- This topic has 4 voices and 7 replies.
-
Posts
-
My question is about the following quote from the free excerpt here (http://athlete.io/5012/book-excerpt-carb-back-loading-2/):"Mike Mentzer’s Heavy Duty training or variant there of like DorianYate’s Blood-and-Guts style of training, Dog Crap or any eccentric-based resistance program fails to translocate tGLUT."My understanding of the Mentzer/Yates/Dog Crap family of methods is to use maximum weight and do one extremely intense, low-rep set (e.g., 7 reps) to absolute, screaming failure at slow cadence (e.g., 5 sec up, 5 sec down) for a given body part. And then keep increasing the weight over time. (With other twists, like static holds at the end, etc., but all inherit from Arthur Jones' idea of extremely-high-intensity weight training for short durations).You call these methods "eccentric-based," and while the 5-seconds-down part is certainly eccentric, the 5-sec up is concentric. Furthermore, from my research, it seems like the more intense the resistance training, the more glycogen stores are used up and the more GLUT4 is translocated. I.e., higher-intensity, lower-volume is better in this regard than lower-intensity, higher-volume. I.e., get those diabetics lifting heavy weights, right?"Go big or go home," right?So... if the HIT weight training (not H-I-I-T, but H-I-T) school of thought is to train at maximum intensity (maximum weight), wouldn't this deplete glycogen and translocate GLUT4 just fine, and therefore be compatible with Carb Backloading?If not, then exactly what kind of resistance training is sufficient for Carb Backloading? You rule a bunch of things out without explicitly ruling anything in. Is more training volume per workout necessary? If so, how much? Is 5 seconds up good cadence, but fast-controlled down instead of 5 seconds down? Any references for these points?Obviously, the longer you lift heavy weights in a given workout, the more the glycogen stores will be depleted and the more GLUT4 will translocate... but how much is "enough?"On my end, I've even found graphs in research papers that show how glycogen stores are depleted and GLUT4 translocation increases as the intensity of the workout increases (heavy weights for shorter durations). See the first graph here:http://physrev.physiology.org/content/93/3/993
Firstly, I wouldn't consider 7 reps a low-rep set.. Under 5 is what I would call low rep.That's important because it could change the dynamic.All that being said, intensity ACROSS volume is where I believe the most glycogen usage and tGLUT translocation to occur.This could be demonstrated anecdotally by the fact that in a carb depleted state, maximal intensities of compound lifts, for single or double reps, is often not severely jeopardized. However, in the same carb depleted state, taking the same carb-loaded intensity into a carb-depleted 10 rep max, you likely won't make it past 5-7 reps.My thoughts.
Thanks! Yeah, that makes some sense.By the way, TCB, your member-log is pretty amazing. I started down this path about three weeks ago with the 4-hour-body Slo-Carb diet (very similar to Carb Nite, except you eat beans during the week along with protein/fat/veg, and have one carb refeed day a week). I started out 6'8" and 179 pounds, but slightly soft (bf around 18%), and regular workouts going nowhere after 2 years of diligence. My changes are very similar to yours as seen in your photos, with those side love-handles just melting away and my torso looking more and more wolf-like each week.BUT... what happened? Did you ever reach 200 pounds? What happened during your next cycle? Reaching 200 pounds for me, without it coming from 20 pounds of fat, would be nice...
Thanks! Yeah, that makes some sense.By the way, TCB, your member-log is pretty amazing. I started down this path about three weeks ago with the 4-hour-body Slo-Carb diet (very similar to Carb Nite, except you eat beans during the week along with protein/fat/veg, and have one carb refeed day a week). I started out 6'8" and 179 pounds, but slightly soft (bf around 18%), and regular workouts going nowhere after 2 years of diligence. My changes are very similar to yours as seen in your photos, with those side love-handles just melting away and my torso looking more and more wolf-like each week.BUT... what happened? Did you ever reach 200 pounds? What happened during your next cycle? Reaching 200 pounds for me, without it coming from 20 pounds of fat, would be nice...
Appreciated..But, I am more into "short" experiments. It seems like every 3-5 months I change what I want to test and see what happens, ha. I'm currently floating at 197-201ish, a little higher BF%. But, as I've mentioned in some other random threads.. I've had a knee issue for a couple of months and haven't been doing anything. Other than eating. I'm currently trying to get the metabolism going as high as possible, and eating as much food as possible without gaining fat. I'm right around 2900 kcal/day, with no workouts, just walking the dog 30-45min/day, and not gaining weight.And 6'8"? Holy crap, squatting must suck. 😉
I can only speak for DC (Doggcrapp) training, which is misspelled in the book and apparently misunderstood: it's not 5 sec up, 5 sec down, cadence is normal with the negative under control (appropriately to the exercise) i.e. 'good form'. Sets are not low rep necessarily, they are either a rest pause set or straight set(s) to near failure again according to the exercise. Rep ranges are seldom under 8, and if they are they're paired with a down set of higher reps (e.g. a set of 4 followed by a set of 8) and always on a big exercise such as a deadlift. Reps are encouraged to be as high as possible in a progressive fashion over time.DC has its own diet protocol, but you could use some CBL principles with it. It would definitely achieve the tGLUT translocation needed for BLing though. Kiefer is advising against exclusively eccentric based programs, which DC isn't.
Yeah, that's what I'm wondering about.What would an "exclusively eccentric" workout program look like? I mean, you'd have to have someone else lift the weight up for you and then you'd lower it down?I looked around and couldn't find anything that fits that description.The eccentric stuff that I could find is all about just going really slow in both up and down. Or in one case, a video showed fast up and then slow down.So, is Kiefer implying that "fast reps" with heavy weight are needed for backloading?
“So, is Kiefer implying that “fast reps” with heavy weight are needed for backloading?”Explosive lifting with a controlled negative is good technique, it's not exclusive to BLing nor is BLing anything magical which needs an intricate training system for it to work. Just lift for strength and growth as you normally would and adjust carbohydrates (and thereby calories) to the amount of work you do. Any progressive powerlifting/bodybuilding/powerbuilding program is fine.I've no idea what an eccentric-only program would look like, probably would need a spotter and machines at the very least. Or perhaps some sort of band setup. But how many people do you know who actually do this sort of program and grow? Can't say I know any myself!
The whole tempo thing is overblown imo, unless you have access to a training partner most of the time and use some very specific bodybuilding techniques to induce muscular damage/fatigue, you should just pick a weight that is challenging for the rep range you are shooting for and bar speed will take care of itself. Use good technique and a good weight, if you need to concern yourself with your tempo you are not most likely not going heavy enough anyways.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.