux said:


> Training all day everyday! Off to the gym at ten.... :beer:


 Lightweight, taking time off to type this post.


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

simonboyle said:


> Lightweight, taking time off to type this post.


 Hmmm think I'll blast abbs chest and upper arms seen as i did upper and lower back yesterday..

Then Tuesday will be high volume leg day followed by hex bar lifts Wednesday oh the life of a gym rat!!


----------



## simonboyle (Aug 5, 2013)

Acidreflux said:


> Hmmm think I'll blast abbs chest and upper arms seen as i did upper and lower back yesterday..
> 
> Then Tuesday will be high volume leg day followed by hex bar lifts Wednesday oh the life of a gym rat!!


 Dude, do you even lift? Two posts when you could be getting more frequency in!


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

simonboyle said:


> Dude, do you even lift? Two posts when you could be getting more frequency in!


 Serious pump today felt euphoric! !!


----------



## Dayv (Nov 1, 2015)

I find training larger muscle groups (like legs & back) once per week to be most effective, training them twice causes me too much fatigue and strength loss

I hit traps, biceps, triceps, chest and delts twice per week, sometimes 3


----------



## AestheticManlet (Jun 12, 2012)

I'm varying it at the moment. Following PPL routine, switching between strength and hypertrophy each day for the last few weeks. Strength days is mainly compounds based on 4 sets of 5, maybe an isolation or two at 3 sets of 8. Hypertrophy is 3 sets of 12 for compounds and 3 sets 16 for isolations, seems to be going well so far. If I feel like a day off I'll continue where i left off the next day.

Ie

push strength

pull hypertrophy

legs strength

push hypertrophy

pull strength

legs hypertrophy


----------



## nWo (Mar 25, 2014)

AgoSte said:


> An Abstract of a thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in the Department of Kinesiology University of Central Missouri
> May, 2011
> ABSTRACT by Michael H. Thomas
> Purpose: Determine the effect strength training frequency of equal volume has on improvements in lean mass and strength. Methods: Participants were 7 women and 12 men, age (��̅ = 34.64 years ± 6.91 years), training age (��̅ = 51.16 months ± 39.02 months). Participants were placed into one of two groups. High frequency training group (HFT) trained each muscle group 3 times per week. Low frequency training group (LFT) trained each muscle group one time per week. Results: HFT increased lean mass 1.06 kg ± 1.78 kg, (1.9%), LFT increased lean mass .99 kg ± 1.31 kg, (2.0%). HFT strength improvements on chest press 9.07 kg ± 6.33 kg, (11%) and hack squat 20.16 kg ± 11.59 kg, (21%). LFT strength improvements on chest press 5.80kg ± 4.26 kg, (7.0%) and hack squat 21.83 kg ± 11.17 kg, (24 %). No mean differences between groups were significant. Conclusion: HFT and LFT result in similar improvements in lean mass and strength, following 8 weeks of strength training.
> ...


 As per usual, clearly done on inexperienced lifters which practically nullifies the entire thing. ANYTHING works when you're new.


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

The problem with using any single study to generalize is that studies have to be conducted with tight controls and generally only compare one or two factors against one another in a very limited capacity. This means that all any single study can tell you is what is likely to happen if you are similar to the subjects in that study and train exactly in the way the study subjects trained. As soon as you change any variables which, since most studies simply of not reflect a real world way of training you almost certainly will have to, you can no longer generalize that studies results directly to what you are talking about doing.

The best way to use studies is to look at multiple studies that study something like frequency, each slightly differently within a narrow range, and pool the results to see if there's a pattern. That gives the best predictor of if there is something you can actually generalize.

In the case of studies looking at frequency, must studies match volume over a week but vary the frequency - say comparing something like 12 sets once a week with 6 sets twice a week or 4 sets three times a week - all for the same total loading and number of reps. There have been several studies like this in recent years, and the general patterns observed suggest that if you are a novice to training it doesn't matter, but if you are already trained there does appear a small but usually statistically significant ('statistically significant' meaning the difference in results is almost certainly not simply 'by chance') advantage to training more than just once a week in this volume matched way.

What the studies don't tell you however is what happens in non-volume matched conditions, such as doing 30 sets once a week compared to 10 sets twice a week. It may be that increased volume once a week has an advantage, or that it doesn't.

Another thing worth mentioning is that even though the averages suggest little difference other than perhaps a slight advantage for higher than once a week frequency, almost all of these studies have a small number of individual participants who buck the trend and do better at the lower frequency. So while increasingly evidence does suggest a higher frequency to be better for most people, in the short and medium term at least, if it very obviously doesn't work that way for you then don't be afraid to stick with a lower frequency. However, if all you've ever done or done for a long time is low frequency, then you really should try a higher frequency and give it a decent bash.


----------

