Bro, have you heard of Doggcrap on Animal's board? I've started his program and it's awesome, every week i'm getting stronger just like he says. I've only been on it for less than a month so I can't really say too much, but if strength keeps improving as it has been, my muscles have no choice but to grow. Check it out...
Read the whole thread, it's really long but very informative.
http://www.animalkits.be/phpBB/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic=253&forum=11&start=0
That's only true to an extent. Strength and Hypertrophy do go hand in hand for a large part, but strength has a lot more to do with neural adaption (increased recruitment of muscle fibers per contraction, increased firing rate of nerves, decreased contraction of protagonist muscles during the lift). The DC system may be more effective for strength gains, but as far as hypertrophic gains (increased contractile proteins), traditional lifts are actually better. You can get stronger without growing that much bigger.
Take power lifters, ever seen a 150lbs, skinny looking kid (or man) deadlift 4-5 plates. It doesn't look possible, that's because MOST of his strength are neural adaption, not muscle hypertrophy. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying DC isn't good at all, the originators of that whole concept of single set high intensity really goes back to Dorian Yates and then pushed heavily by Mike Mentzer who wrote books and did a million seminars (the only thing new about DC training is the "extreme stretching" which does not facilitate greater growth by potentially creating more room at the muscle sarcolemma) I know all the arguements backing DC because I used to be a huge advocate of high intensity. I converted all my workout buddies from traditional lifting to high intensity. It makes the most logical sense, more strength = more muscle, but that's not completely true when you know the science behind muscle behavior.
I will say DC is more effective if pure strength is your goal, but as far as bodybuidling, traditional lifts (which I'm not implying lacks intensity, 405lbs bent over rows for 12 reps is mighty intense) is your best option for muscle hypertrophy. Muscle doesn't just react to Load Intensity, which is all DC emphasis, but also Volume Intensity, which you don't get in the DC system.
Again, think back to the 150lbs kid who can deadlift triple his weight, his strength lies in neural adaption (increased recruitment of muscle fibers per contraction, increased firing rate of nerves, decreased contraction of protagonist muscles during the lift), not because of increased muscle size (hypertrophy). DC isn't a new concept (it's a new label on the old, old concept of high intensity. Look up Dorian Yates and Mike Mentzer, who I used to mentor), it's been argued by muscle physiologists for generations. Tons of studies and research comparing the two. Traditional lifting wins EVERYTIME, with ONE exception, beginning lifters respond to DC quicker, but that's only within the first 3 months of EVER touching a weight. Veteran lifters will find traditional lifting superior for muscle size.
Again, I'm not saying DC doesn't work, but as far as muscle hypertrophy and not neural strength adaption, traditional lifting is superior.
