One work out a week for one month for MASS?

[flamini]

So, this might seem outrageous but I came across what I personally found an interesting Idea. What if one were to workout only once a week doing bodybuilding workouts lifting each muscle in one day , a full weeks worth of lifting in one day.
Example:

7:30-8:30 am - Chest

11:00 am - back and shoulder

3:00-4:00- Legs

8:00-9:00 pm - bi and tris

Lets say for each time frame there were a total for 4 exercises for each muscle group between 6-10 reps and 4 sets each.

Now image this same routine while ignoring the times:

7:30-8:30 am - Chest (Sunday)

11:00 am - back and shoulder (Tuesday )


3:00-4:00- Legs (wed)

off thursday


8:00-9:00 pm - bi and tris (friday)
off saturday.

NOW each muscle group rests for a full week , so whats the difference between working them in one day and letting your whole body recover in one week.

You would have small yet high liquid carbohydrate and protein drinks/portions in between exercise with enough time to digest before you work out.

THEN one large ending meal in the day. the rest of the week , take naps the time you would be in the gym to get even more rest and sleep which we know aides recovery (obviously). We would eat higher amounts of fat for energy and the required protein as if you were normally working out.

we know that the body is always counter acting ... break down to build up, staying more hungry keeps elevated gh levels and cyclic adenosine monophate and lowers insulin levels to help burn fat, in return keeps insulin resistance low and in balance , then when sugars come you get a great inslin spike.

the body seems to respond in accordance to its mr. hyde. ALMOST every function and or hormone in the body has a jekyl and a hyde, one responsible for the opposite effects. Ex--> glucagon and insulin. or yet again a simple example of breaking muscle down to build it up. seems simple yes , wel all already know this , but its true.

So, back on topic, by working the while body to hell in one day may shock in my own theory not just your muscle but your entire endocrine system, could this be an innovative approach to gain the size we have all wanted all along?

This is just a thought, please no hostility !!!!! just friendly criticism and talk.

I am trying to keep this simple for now , as this takes off we can discuss into detail and raise questions.

 

[PaulBlack]

Not a bad question or topic, but it has been going on for quite some time in old lifting journals and articles.
Here's my take...
First off, abbreviated training (and sometimes, very abbreviated) is not really new to the fitness world. Old HIT lifters like Dr Ken, only did 2 hard W/O's per week and kept the overall volume low. ie: 1-3 sets per body part/full body).
Believing along the lines of say AJ (Arthur Jones) that, less is more or, once you inroad a muscle, you do not have to train it again for perhaps 4-8 days.
Some newer proponents of HIT feel training once every 10 or so days is fine too.
I can see where in this case, something, is better than nothing, but I do not see, training so infrequently, to gain the most, or be optimal.
Dr Ken used to say, most people will not train hard enough to only get away with once a week training. And when he said not training hard enough, he did nt mean the small groups like curls or shoulders. He meant putting tons of effort into say squatting or deadlifting, the big exercises that make systemic changes in the entire system.

That all said, I personally am from the school that believes most muscle recovery happens in 2-5 days. 2 being the smaller groups and 4-5 being the larger.
There must be something to the effectiveness of an average of 3-4 days per, since the masses seem to benefit the most from it. Everyone from pro athletes to the weekend warriors.
I also think, only training real hard one day, then resting for an entire week, is compared to using a hand tool for the first time.
ie: The first day guy #1 does 8 full hours of raking and ends up with blisters on his hands. Guy #2 slowly does 2-3 hours each day and builds up a nice callous on his. Guy #2, can then do more work eventually, as he has built his GPP and fitness levels up slowly and over time to adapt to the new stimulus.

I don't think that infrequent training is bad say (like a month you mention perhaps!?) and maybe at times is exactly what some trainees need to switch up their tool box or elicit a "different" response from their body that it is used too, but to just stick with one protocol and also have it be a protocol that is perhaps less popular or goes against the grain, only because it sounds like a good theory or looks good on paper or in the lab (since the gym is the true lab for 99% of us), is not the best approach IMHO.

I think there is a reason why some of the biggest, strongest and best built athletes use pretty standard protocols. Because they work quite well.
I can't remember what oly lifter said it, but it was something like, you want to be able to train perhaps as frequently as possible, but being well recovered to do so and being able to gain. That is of course the key, in knowing your body and how well you can adapt and recover to constantly higher stimuli.

People too, must consider outside the gym and or work and family related stresses and activities.
YMMV

 

[asooneyeonig]

look up powerfactor training. it covers in detail what you are talking about.

 

[flamini]

look up powerfactor training. it covers in detail what you are talking about.

Ill check it out!

 

[flamini]

Not a bad question or topic, but it has been going on for quite some time in old lifting journals and articles.
Here's my take...
First off, abbreviated training (and sometimes, very abbreviated) is not really new to the fitness world. Old HIT lifters like Dr Ken, only did 2 hard W/O's per week and kept the overall volume low. ie: 1-3 sets per body part/full body).
Believing along the lines of say AJ (Arthur Jones) that, less is more or, once you inroad a muscle, you do not have to train it again for perhaps 4-8 days.
Some newer proponents of HIT feel training once every 10 or so days is fine too.
I can see where in this case, something, is better than nothing, but I do not see, training so infrequently, to gain the most, or be optimal.
Dr Ken used to say, most people will not train hard enough to only get away with once a week training. And when he said not training hard enough, he did nt mean the small groups like curls or shoulders. He meant putting tons of effort into say squatting or deadlifting, the big exercises that make systemic changes in the entire system.

That all said, I personally am from the school that believes most muscle recovery happens in 2-5 days. 2 being the smaller groups and 4-5 being the larger.
There must be something to the effectiveness of an average of 3-4 days per, since the masses seem to benefit the most from it. Everyone from pro athletes to the weekend warriors.
I also think, only training real hard one day, then resting for an entire week, is compared to using a hand tool for the first time.
ie: The first day guy #1 does 8 full hours of raking and ends up with blisters on his hands. Guy #2 slowly does 2-3 hours each day and builds up a nice callous on his. Guy #2, can then do more work eventually, as he has built his GPP and fitness levels up slowly and over time to adapt to the new stimulus.

I don't think that infrequent training is bad say (like a month you mention perhaps!?) and maybe at times is exactly what some trainees need to switch up their tool box or elicit a "different" response from their body that it is used too, but to just stick with one protocol and also have it be a protocol that is perhaps less popular or goes against the grain, only because it sounds like a good theory or looks good on paper or in the lab (since the gym is the true lab for 99% of us), is not the best approach IMHO.

I think there is a reason why some of the biggest, strongest and best built athletes use pretty standard protocols. Because they work quite well.
I can't remember what oly lifter said it, but it was something like, you want to be able to train perhaps as frequently as possible, but being well recovered to do so and being able to gain. That is of course the key, in knowing your body and how well you can adapt and recover to constantly higher stimuli.

People too, must consider outside the gym and or work and family related stresses and activities.
YMMV

good points , I feel if I were to try or recommend it then yeah it would be STRICTLY one month out of the year . I think there is definitely a reason standard protocol is common ... It works! Definitely right about that.

 

[flamini]

look up powerfactor training. it covers in detail what you are talking about.

I've looked into power factor training , it has more to do with static contractions and partial reps then what we were talking about I feel like . can u explain if I am wrong . I can't find anything on power factor training and what we are talking about

 

[asooneyeonig]

I've looked into power factor training , it has more to do with static contractions and partial reps then what we were talking about I feel like . can u explain if I am wrong . I can't find anything on power factor training and what we are talking about

powerfactor was all about applying the maximal weight/intensity to the body. the research being done was showing that people could go up to 1-2 weeks between between a workout and still get stronger, and therefore bigger. static contraction took it to the next logical step.

 

[PaulBlack]

powerfactor was all about applying the maximal weight/intensity to the body. the research being done was showing that people could go up to 1-2 weeks between between a workout and still get stronger, and therefore bigger. static contraction took it to the next logical step.

I might also bet, that "any change" from their typical settled program (if they have been at it for back to back cycles or so) will elicit a change, along with testing showing guys getting stronger, are many times done with novices, or more or less under-trained individuals, who, if you use any good (harder or less volume frequency, depending on what they have been doing) effort and protocol than they are used to, you will see a positive for a short period at least.