I do 2 sets per exercise, 1st set I do 70-80% and the 2nd set to complete failure. I only do 3 exercises. Two upper body which I change every 6 weeks. The 3rd exercise is always squats. Works well for me. Saves me time and stress on joints.
This is also my approach. First set is basically a warm up, but I don't go to 100% failure on the second set during most of my workouts. I will do that only on some occasions, when I feel like pushing myself. I have actually read/watched multiple sources where they say it is much more beneficial to stop 1 or 2 reps short of total failure, that pushing yourself (every) workout can actually hinder your progress.
People need to realize there is no such thing the optimal routine. Its about novelty. Diminished returns will come from doing one thing too often no matter what. High intensity works and high volume works. What matters is what you haven’t done before or in awhile. Dont make this too complicated. Also, if someone is sure their way is best, watch out because they have something to sell. Train hard everyone 💪
Great info, always good to see scientific approaches that question the staus quo. I'm 57 and worked out my whole life, but for sure picked up back habits along the way. I come from the era of pushing until you are throwing up , NOBODY drank water, you play hurt, and coach will give a you salt pill . Won't bore anybody with my personal approach now, but it's built entirely around 1) Avoid injury 2) Make it interesting so I stay consistent . That's it. I'll check this method out and see if it fits for sure . I do have to warm up really good at my age though . That's critical for me to not get hurt.
@@dagre1839 Oh yes, it definitely is. As a 42 year old I can vouch I have hurt myself easier by skipping/doing flimsy warmups compared to 20+ years ago where I could have gotten away with it more.
I’d be careful with exercise to failure routines. I made phenomenal strength gains with plain 3x10s and powerlifting for 5-10 years. I still have nagging injuries from 1 set to failure, and I did those for less than a month.
@@-John-Doe- I agree that going to failure is probably a bad idea and likely to get you injured. Would you think that 1 set at RPE 9 with a rep range of 7-10 would be a reasonable compromise? RPE 9 being defined as _probably_ one rep left in the tank.
In 1970 I started training from the 1930s book my Dad starting using in the 1940s. The protocol was two warmup sets, then two working sets per compound exercise. It called for progressing from two sets of 6 to two sets of 12, then adding weight, reducing reps, and progressing again from 6 to 12. I find my second set is usually better than the first, the third, or anything after it. So I find two sets per exercise very useful.
This sounds like a very sensible approach, I have been thinking about this on my own for a while but not done it yet. I’m currently on 5X5 since May this year after taking 18 months off due to injury to my spine and shoulder tear. I do one week 5X5 then the following week 5X3 with heavier weights. But thinking of doing what you just mentioned makes sense.
Bro i dont realy under stand how you train 2 Sets 6 and 2 Sets 12 ? Then reduce reps an then again , 2 Set 6 and 2 set 12 what?? Could you explain Better?
@@unskilledxd6970 Imagine bicep curls. you begin at 20lbs. you can make it to 6 reps, 3 sets per arm. One day youre gonne tell yourself you want to move to the next heaviest dumbell because you want to get stronger and build more mass. In stead of jumping to 22.5lbss, get comfortable doing 3 sets of 12 reps with the 20s. once you can do that (dont bs yourself) THEN grab the next heaviest dumbell and do 6 reps, 3 sets. Then, again, before you begin trainign with the 25lb dumbell, prove to yourself you can consitently do 3 sets of 12 22.5. Basically dont reward yourself with a heavier weight until you can prove to yourself that youre a beast with your current weight for that exercise. and you prove that by being able to get up to 12 reps, instead of 6
@@unskilledxd6970what he's saying is pick a weight that you can do for 6 reps. Do two sets. When you progress to the point that you can do 12 reps for both sets, then you increase the weight and drop the reps back down to 6. Repeat the whole cycle. It's called a "double progression" program. This is a standard way to do it.
Dorian Yates trained the same way . One set of 6-8 reps to failure , also while focusing on the negative portion of the lift . I’ve always love this style of training .
@@Tonal236 exactly, i think 2-3 sets per exercise is totally enough if performed with quality. Especially for naturals you shouldn't go too much above that
Arthur Jones was crazy in the right ways. Loved learning about him and his starting of Nautilus. What was even crazier was combining one set till failure, his equipment, woman were able to reverse their bone loss. Amazing stuff, thanks for reminding me of all this right as I got back into training after falling off for far too long :)
Arthur Jones eventually out did himself though, he started getting more extreme In his later years advocating for marathon no rest workout routines which didn't work well. Just because no one could recover from one HIT exercise and then immediately(I am talking 5-20 seconds) do that style of training again. Look at Boyer Coe there is a video of Jones training him on RU-vid. He was doing TONS of exercises with no rest. This video was before he quit Jones and went back to regular training(he was also off the sauce, Jones hated steroids). By the third exercise he just couldn't do anything hardly intense enough. That's why Mike Mentzer left Nautilus after a few months I believe. Because Jones had gone too far. Later on in Mikes life he started encouraging rest, and he stopped doing as many super sets unless you need to superset to pre fatigue a muscle like the Lat.
Jones didn't want people spending long periods of time in his gyms, he wanted a higher turnover of gym customers, equaling more money. This is the real reason jones liked short, two time a week workouts. He was first and foremost a businessman.
Arthur Jones was also doing exactly what he accused reg and Arnold of looking for his "gimick" that's different to sell people. Mentzer drove himself crazy abusing methamphetamine and admitted in an interview that 90% of his physique was built w traditional volume and progressive overload. But has later conceived the believe that his heavy duty training he developed with Jones was now the best. Which teaches and encourages going far beyond initial failure for max efficacy. There may be merit here but there are many studies proving that a certain amount of volume and frequency reign supreme, not to mention time under tension and phacial stretching from intense pump, etc. plus you risk injury if you don't emphasize these people warm up before attempting one all out set of say bench press. I have alot of these books from these eras and studied the history alot of history lacking in this video. Also lived in California Florida and Virginia training over 25 years lived dozens of cities yet to meet anyone built like a house that did Mentzer style training from the beginning.
Yates got pretty big, and his training wasn't too far from from Mentzer's heavy duty philosophy. I think the main problem is the genetically gifted with big goals are too scared to try such little volume
@@muakutu4641 im not sure what you meant by this. Yates was size-gifted and did it. And if he's truthful about his training then it worked. So what is your point?
The bottom line is, THESE GUYS DONT LOOK THAT GREAT, so why take advice from them. On the other hand, Dorian Yates looked great, so.... where do you go from here?
Here we are talking about 3 sets or 1 set for each exercise, when several years ago I would do 10 exercises per day, 5 to 6 days per week, and 6-8 sets each for most of them. I would warm up for the first, then hit the 25, 15, 10, 5 and finally single rep range, then go back up to 5, 10, 15, and 20 again. This brought me in fantastic shape. I remember Arnold talking about volume (high set and rep ranges) as key to his bodybuilding success, but Mike Mentzer and Dorian Yates talking about 1 or 2 sets per workout. For me, I go in and listen to my body. I still pyramid down and back up again. If I'm not feeling an exercise, I stop after the warmup. If I am, I keep going 80% to failure and maybe once to failure in a low rep range, and once for a high rep range, for every exercise. When I am making the mind-muscle connection, I keep going. When it's just not working today, I head to the cardio. A one-size-fits-all rarely works with anything, so for bodybuilding, I listen to every advocate and synthesize/adjust the concepts to whatever feels most natural to me.
Well Yates routine was doing 3-4 sets still. 2 maybe 3 warm ups 12-15 reps plus one heavy 8-10 so it’s not really one set. Plus if it’s chest 3 exercises with a total of 9-12 sets.
I agree with you , when i dont feel the workout i do nowadays i stop doing them after 1 set.. or even in half set in.. sometimes something just not there...and then i change to different type of the same workout and it feels crazy and i just keep doing that as much as i want..
So much goes into building muscle... it's really hard to say. The same guys would say that without a proper diet or x grams of protein, you can't build muscle. But I'm 200 pounds and have added muscle with only 50-80 grams of protein each day as I fast for 20 hours a day and that's about all I get in.
You can build muscle with that much protein but the real question is could you build more with additional protein. The answer is yes. But that’s not possible with your 20 hour fast which is fine.
Multi sets without reaching failure as well as working construction (never reaching failure) does work. Definitely not a bad idea, especially since reaching failure is, for some, risky in regards to injury. Both strategies probably have their place.
@@imhopelesslyaddictedtofent4266 when I worked construction I put on a good deal of muscle by (for example) lifting 20 lb block all day. No failure. Nothing too heavy.
I think it comes down to what level of failure you're going to. If you're going beyond failure with forced reps, static holds, and negatives, 1 set for sure is all you need. Concentric failure only, 2 sets. Leaving 1-2 reps in reserve, 3 or more working sets at that point. The intensity approach is definitely the most optimal, but can lead to CNS burnout, especially if diet and sleep are not 100% optimal. Those are times where I find personally higher volume less intensity can have benefit. But overall intensity is definitely the main trigger for growth.
@Old Skool Bodybuilding Routines Yeah, makes sense. Weight x sets x reps aiming to increase over time. My point is depending on how slow, and controlled you do each rep, and what level of failure you're reaching, would determine how much overall volume can be handled.
@@matthewtarlach504 I would say the volume would also depend on what machines or free weights you're using..I just started this program and been doing it for 3 days now. On the free weights I'm not going to complete failure since I'm working out by myself. Especially for the bench press. I do 2 sets of very slow and controlled reps until my chest and triceps are on fire and I stop. On the plated and cable machines, I can go to complete failure on my own because those are safer.
Mind muscle connection is also very underrated. You can have better results with a 20lbs dumbbell doing slow bicep curls with good supination and focus on the negative movement. Than with a 70lbs dumbbell you can hardly handle so you use your shoulder and back, and not the bicep to get the weight up. Even now I can get an insane pump with very light weights doing them very slowly and by squeezing the muscle.
It’s all about views….us watching this video is just creating revenue for his channel. If you have watched over the years he has recommended all different styles of working as the best. Just do what you enjoy and consistency is the key. No one approach is the best. If it was, then everyone would be doing it.
That is a fallacious argument. How does the changing of ones methodology and approach based on new information (which you conveniently never thought to look into or refute) indicate disingenuity? The bottom line is you are too lazy to look into what was discussed in the video and too stupid to form your own opinion.
I do a minimalist routine of what Jay teaches. Sort of like a consolation routine, and I see results and feel better. I’ve trained like this for almost a year now. I’m in and out of the gym in 10-15 minutes MAX! I probably would see more optimal gains from a couple more exercises but from the time I invest I’m keeping it right where it is! I’ve trained on and off for 10 years and tried all of it: freeletics, strong lifts 5x5, starting strength, greyskull, calisthenics, simple and sinister, high volume bro splits, you name it, and I’m totally sold. I really think this is the workout of the future. In and out of the gym in no-time (if you do it like me) but reap all the benefits of what exercise will get you, in a safe manner. And everyone can do it. For the time invested this is by far the most effective training there is.
Have you tried singles up to your 1RPM with low weight volume in between those sets? I've tried it all as well over 20 years and this is the most effective system I've found to keep full and stay strong. The singles that I will do will have very slow eccentrics. The band work is really focusing on blood flow.
These are all facts. This will ruffle a lot of feathers and be hard for a lot of people to accept but swallowing the truth usually goes down like shards of glass
These are not facts.The bodybuilders that had more success trained high volume and those who did not trained low volume. Thank you for listing those names that proved your own theory wrong
This is the classic american "no pain no gain" mindset, for longevity and staying injury free a volume based approach focused on stimulating not annihalating like Lee Haney did with a focus on always feeling good is a lot better
I wondered that too. Lee Haney style. Which I feel is like Surge Nubret, never really heavy, lots of volume and going to initial failure. Yet idk, Haney spent 2 hours in the gym I recall. I mean if you’re gonna do volume, don’t go to failure. And I remember reading all about muscle failure; 3 types and another saying or approach which says; once you reach muscle fatigue you’re just training the nervous system after that, and not benefiting the muscles. And I still always added a few burnout sets when I was younger. Idk, did Lee Haney ever annihilate?
Ya know, there’s a little bit of BS in this guy’s history of multiple set training. John Grimek and Steve Reeves, for instance, we’re doing multiple sets, way before this Delorme & Watkins Protocol came out, first of all. Grimek won Mr America in 1940&41 and Mr Universe, shortly after. Reeves won Mr America in ‘47 and Mr Universe in ‘50. Both guys reported doing multiple sets/exercise in those early years. Plus, the introduction of steroids into bodybuilding in the late 50’s/early 60’s compelled guys to really increase their set counts on exercises and ultimately, to split their training up into particular body parts on certain days. I’m not saying single set training won’t work, but multiple set training also produces good results, because of the factor of pumping blood into a muscle and keeping it in there for significant lengths of time. Look at Serge Nubret for proof of the effect of that kind of training.
@@joachimjustinmorgan4851: He might have used HIT by accident, at one time or another. Sergio was big on doing lots of exercises, lots of sets and lots of reps. Greg Zulak and Bob Kennedy went to Chicago, back in the mid ‘80’s to watch Sergio train for one of the Mr Olympia contests. ‘85, I believe. Zulak gave a pretty good blow by blow overview of Sergio’s workout methods and the volume was incredible. For just chest, for instance, Sergio did flat bench press, starting very light, then adding weight, set after set. Then, he turned around and dropped the weight and did about 50 reps. After that, it was incline presses, then decline presses, dumbbell flyes, then dips. Zulak said it was the same for every body part, over the course of a few days. Workouts that would kill an average man. You’re right. Sergio wasn’t into HIT, at all.
@@gregshock This is true, good comment. Sergio tried HIT for 6 weeks and returned to long, high volume workouts. I guess 30 minutes of HIT was just too hard for him lol Such a joke. Greg Zulak also saw Mentzer doing multiple sets per exercise whilst pushing his version of HIT.
@@dtm4071: That’s what I heard Franco say once to an interviewer, that Mike was in the gym, when he came in to work out and was still in there when he left. If he was doing HIT, what was taking him so long?
*THIS LAST YEAR I'VE DONE ONE SET OF EACH EXERCISE (CALISTENICS) MY RESULTS* For the last year, I've done literally ONE SET of each exercise per day (NO WARMUPS). This is all calistenics bodyweight stuff too. I started out going every single day and I gained muscle and strength like crazy when I'd go every single day. But I notice that if I only workout a few times per week, that I tend to lose a rep in strength. I think naturals do best when they are constantly hitting it, at least every other day. Here is what I've been doing the last year below 1. One Set Pullups (neutral grip) 2. One Set Chinups (palms facing towards me) 3. One Set Pushups 4. One Set Calf Raises 5. One Set Body Squats 6. One Set Delt Lateral Raises 7. One Set Bicep Curls That's my workout it takes less than 20 minutes. I also incorporate a WEIGHTED VEST (25 lbs) now that I'm getting stronger. I have been slacking the last few months though, not going every single day and I got sick in February 2022 so I had a month of recovery and gaining my strength and weight back.
@Old Skool Bodybuilding Routines Ric Drasin called from his grave, he said to tell you that he hopes you enjoy that Tylenol and I.B. Profen from lifting too heavy and too often. Best Regards chump
Vince Gironda was a fan of Delarme and Watkins and developed a 10 8 6 15 protocol similar but added a flushing set. This minimalist routine one exercise per bodypart is very effective when done properly
Casey Viator was in a bad car accident and lost a ton of muscle before recovering. Muscle memory kicked in and he easily gained 20 pounds back when he was able to start lifting again. He was never a Mr Universe. EVER! He was Mr America at age 19 however. And placed 3rd in Mr Olympia at age 31. This guy is blowing smoke and doesn't know his facts.
For me it's about saving time and simplicity. I'd never heard of Jay, but have learned about similar ideas from Doug McDuff. I'd rather do a rather short, intense, one-set (usually) slow-rep till failure routine than the latest "5 supersets, 6 days a week" trend workout..even if it gave marginally better results.
You should never do a full out set until failure on a single set. It's fucking stupid, you need to prepare your body. Doing a set until failure will tear ligaments or even your bicep if your not careful.
Bottom line it comes down to the Mind Muscle connection. Some days & weeks are different than today. Low Vol HIT one day, 5x5, 6x6, 8x8, 10x10 otherdays. Open up the pathways to peak contractions. Eat right. Rest easy. Have fun. Look forward to each day with gusto...move forward & some days just hold your ground. Take a day off now & then...enjoy the journey. One size rarely fits all 🎯 There are many ways to increase intensity...it's not always about huge poundages... the execution often dictates levels of intensity ie: Little to no momentum, little to no rest between sets or exercises.
How many of you do NOT take a final set to failure when you're doing multiple sets? And even doing a drop set to exhaustion. And, that that does NOT lead to a better, stronger, more functional physique. One set to failure is NOT something for OLDER guys. You'll jack your shit up if you do that. The older body cannot take it. Perhaps for a strength athelete this is good advice, but multiple studies of older men and women show that any kind of strength training increases bone density and strength and is good for an aging body. What is being said above is overstated. Also, the York boys were talking multiple sets early on as well. The history is MORE complex than what is being stated here. Reg Park was not alone, there were Grimek and Reeves before Park, and others as well. And what about the Weider boys. By the '50s, Weider was publishing and also promoting various training routines. What were those? What about the relationship between Weider and Arnold. Who influenced whom?
Don't studies show that training each body part 2 or possibly 3 times per week is best? And 10 to 20 sets per week per body part??? If not, why are all these credible legends saying so?
Because they are legends and he’s not, in fact both these two RU-vidrs aren’t. The only thing to failure makes any sense is bodyweight stuff pushups and squats and abs, if you are benching in the upper levels of 500 plus you willing kill your self if go to failure every time and don’t rest. I’m benching four twenty at the moment. Now I agree with two or three set warm ups not necessary but a cardio warm up plus one warmup resistant set of the workout I’m doing.
So you’re telling me you’re doing 10 sets per muscle twice a week? If you actually tried this you’d know those studies were BS or the participants weren’t training hard at all.
Vince Gironda who trained literally thousands of guys in his North Hollywood Gym said never ask a champion how to train because a guy with champion genetics can train any way, including the wrong way, and still make great gains. Vince did recommend multiple sets but was against training to total failure as he felt this caused some type of shock to the body and would hold back gains. Viator, Mentzer, etc who trained under Arthur Jones in Deland, FL were genetic freaks on steroids who came to Jones already very well developed thru multi set training. If you can make gains on one set to failure, then by all means stick to it. Experiment. But do read Vince Gironda's ideas. He was far ahead of his time.
So... I started training this way avout a year and a half ago, and I am 48. I just competed in the USPA, and I finished with a 1580 raw total at 200lbs bodyweight. All of my friends and critics keep saying I am crazy, lying, on a ton of drugs.... all that. They just do not believe me when I tell them I only do one set. So, I am not crazy! I am not some nutty windbag that is doing absurd things. I feel completely vindicated by this. I am lifting more at the age of 48 than I ever have, and my current gym total is mid to high 1600's. I am going to kill it at IPL Worlds this year. I was ranked #1 for my weight and age, but I just got bumped down by a monster to number 2. This stuff works! I am not crazy!
So as a noobie to strength training and i guess body building, what is my take away here? Clearly these two men have mastered the craft. Its impossible as a noob to argue their results. In the craft that I master, there is this thing called analysis paralysis. Even the masters suffer bouts of this. Essentially what it comes down to is yeah, there is a textbook way, there is the master way (which is textbook with experience tweaks), and there is the experimental aka noob way. At the end of the day, its all about the result. Someone who is not a master in the craft would never be able to distinguish the professionalism and expertise on the surface. I guess what I am left with here after listening to this is 1.) Even as a noob in this field, my mastery of other fields has taught me to avoid analysis paralysis. 2.) Dont let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks for the perspective. Even if I could gain 15lbs of muscle in 12 months being perfect instead of 12lbs of muscle in 12 months being good, I think for now, I will look for good and strive for perfection as the results pile on!
It doesn’t matter. This is nonsensical. Elliot’s body wasn’t built by this method and I question if the other guy’s was. There are no studies in this video just strong opinions without push back from Elliot. This training style probably does hold merit, however you’ll be fine on a 3x10 as well. Just be aware of your RPE and consider what you’re training for. Strength I’d go for lower reps more sets with a higher RPE. Where as for hypertrophy you’d go more reps per set and often less sets. That would stimulate the muscles to pump more blood through. However you wouldn’t be able to push as heavy as a weight for 10 reps as you would 2-6 of course. All depends on what you want to do
I'm shocked! Why am I only learning about this right now? Damn, been exhausting my body 5x/week at the gym for years..no wonder I felt depleted by the end.of the week..will apply this knowledge from now on..Thanks for posting this, Elliott
Regardless of what you do, you will see results, i personally seen the biggest mass gains doing a warm up set and a high intensity rest pause set, may even drop a lil weight just so i can dominate the set, I’d mix in opposing muscle calisthenics sets like pull ups and bench/push ups and deads, and focused on getting all my rep work thru the calis, and get the best pump, does take a few days to recover if your truly pushing yourself, and this is a training style i enjoyed because my ego is satisfied with the pump, and i know I’m on course with gainz doing progressive overload on my compound lifts, so it was easy to stick to this style, had i switched up every other day with my training philosophy my body doesn’t react the same
I still have my Arnold's Encyclopedia to BB i bought in 1998. I had to cut the workouts in half before making good progress. Currently I've been following Dr Mike Isratel's templates with success.
I been doing 2 sets of 20-25 reps on most my exercises now and I like it better then the 3-5×10 scheme I used to do. I always push myself so when I started doing 20-25reps sets I did 3. Then I had to scale back to 2. Less is more.
Arthur Jones method is good but because he advocated training full body, it proved to be very taxing for more stronger more experienced bodybuilders. Mike Mentzer took what he learned from Arthur Jones and modified it with his split routine which works well for more experienced guys as it allows for better recovery. Later Dorian Yates took what he learned from Mentzer and changed it in a way where you do as many warm up sets as necessary to work up to that one all out set to failure which is my personal favourite as it minimises risk of injury
Mike actually worked out a lot more than he claimed he did according to other bodybuilders who worked out in the same gym as him. His claims gave him something different to sell for his training plans (just like Arnold's did). Look up what Franco Columbu said about Mike's workouts. It's on RU-vid.
I'm 65, 6'1 about 190 lb. Extremely healthy . I eat very clean. And I was always doing multiple sets & lots of reps. I pretty much plateaued. I tried your method today and it totally kicked my ass. It really works!! I was introduced to muscles I didn't realize It had 😂. After each set I felt like I just ran around the building & out of breath. I drank more water than I ever had during a workout and got it done in half the time. This definitely seems to work. I'm going to continue with your method. I like it. Now I'm more excited to go to the gym.
I really like how this interview was conducted, highlighting the main points and giving them further explanation instead of having the guy just talking.
Hadn't heard that his book was highly exaggerated, but have heard that Arnold would troll newbie bodybuilders and give them BS advice, so I guess such a move fits the mold 🤣
I swear to god I watched a video where Elliot was telling us we would not get results with one set. I will have to find it. BTW Elliot, my deadlift, clean and press, and farmers walk skyrocketed when doing this
the less is more approach. As I've aged and gained more knowledge, I've implemented only two days a week for gym training which consist of full body interval training and I can say that my results have never been better
The amount of knowledge I've gained in a decade is worth income so I'm not going to get into details here but I will say that Phil, Elliott Hulse and Chris from Overtime Athletes provide quality and free information and workouts in their videos so I'd go check out and get ideas from all three and mix them into your workouts.
My best results came from weight training 3× a week, 45-90 minutes(depending on how many co-workers showed up after work, it took longer to get more people through their sets). Every workout day followed by a rest day and I'd keep my weekend free for life stuff or just to hang out. Our workouts had a high emphasis on going to failure, and working all muscle groups. We'd do everything, arms, legs, back, chest, core, compound lifts. We'd add more variety to keep our workouts from getting boring by putting more emphasis on one particular muscle group each session. Say one day we'd do one set of everything like normal but if it was arms day we'd do either more variations in arm excercises or we'd do more sets of the same arm excercises. High intensity beats volume every time.
Almost all old school workouts were predicated on you taking PEDs, that allowed for quick recovery. Once PEDs are removed all the gains will require a lot more rest.
Correct me if I'm wrong but all the research I see says more volume more gains up to a point. His research is completely different from anything I've seen
I tried everything: conventional high volume, stronglifts, high volume calisthenics, crossfit, kettlebell...you name it. No other approach works better for me than HIT, plus I feel way less stressed because I have more time for the real important things. I can't thank Jay enough for introducing this kind of training to me. Been doing it since January 2022 and I don't think I will ever go back to conventional weight training again.
I've been doing 40 reps single set isolations for several months, to avoid connective tissue injuries I usually suffer from, and it's been the best of both worlds. Technically, it's every day, but in reality, I do skip days, from time-to-time, when my schedule or travel demands it. I have to agree that I don't seem to lose progress on days I skip; I'm just better rested🤷♂️
the book I look to for understanding all this stuff is supertraining; special strength training for sporting excellence, by mel c siff and yuri v verkhoshansky the russians did an excellent job of researching and understanding training, I think this book is still state of the art in terms of a lot of training stuff. this book is a great resource for anyone wishing to understand all this stuff better.
Casey was documented for doing multi set workouts behind Arthur Jones back . Sprinters and joggers have different bodies due to genetic type not training stimulus. Let’s not forget all the injuries Dorian accumulated as his career progressed using one set to failure.
"Sprinters and joggers have different bodies due to genetic type not training stimulus" You don't know what you're saying, I used to run track and what they said in the video is right, long distance runners are skinny cuz their training isn't explosive or HIIT, they gotta train for endurance which doesn't require explosiveness.
There are definitely some nuggets of truth to this, but also crater sized holes. Let's stick with the sprinter example as that's exactly what I did in college on a scholarship as well as coached afterwards and worked with athletes at an elite level. Volume is a huge driver of training and development with sprinters. The comparison of distance runners to sprinters is extreme and illogical. To develop a sprinter over the year (to peak) and over years as an athlete matures you oscillate volume, intensity and frequency. Even in this case I'd say training volume is at least equal to intensity as far as importance....and potentially more important as we rarely run at 100%/failure. For instance, you may have a phase where you don't run at an intensity over 90% but you increase volume. Over a 16 week period we'd start off lower intensity (with small bouts of higher) but higher volume and then raise intensity and lower volume...but rarely up to someone's failure/100% point. Your examples of why your training is the best is actually showing the contrary. What I referenced above, while not apples to apples, is also similar to what we see from most research around strength training. I don't actually even disagree with the premise of some of your thoughts but you are misrepresenting many of the examples and the research overall.
There’s plenty of collegiate strength coaches that are fans of 1x20 training. Granted, they are fans because they can balance gym stress with field stress. But strength gains are quite achievable with one set per exercise 3x a week.
@@samwroblewski748 agree and I've seen it first hand. Even at psu in the early 00's and other major programs. In fact in the MAC as well there were a bunch of strength coaches with that general line of thinking (including when I was at Bowling Green). But in every instance there is always thoughtful programing that balances volume and intensity and when you "dig in" they are often much different that what is being espoused here and certainly appreciation that volume is likely the principle driver of progress (strength and hypertrophy) assuming intensity is adequate (failure not required). Heck I'd argue not just some, but many college strength coaches have some degree of commonality with this because there are themes that are correct but every one I've seen has serious consideration with volume and volume manipulation and at it's core is still pretty far off from what is being explained here. He also uses examples that really don't support his arguments and the constant "research is clear" comment is contrary to a lot of actual research. All that being said I typed way to much for some reason.
@@donutfitness6324 no disagreements here. The further I delve into the collegiate and professional sports training community the more I come away with the impression that a lot of BBs and PLs (and to some extent strong men) are playing checkers while these mofos are playing 3D chess.
@@samwroblewski748 all good man trust me I don't want to come off like I know it all...I don't...at all. And I've seen just as many collegiate and pros do "odd" things...to but it mildly :) I actually do like a lot of what is being said...be efficient, be intense, focused, etc. You really can take a lot of good things from this. No routine or plan is perfect. thanks for the friendly banter!
It came from the idea that leaving 2 RIR has a better SFR than 0 RIR. Your genetic potential is the point at which the amount of volume you need to make further progress and the amount of volume you can recover from meet. If you’re going to peak strength and you only have one set to work with, you have nothing to taper. Good luck. Do sprinters just sprint once and their practice is done?
With your analogy of the sprinter: what fails first for a sprinter? Their legs? Their core? No! Its their cardiovascular system. Its a similar thing that happens with a squat. Most people aren't actually failing the squat, but running out of breath or the stabilising muscles fail first.
It’s an adaptation and if you decrease volume over time, even if going to failure, you’re going to peak first and then eventually start to detrain. 2 RIR has a better stimulus to fatigue ratio than 0 RIR.
I would probably think that it would be easiest with calisthenics. Going to failure on pull-ups is easy. You can either do it or you can't. If you're doing machines for instance, a lot of the time your head goes before the actual muscles. Marcus Bondi the world record calisthenics guy actually has a video talking about this. He would improve this pull-ups by going beyond failure, and even further than that.
@@jumbothompson If you want your muscles to fail before your endurance/mental toughness, do a weight that you can only do 6-10 reps on. You should reach failure between 40-60 seconds with that rep range so it's not too cardiovascular.
The funny thing is I actually discovered this on accident during my teens, just due to the fact that as much as I loved lifting weights I was also insanely lazy. In weight lifting class at school the coaches always instructed us to do 3 sets for each exercise, as was and still is conventional wisdom, along with doing that for each exercise 2 or 3 days a week (this could add up to NINE sets a week). I did this in 9th and 10th grade and while I gained a decent amount of strength it was basically the same amount as the other guys and I'd lose interest for long periods, basically having to start back at square one each time. But in 11th grade for some reason I started only doing one set per exercise each week (for example I literally only did bench press one set every Monday). My strength skyrocketed to the point where my peers were joking that I was on roids. In March 2001 my bench max was only 155 lbs and in December 2002 it was 345 lbs.
You can also look at it from a skill perspective. More practice over time will lead to proficiency in the movements. The more proficient you are at a squat, deadlift, overhead press, row, pullup, bench press, etc, the better you'll be at doing them. Plus, CNS adaptation of more exposure. But I think this is why Jay typically just uses machines with people because it doesn't require the same skill as freeweights do. Machines will build hypertrophy but don't have the same stability factor or dare I say "functionality".
There is no way only one set if done to failure is the appropriate way to approach trainaing. Even the concept of failure is kinda blurry because not being able to do another rep has more to do with mental toughness than actual body capacity. I believe that Trainers kinda love univariable ideologies because it's easier to sell yet sometimes the cheapest things may cost you alot more. At least that is my opinion.
@@petermurphy2106 99% of champion bodybuilders use 10-30 sets per muscle group week. I’m pretty sure the same, but probably closer to 8-15 sets week will work for us normal genetic folks.
I will say this about HIT. Yates, Mentzer and Viator all built fairly spectacular physiques with conventional bodybuilding techniques, before they ever went to the One Set method. And by the way, you should have seen Casey Viator when he was only 19 and won the Mr. America contest in 1969, I believe. All conventional bodybuilding. Just checked and it was ‘71, not ‘69.
Talk about how feeder sets work for bodybuilders too. High rep sets with lower weights to feed blood into the muscle. It was done by Flex Wheeler and others.
"Walking would give you Legs like Platz" Haha guess what Platz trained with very high volume So you shot yourself in the foot. End of the day all rep ranges pushed to near failure will build muscle
I pick 5 exercises & do 1 set of 1 rep each so 5 total exercises, 5 total sets, 5 total reps. If I fail I try the same weight next time. If I complete it I go up5 lbs next time. Works for me. Workouts only take 5 minutes
I don’t know if this will help anyone but here it is. This approach is truly amazing what I aim for is 12 reps for a weight. Once I can do 12 slow and controlled then I will add weight. What I do to get extra volume is do my set and let’s say I get 8 reps I will then take 4 deep breaths and try to get four more reps. I do that four times that way I hit failure 1-5 times for an exercise. The gains have been insane.
@@LinearGiraffe awesome brother. If you feel like you aren’t getting the results or have any questions reply here and I’ll see how I can help tweak the effort so you can get the results you want. Be careful not to overdo it the first time though. It’s easy to think you aren’t doing enough when you are actually doing way way more.
That's exactly what I am planning to do. Have been doing 1 set to positive failure the last month - didn't progress at all. I think the stimulus I provide with my 1 set in "traditional" tempo isn't enough to trigger the adaptation so the plan now is to take 5 deep breaths (around 30 seconds) after the first set to positive failure and then go beyond positive failure again in really slow tempo (because there is no way I do these couple of reps fast) and finish it with isometric/negative failure on the way down to reach the complete annihilation of the muscle. Full body x2 week, one muscle group every 7 days. I hope for the best.
@@higher_highs I’m going to respond not knowing all the details of you and how long you’ve been training, so take this as is and hopefully it fits. Personally I’m not a fan of full body twice a week but that is because I’ve been training for well over ten years. Right now I do push pull legs and it comes out to me training ever three to four days. With that- I am still getting gains and by gains I mean simply- getting one to two extra reps on exercises for at least 50% of my workout with some exercises getting the same reps or maybe one to two less. So what I am indicating is you might to switch up the routine to give you a couple of approaches to attack a muscle, with still the same amount of training days per week but more recovery for muscle groups since it would be a two times a week ordeal. Any questions you have I’d be glad to answer so that you can still get progress.
It's 3 sets because after 3 sets you usually get worn out and it doesn't typically leave you with enough energy to do the rest of the exercise program. Plus if your injured you can decrease the sets and if your trying to put extra strain on your muscle for that day you can increase the sets. So 3 is kind of a good middle ground.
I did 531 for several months a few years ago. I made the connection this morning that I was inadvertently doing essentially what they're talking about.
I have been running the 5/3/1 for almost 2 years. Small break where I did body beast by beach body for 3 months (it was freaking amazing) This has helped me get my deadlift to 500 and bench to 325. Today is Thursday so it’s bench. I’m on the 1st week so I do the 3 warm up sets. Then the 2 working sets then the last set I go balls to the wall and dump the gas tank on that one set.
531 uses this principle on the TM %’s and the last set being the rep+ PR set. I use BBB program 5x10 with pretty light %. This is the time under tension principle to strength.
The problem I see with people online and in comments saying "1-3 RIR is also stimulating like failure" is: 1). RIR will always be an abstraction, while 0 RIR (Failure) is an absolute tangible measurement. One knows when they reached 100% intensity when they cannot continue the set no matter how much they try. 2). RIR that is higher than 0 cannot be accurately assessed by someone who is inexperienced. People with less than a year in the gym don't truly know how much strength and energy they actually have in reserve. 3). Teaching everyone especially novices that failure is unnecessary or worse, something to avoid and fear, is why almost everyone at the gym plateaus so quickly. It's teaching them to stop a set of curls at 10 when they could have gotten 14, because "fAiLuRe iS uNnEcEsSaRy". I was a victim to this too. 4). Failure is supposed to be fatiguing to your muscle and nervous system; the solution is resting more often lmao. IDK why people would prefer to spend twice the time per day and thrice the time per week to elicit the same hypertrophy response.
giving novices a set number is good because it gives them an objective number to work from to track progress over time, so lets say a novice can hit 3 sets of 10 on bench press with 60KG when they are able to reciprocate that on lets say 80KG then have a clear indication of progress
I would never be convinced of the one set to failure to build muscle. If it was the holy grail every strength coach in the world would train their athletes using one set to failure. I’ve been training since the 80’s and tried all sorts of programs and methods. And have found that there is no replacement to volume and time under tension or progressive overload.
@@naturalgains4229 Utter fucking nonsense. I guarantee if and when I get my surplus my body will look much better than yours. Stop being a follower and do your own thinking. Mike Metzers method should be used in supplement to volume not as a replacement.
@@EngineeringandAI Try it if you don’t believe it. Maybe then you’ll stop wasting so much time spending 6 days a week 1 hour at the gym. I’ve tested it, it works. I want you to run a little experiment. Do 1 set to failure on the chest press machine, lat pulldown machine, back row machine, the leg press, the calf machine, and do whatever exercise you want for biceps and triceps. Do that for a month, twice a week. Come back when you see the fitness industry lied to you and kept you small for much longer.
@@naturalgains4229 I never said the method does not work. It does not work to the level you claim. You can get a good physique with 4 hours a week of working out. That is nothing in terms of exercise. My point is HIT training in itself without volume is flawed. You can get gains but they won't be at the maximum. You have to remember Mike Metzer was a genetic freak. If you average in genetics bro you need repetition. If your doing 1 failure set you aren't getting repetition. He was also loading on PED's and tren. You can get gains. However, the difference isn't gonna be huge. I guarantee you bro when I get enough food I'll be ridiculous.
I adopted John Meadows "Mountain Dog" style training a little while back and have seen a tremendous improvement in my size and strength. Your approach is similar in a way and it makes sense. I cut back on "junk volume" and just focused on really putting my body through pretty intense but efficient and smart protocols. 👍
I agree with this but I just have one question: wouldnt the use of AAS, which increases recovery ability, also increase how many sets one could do to get maximum effect? Arnold was on lots. And I doubt he could have made better results than he did. I have a feeling that the one set to failure is for naturals and the 3 sets is for supernaturals. Please let me know what you think of this idea, its half opinion and half question. Thanks, always loved your material man. Long time fan.
Yes we know the minimum effective volume is lower and the maximum recoverable volume is higher when on steroids. From my understanding Arnold was training 2x day right before a show, and usually would train like saying in video. There is a lot of studies that are demonstrating volume does work but has to be spread out throughout week to keep protein synthesis elevated and too not do too much damage in a single session and to not have cortisol elevated for too long. Full body workouts are great which so happens what Arnold did as well when was younger and starting out. The key is progressive overload and usually accomplish that by first increasing volume wk to wk and then increasing load. Powerlifters know this very well. Why they do a hypertrophy block and plan on slowly increasing volume wk to wk with the same resistance. If you are doing 1 set and next time can do more reps still increasing volume, but usually adding sets is easier method
According to Jeff Cavalier, working out and making gains is killing your gains, Greg Doucette screams at you in a Gilbert Godfey (RIP) voice telling you to buy his cool book and Mike O’Hearn does more steroids than a race horse and claims he’s all natural. Why oh why is Elliot the only one that seems to make sense of it all. Tough being the GOAT!
I completely disagree I’ve been training at a very high-level for 15 years and for me high intensity low volume is what’s work for me my best workouts are 30minutes to hour. Get in the gym and get out and recover eat etc. most people are in the gym way too long. Way to many sets.
2 warm up sets then 1 set to failure sounds a lot like 3 sets to me. If one set to failure works then skip the two (warm up sets) otherwise you're doing 3 sets and calling it 1
started with 5/3/1 +BBB again and felt great after allready 3 weeks. I think its a good mix of doing the small reps for max strenght and add the 5x10 with 50% load as a finisher to get the movement faster.
531 has treated me so well over the years. Love BBB I do it on every lift except pulls (hate the lower back pump) I’m about to start incorporating First Set Last for the first time since I started doing 531
Killing it as always, good video. I think every bodybuilder should read Mike Mentzer's books, he was super intellectual and explains so much more about high intensity and why he believes it is superior to junk volume. HIT might be easy to start but to keep doing it requires mental fortitude, because your body just wats to pump weights and get dopamine boost, but this is why people defend volume because it's something pshychological they are emotionally reliant on it, and it's not intellectual at all.
This guy isn't in the same generation as Arnold and has never trained with Arnold in his prime but somehow "knows" what Arnold bullshitted about and how he trained? He knows nothing lol. It's a glorified opinion.
Exactly. Fool can’t even spell Schwarzenegger correctly. It’s like bro, as much as you’ve been making content over the years you don’t even edit your stuff? 😂
Casey Viator actually did a crazy amount of volume to build his physique. The one set to failure protocol was not something he did year round.. it was something that was sprinkled in for a small period throughout the year.
Would be cool to have some sources on Jay's statements. In particular, everything I read about Sergio Oliva says that he did 5x5s and supersets on all muscle groups twice a week...where does Jay get the idea that all these guys were doing heavy single sets to failure?
@@adam-lt8iy 3:56 "But alongside Arnold Schwarzenegger was Mike Mentzer, Casey Viator, Sergio Oliva, who had the biggest biceps of bodybuilding history, only training one set to failure." Jay talks pretty big about how the greatest bodybuilder of all time, Arnold, was full of crap...but the proof is in the pudding, my friend. For all Jay's talk about training gimmicks, I'd say that claiming to have an inside scoop on how all the greats were bullshitting you is a gimmick in itself. And like I said, I would be more impressed if Jay quoted any sources. Where does he get this stuff on single sets, on Arnold, on Sergio Oliva, on anything he's saying here?
@Old Skool Bodybuilding Routines Jordan Peters got up to 300 pounds using HIT only. Built so much muscle he can't even get it off now even though he retired and only does cardio. Atm hes 235 pounds at 9% bf and hes only been on test for the last 6 months. So once again you're wrong, exactly. And Jay didn't admit that at all lol he said HIT got him from 188 to 212 pounds because volume sucked and couldnt get him bigger
The problem with always going to failure is risk of injury. I think going to failure once or twice in a training cycle is OK, but I would worry about going to failure all the time. I fucked my wrist going too hard for too long, and I'm still recovering from it two years later. But to each their own. I'm not denying that one set to failure is more efficient and leads to better results. I just worry about how effective this would be long term with risks of injury. Great video, though.
While what you say is true, consider the possibility to reach muscle failure in a different way. Imagine this: You can go to failure with, lets say, a weight of 50 pounds and 12 reps, which you pump out pretty quickly, almost "swinging" up the last 2 reps because you cant do it with perfect form... OR you go to failure with the same 50 pounds with only 7-8 reps, but reeeeaallly slow (3 seconds up, 5 seconds down), controlling every second of the movement, using all the stabilizing muscles. Where is the difference? Will your body know that you "only" did 8 reps, instead of 12? Isnt the result the same? You went to failure with an appropriate weight. But in the later option, injury is very much less likely.
There shouldn't be any injury risk going to failure. The movement grinds to a halt as you continue to try and move it. The risk of injury is if you go to failure using shitty technique and speeding it up to try and complete the rep. You only move fast when you've approached failure and even then it shouldn't go fast as fatigue has set in.
I don't agree with this. You need volume to build strength and stamina. I think enhanced athletes can achieve more with less. For sure you need a balance but saying that you need to do one set I think is bs. After 28 years of training nothing works other than volume
Let's be real. If you work as a laborer or as manual labor 40+ hours a week. It's just not possible to train till failure and recover properly naturally. Something is gonna suffer. Whether it's your performance at work or your fitness goals.
I agree with everything Mr. Vincent said, especially the part about Arnold lying in "Pumping Iron" and in his books regarding frequency, sets, intensity, etc. However, and this is just my opinion, when your body is in a catabolic state due to dosing with D-Bol, Anavar, and other testosterone derivatives like the bodybuilders of that era were injecting into their systems, they not only worked out like horses to put their bodies into an anabolic state, but they ate 6500 plus calories every day because their bodies' were in a constant state of fat burn. The fact is that ALL of the RU-vid bodybuilding channels feature "geared" individuals. If you take "gear" you have to work out with massive volume (15 or more sets per body part per work out) in order to take advantage of the additional ATP, muscle fiber nuclei, and to prevent your body from going into a catabolic state. Natty's are the ones who can really benefit from the 2 sets warm up, 1 set to failure routine that Mr. Vincent is referring to in this video. Our bodies simply cannot produce the work load that a geared guy can. That's the problem I see in my gym. All the teenagers watch Seth Feroce, John Meadows (old videos), and other internet sensations and think they can program workouts based upon those guys' videos and they end up overtraining and injuring themselves because they're not pumped full of horse steroids. They last 6 months or so and then get so disgusted that they quit. Even though Seth and John were honest about their dosing, kids and other noobs think that its all about mindset and that they can keep pushing to reach the volume that these guys can and it just doesn't work.
He's right about some bodybuilders being full of shit and not realizing genetics and steroids play a huge role in their bodies but he's full of shit on pretty much anything else. Intensity is crucial, but try doing 1 set and see where that will get you, it's a ridiculous statement. Volume,intensity, frequency, all 3 not just 1
When I did bodybuilding back in the day the most effective training I had was two sets too failure. I would choose 3 exercises for large muscle groups and 2 accessory exercises for isolation. For example. Chest day would be something like - Flat dumbbell or barbell bench press 8-12 reps to failure) - 1 - 2 sets, followed by incline bench press 1 - 2 sets too failure and then dips 1 - 2 sets too failure, finished with arms bicep curl 1-2 sets to failure and triceps 1-2 sets to failure. And thats it. I'd do the same for back and legs 3 x a week and I got phenominal results. It was a guys program that I purchased and followed and gained like 75 lbs off that program alone. Again emphasizing compound movements vs isolation but finishing the workouts with isolation helps a lot. Now I do something similar but I'll do like 1-2 compound movements followed by 1-2 isolation exercises (usually biceps with back or triceps with chest) and yeah keeping it very stupid simple as well. You adapt and find what works for you and sometimes I improvise with my training for the shits and giggles and because I want too and enjoy experimenting. :)
I’m natural and this works better than volume training. I’ve tested it on myself for 2 weeks with body weight training. I grew FAST. I will see how big and strong I get at the gym with this approach. Your joints and tendons will thank you if you decide to just do 1 set to failure.
2 weeks?! Are you kidding??? any data in 2 weeks means nothing if you changed your program... you guys are all noobs being fed sensational random bs for information.
Intensity is the key. Whether you do 4x12, 3x8, 5x5, etc. Tare the muscles. Nuff said. I have had better muscle stimulation when I did ANY of these kind of ways because, again, intensity matters. Switch it up to prevent plateaus- just make sure you actually tire out the muscles during your last set. It works.
I switched to Mentzer/Yates(whom I've met.Great guys.)style of training a year ago after years of volume.At 62,I've made my best gains,saved time,and became better rested.The problem with volume is approx. 70% of your reps aren't 'stimulating' reps which mean more time and energy wasted.Volume will remain popular bc its less stressful on the CNS,easier,and suites most peoples psychological profile.
Wow this is amazing stuff. Ive never heard anyone teach this. Wish I could work out with you guys and gain all of your knowledge. I really want to know more and I want to be the best version of myself that my genetics allow. I actually only workout 2 days a week with multiple compound exercises. I've been seeing incredible improvement, but soon ill be switching from endurance to power. Keep up the great information Elliot. I love this stuff!
@@arnoldprathap volume is only needed for endurance. If you want only size you do few sets but you go Beyond failure, it has to hurt A lot. You also need protein.
