The Jimbo Slice memorial thread, feat Nate Dogg - The new Off Topic thread

Black Sheep

I'm sure he's been here for shows and maybe seminars? I think there was a gym down the country that got him over for a one day HIT training seminar.

I'd like to do a PT session with him sometime, although not sure I'd ever got to the trouble of going to Marbella or Birmingham for it. A lot of people who've done that say it completely alters the way they gauge how much effort they are using on any given set.

JayRoc

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118906472#Comment_118906472

I remember him going full Mike Mentzer towards the end of his career.

But it's unlikely he'd have had that career if he'd been doing the whole "just one set to absolute failure" shtick from day one.

I just recalled a particularly entertaining yarn a colleague of mine used to spin about Dorian trying to source some Growth for himself in Cork back in the 90s.

Black Sheep

I don't claim this as definitively correct by any means, but this is what I think:-

He had exceptional genes and when he did his first show he tried entered as an amateur and was basically told afterwards that in fact he should have a pro card and was actually the best heavyweight in the UK at the time. At that stage I'd definitely imagine his programming was more conventional i.e had greater volume.

But it does seem to be the case that as a pro he really did use a low volume, high intensity approach during the period where he really, really packed on the muscle and got exceptionally big.

He did meet Mentzer, not sure about Jones, and I get the impression that he wants to give them some degree of credit but he appears to have rejected advice from Mentzer to further drop the volume in his programming.

I think Dorian was 'low volume' in that he was doing one work set on a given movement, but obviously you've got to consider:-

• There was more than one movement per body part, so he's not just doing a DB bench for chest, he's doing 2-3 movements, each with the one work set. I'm imagining incline barbell bench, machine chest press, decline flyes etc. For example.
• That one work set is heavy enough that it needed 1-3 warm-ups before he'd attempt it. He has said people shouldn't forget that bit, and my takeaway is that the heavier warm-ups are likely part of why the work set was effective (More on this later), and should be challenging enough in themselves
• The one work set is not just one straight set to failure, it's followed by him doing assisted reps / forced reps / partials
• The overall effect is that the last heavy warm-up sets him up for achieving really high mechanical tension in the final reps of the work set... And then the extra work with his partner went beyond what he could have done by himself
• He's actually getting quite a few quality reps with a high degree of mechanical tension and it seems like the current science says basically that's the money for hypertrophy. If he does an all-out DB bench set of 10 reps, and then with his partner ends up at 10+5 more assisted/forced/partials, then actually he might accumulate as much mechanical tension for that bunch of reps as someone who did 4-5 sets at a more sub maximal weights... It might only be a handful of reps in each of their sets achieved comparable mechanical tension, and that only because of cumulative fatigue

So he does this on his DB bench... And then he's doing it on 1-2 other movements for his chest before he moves on to some other body part and does 2-3 movements for that. It's "low volume", but .... I think the name is somewhat misleading considering what's actually involved. I actually am more and more a believer that if hypertrophy is the goal then you probably don't need more volume if you can train this way effectively (And I don't think novices can, by themselves).

As time goes by, more and more I think this is far more effective than higher volume approaches. With a higher volume approach all you're doing is taking more time to gradually accumulate reps until you get to the 'money' ones where there is a high degree of mechanical tension.

Final thoughts, I don't know if Dorian used back-off sets if he didn't have a partner, or he'd recommend that as an alternative, but to me that along with the possible use of rest/pause techniques seem like the smartest adaptations that someone training by themselves could make to this kind of approach.

Me ---> Definitely not a pro bodybuilder or looking much like one these days.

Cill94

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118906861#Comment_118906861

I think Dorian Yates could have trained in multiple different ways and still would have been a monster.

Genetics, hard training, and ‘special supplements’ matter far more than something as minute as how many sets or reps you do.

Black Sheep

I think that’s grand as advice to general trainees who need it, but I don’t know how meaningful in this context.

At his elite level they all have great genetics, all have great nutrition and they’re all on drugs. There’s no reason to discount the idea his training methods weren’t a factor in his success over others, especially if he says it was.

Although for most casual trainees things like adherence and effort in a workout might trump the details of programming … That doesn’t mean all programming approaches are made equal- there are objective differences between them in their utility for achieving outcomes. It just might not be as important as other stuff for casuals.

JayRoc

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118907388#Comment_118907388

"I think Dorian Yates could have trained in multiple different ways and still would have been a monster"

Agree!

"Genetics, hard training, and ‘special supplements’ matter far more than something as minute as how many sets or reps you do"

Disagree, to an extent.

(Sorry, I don't think you can break up a post to quote parts since the Great Boards Downgrade of '21, or at least not in a way that's obvious to me)

Black Sheep

Well, that might be an even better way to put it.

If Dorian did a higher volume approach it’s possible he could have looked the same at the end of it all. However, what he says is he feels he recovered better and grew more on the lower volume approach. I’m reluctant to believe two very divergent approaches would yield same result.

JayRoc

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118907804#Comment_118907804

I'm trying to think of a high profile advocate of HIT that trained that way for the majority of their career, and none are coming to mind (ie Casey Viator, the Mentzers, Yates etc).

But I can say with some authority that dropping volume as training age increases is certainly the way to go for a lot of trainees. I've seen many coaches in their 20s baffled that their high volume programmes don't get the best results when they're working with people in their 30s and 40s

Black Sheep

I think that’s a valid issue to raise… Why was there (more or less) just Mike and Dorian and no next wave.

Even thinking of Dante Trudel (Doggcrapp)… His approach is also low volume and intensity based and was widely lauded but he did not actually create loads of successful pro bodybuilders.

I don’t know the answer… I think it’s possible that low volume is still so counter intuitive to pros they reject it for reasons unrelated to its efficacy…?

I’d also buy the idea that some athletes are not temperamentally suited to HIT as an approach and have to accumulate the effective reps through a higher volume method even if it’s less efficient.

JayRoc

Lots of food for thought.

I can only say, the majority of people I coach are between mid thirties and mid forties. It has been that way for most of my 15 year career.

And for this demographic, arguably the most important thing to get right (and it is SO specific to the individual athlete/trainee) is the correct combination of volume and intensity.

It's probably what keep this gig so interesting even after all this time.

Brian?

I love the way Dorian looked in his hey day, but I’ve never been convinced his training methods should have been repeated. He was immense, but the great champions before and after him were also immense using the opposite methods.

The 70s golden age and the 90s mass monsters were all about volume. Whatever Yates did worked for him really well. But not so much for others

Cill94

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118907703#Comment_118907703

I think if those specifics of training really mattered that much then we would only see people who've trained a certain way winning all the Olympias. Some have used HIT, some have done high volume, some have used mostly free weights, some have used mostly machines. I think some approaches certainly work better for some people, but I think a lot of that is mostly a psychological preference.

Everyone at that level does have great genetics, but you can still be a freak among freaks. To be fair, athletes (much like celebrities, billionaires, etc.) always tend to downplay their unfair advantages and like to believe it was all just hard work or some special training method. It's called survivorship bias. Dorian worked his ass off and was one of the best ever, so he assumes that most people could do the same if they just trained like him. I don't blame him for thinking that. It would be near impossible to relate to the average person if your first day in the gym is lifting numbers that would take others years to achieve.

It most certainly does trump it. Speaking as someone who trains people: without exception, the ones I see get the results are the ones who miss the fewest sessions. When consistency is controlled for, it's the ones with better genetics/response to training who do better. Definitely different approaches to programming lead to different outcomes - however hypertrophy is a weird thing to train for in that almost everything can work so long as you're taking a muscle at least close to failure and increasing your workload over time. There's a lot more flexibility for different approaches here than for trying to increase a 1RM or break a 5k run time.

Black Sheep

Program adherence: Yes, it matters, but again, at the level we're talking about, it's a given. I don't really see the relevance of clients who miss training sessions getting nowhere despite decent programming- yes, I don't think anyone will be surprised by that. What's the takeaway for more committed trainees, proper amateur athletes or pros? None of them will be missing sessions.

Genetics: If you're proposing that Dorian had such a genetic advantage over others that he could have literally trained almost any way and would still have won Mr Olympia the same amount of times... Look, it's impossible to prove that assertion one way or the other but I think it probably goes too far.

You say "definitely different approaches to programming lead to different outcomes". Well, in that case we agree really, I think just a difference on its relative importance.

As far as hypertrophy vs strength goes, I'd suggest nearly the opposite.. there are more qualities that can be trained to increase your 1RM than there are for hypertrophy.

Hypertrophy is about increasing muscle fiber diameter and length, one quality and there's more clarity now about how that quality is trained most efficiently.

But you can increase your 1RM by improving coordination, increasing high threshold motor unit recruitment, hypertrophy, tendon stiffness, reducing antagonist muscle activation .... Lots of different qualities, trained different ways, potentially.

In the great scheme of things none of this really matters, but at least we have a thread on the forum where people are posting again...

Cill94

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118909837#Comment_118909837

Ah no, the adherence thing was only in relation to amateurs who miss the odd session. For sure all the pros are making their sessions.

Impossible to prove that he had that much of a genetic advantage but if I had to hedge my bets, genetics generally matters more than programming style once the big things are ticked off (following basic principles). We see people who deadlift 140kg on their first session and those who take 3 years to get there. You can’t bridge that gap with a more optimal workout. Anyway, I really think HIT and high volume really have far more in common than not. From a wide angle view it’s still heavy resistance training where the workload goes up over time. Again, if it really mattered I think we’d see one consistently produce better results - and it just doesn’t.

Those different ways of increasing strength you’re listing are just the different mechanisms by which it increases. In practical application, there are fewer programming options available for increasing your squat 1RM than for increasing your leg mass.

Absolutely, this forum has been a graveyard! 😁

Patsy167

Ben Dunne shuts down six gyms due to Covid-19 impact

Dunne listed off the six Ben Dunne gyms he shut down - Lucan, Jervis Street, Beacon, Sandyford in Dublin along with Navan and Waterford.

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2022/0420/1293343-ben-dunne-shuts-down-six-gyms-due-to-covid-19-impact/

silverharp

seems whey too high

https://twitter.com/PropaneFitness/status/1517167273341071361

Brian?

I know most of the regulars post here. I need your help:

1. No medical advice, please report them. If you need to add a caveat like "I'm not a phsysio", don't post the reply. Report it
2. I just moved a load of threads from the logs to the main forum. Again, don't reply - report it and I will move them.

Thanks in advance.

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119088842#Comment_119088842

I assume cavaets like "I’m not a chiropractor but…” are still ok.

Not being medical advice and all

Brian?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119092650#Comment_119092650

I put that in the same category as “I’m no witch doctor, but..”

Black Sheep

After 6 months of doing 3 and 4 day a week splits, but all of them high intensity and really really low volume, today is my first day back using a type of conjugate programming.

Previously I ran conjugate on a 4 day split with two upper days and two lower, this time I'm doing a 3 day conjugate split where I have max effort upper, max effort lower, a voume upper body day and I'm going to go an optional fourth day with some more lower body volume depending on how it goes.

There are many types of conjugate programming and everyone focuses on the max effort main lifts involved, but another defining characteristic of it as an approach to training is that your supplemental and accessory lifts are where you get your volume in. You've got to really hammer them and progress on them in order to drive progress on your main lifts, because you won't get enough practice or volume when executing the main lifts in themselves.

Anyway... Today I did 6 exercises, maybe 15-18 work sets depending on how you figure it (Excluding warm-ups). I deliberately pushed weights and man I am knackered after that, even within the realm of lifting it's funny how quick you become used to a particular approach and deconditioned for anything else.

My top end strength on my max effort movement is down maybe 10% from what it was previously. My accessory working weights are way up, but that's kind of what I would have expected based on how I've been training lately, I hope I can keep them progressing.

Why did I go back to conjugate? Basically, I realised it had all the elements I wanted in my programming. I want to lift heavy, I also want to feel a bit athletic and I also want to do bodybuildery type stuff. The main change I've made is to not prioritise the 'big three', however. I'm using shoulder-friendly versions of many movements ... Swiss bar... Safety squat bar... etc. Straight bar work will be kept to a minimum.

silverharp

back to the gym after a dose of covid, i got about 40% of a sled routine done and went home. You have to start somewhere I guess.

Black Sheep

Since May I have evolved from the Joe DeFranco conjugate training I was doing to his more current training, which is a four day a week programming.

It's push, pull, legs and a fourth full body day. I would describe it as quite high volume.

Each day begins with a mobility segment that's probably 5-6 minutes duration. Very brief, on a push day it might be something like 2 rotator cuff exercises, 2 shoulder mobilisation movements and a chest stretch. It's so little that you have 'no excuse' not to do it. The next segment is a more conventional warm-up that reminds me of Matt Wenning's warm-up concept. It's three rounds of a four movement superset in the 15-20 range, RPE 7, mostly single joint movements. You're probably sinking another 8-9 minutes on this.

At this stage you're thoroughly warmed up for your main lift, if you're anything like me. He uses a bit of a Jim Wendler style approach here, with a percentage based approach that sees you doing a few sets of a prescribed number, and then doing a final 'as many reps as possible' set, but it's typically going to be in the 8-12 range at the start and then taper off as the weeks go by.

After the main lift he uses supersets heavily for the assistance work, which is classic DeFranco.

A few elements of note that he started using more and more in recent years is that he programmes an absolute **** tone of upper back work and circuits. You think you're doing a lot of rear delt work if you do it two days a week, but DeFranco practically has you doing it four days a week. A lot of upper back work and the care he takes in how he programmes push movements means that my shoulders are feeling incredible right now, and very mobile. I guess this is something he's known for. He also uses very punishing iso holds with light weights, with movements like the YTW.

What I am somewhat on the fence about is that he also programs a lot of high rep sets or exercises where there's a total target goal. So on a push day he slips in 75 pushups, or 100 curls on a pull day. It's taking some time for me to shift around to think past doing 3x10 and just progressively overloading week to week. The first couple of weeks I was struggling to get 75 quality push-ups done on top of the other work, at least in a reasonable time period, but I'm finally getting there now.

One effect of all of this is that my calories expended have gone up dramatically in a workout, the volume is leaving me feeling like DeFranco is a P.E teacher and I'm an under performing student. To an extent I'm seeing that classic "fitness transformation" thing where I notice I have more definition in my arms and shoulders, but it's probably less to do with lean muscle mass gain and more to do with the fact that I'm in a slight calorie deficit on many days and I'm losing weight. Top end strength is undoubtedly down but I don't really care that much, I feel a lot more athletic in general than I did a few months ago.

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119575252#Comment_119575252

I do through phases like that now and again. When I've two phase or two of strength. I'll switch more circuit, superset, high repish. Prob not nearly as high volume as the mainly due to time. Also train more like that when cutting . Summer is coming.

Currently routine looks like.

• Cardio Day: Because I keep finding excuses to not do it in small doses after weights. Something in the 25-45min range.
• Superset Day: Squat/V-Pull, DB Bench/DB Row, Suitcase Deadlift/Mobility Drill, Bicep/Tricep
• Kettebell Day: Barbell Thruster, Dead hang, KB Press, KB Swings (100 reps), Turkish Get Up

  Would also like to get some carries in there somewhere.

Mellor

Came across tihs bar the other fay. Think it could make for some humbling deadlifts.

https://www.armassassinstrengthshop.com/products/saxon-bar-custom

Black Sheep

It's a square grip bar? Weird, I've never seen anything like that... I'm not sure what to make of it, I'd have to try it.

My immediate thought is that if it is worthwhile then the obvious thing to do would be for someone to make a set of squared rubber grips that you can slot onto a regular barbell. Like Fat Gripz, except square. When I was doing conjugate if I wanted to do an axle press or axle deadlift that was all I would do, I'd just throw the grips on and away I went.

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119582172#Comment_119582172

That was literally my first thought also. I can understand a gym, or strongman specializing in grip event getting a dedicated bar. But for everyone else, grips would be fine. Or even a pinch block achieves the same thing.

Black Sheep

Gympin are a UK company that make a few attachments / accessories for lifting. As their name suggests, their flagship is a line of pins that you can slot into a weight stack of any machine, and a sleeve protrudes onto which you can load extra plates. So it's a way of increasing the weight of any stack if you max out.

They also do a line of d-bar attachments for cable movements that people often use in conjunction with Angles 90 grips.

Anyway, where I'm going with this is that I see they've posted that they're discontinuing a line of d-bars they offered in stainless steel, due to the price of steel, apparently.

Haven't seen that from any small companies elsewhere yet, wonder is it a sign of things to come.

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119687272#Comment_119687272

It’s a good idea. And definitely has its place. But I also think it encourages certain nonsense behaviours.

Had a quick look at their insta and seen;

A guy used a pin extender to load up more plates. Even thou the machine had two pins free.

Leg press with a bazillion plates in it…and 2” rom.

Going ridiculously heavy on a machine where a simple barbell version exists.

They definitely have a use, for machines that are not easily replicated with free weights. But certain machine strike me as vanity.

Black Sheep

That could definitely be the case for some people who buy them.

If you look at the pro athletes they sponsor I think there are many of them who have legitimately earned the right to need the gympin, I've no doubt they've maxed out the weight stack on a lot of commercial leg extensions, pulldowns etc. Which don't tend to have huge weight stacks for the most part in many cases.

For casuals or intermediates they're probably vanity buys. I don't own one. I can only think of many two machines I've used where I maxed out the weight stack.

Two movements where people do tend to think they've hit the top of the weight stack, the leg curl and the leg extension, still usually have plenty of road that you can use up if you do something simple like lean forward rather than sitting back onto the pad. Not to mention playing with the tempo or adding a pause and so on.

I do have their d-bar however, good bit of kit.

If anyone has angles 90 grips, funnily enough they can be used in place of a gympin, with a bit of ingenuity. The details are on the web if people search.

As far as heavy load and range of motion goes, I don't know the specific video you're talking about and you could be totally right. But I'd also say that there's a movement these days in some bodybuilding camps to make the case that they are deliberately going to do active ROM only, or even partials, rather than a 'full' ROM as many of us think of it. When you see things like rows or leg presses performed in this style it can be jarring at first, but in some cases that's what's going on, it's deliberate.

Brian?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119687801#Comment_119687801

I find plate loaded leg presses the ultimate vanity lift.

I pressed 700 pounds on one around the same time I could squat 200kg. Pounds because I was living in the US at the time. I had an elbow injury so couldn’t squat.