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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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...

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.

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.

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.

Well, a leg press or a machine press is so much more stable than a barbell squat, of course you're going to use more load.

I don't really see how it's necessarily about vanity- you still just load to the desired RPE. The load will be high and its not like its easy if you've loaded correctly. To be honest I actually think leg presses are very daunting, if anything.

As with leg extensions, I usually want to quit way before I actually have to. You don't get form breakdown in the same way as with a barbell squat, telling you to call it a day.

I see as many people squatting high with a barbell as I do doing short leg presses to be honest. Possibly more.

I do remember an Irish guy a few years ago that was claiming world record bench and leg press numbers at a really low bodyweight. Then when you watched the video it transpired he was doing iso holds for a second and 2 inches of movement in a Smith machine. I nearly admire the brass neck, he was selling e books on his training approach.

I remember listening to an interview with John Meadows, well before he died, and he was talking about the colitis / colon problems he had, and I think I'm right in saying that was related to his heart condition.

There's something depressing about a guy being in such good shape and, underneath it all, there's a life-threatening situation growing quietly.

I don't know the ins and outs of it and for all I know there was a strong genetic element to what happened to him, but if it was related to being on PEDs it's frustrating. I'd like to think that anyone who is a parent, especially, would know it's not worth it (Especially in a sport like bodybuilding where it's not even like professional football or something, where arguably you might weigh up the risks to your health and take the drugs because the monetary rewards are just so great).