WEBVTT
1
00:00:00.107 --> 00:00:02.100
All right, so we weren't originally sure
2
00:00:02.100 --> 00:00:05.760
if we'd include this in the seminar
3
00:00:05.760 --> 00:00:08.013
but it's a question I get a lot.
4
00:00:10.170 --> 00:00:11.880
Like I'm sure a lot of you are sort of familiar
5
00:00:11.880 --> 00:00:15.153
with the idea of set progression across a mesocycle.
6
00:00:16.050 --> 00:00:17.430
And there's, you know,
7
00:00:17.430 --> 00:00:20.880
groups that are big advocates of doing that.
8
00:00:20.880 --> 00:00:24.930
And Eric Helms and I wrote,
9
00:00:24.930 --> 00:00:26.970
so Mike Israetel, Jared Feather,
10
00:00:26.970 --> 00:00:30.090
like I, you know, respect both of them a lot,
11
00:00:30.090 --> 00:00:34.890
but they wrote a a paper about
12
00:00:34.890 --> 00:00:36.720
mesocycle progression for hypertrophy.
13
00:00:36.720 --> 00:00:39.330
And then we wrote like basically a rebuttal paper to it.
14
00:00:39.330 --> 00:00:44.021
But so in the paper they proposed,
15
00:00:44.021 --> 00:00:45.870
you know, weekly set progression
16
00:00:45.870 --> 00:00:48.870
should be prioritized over load progression.
17
00:00:48.870 --> 00:00:50.700
And I think it's important to point out here
18
00:00:50.700 --> 00:00:53.160
like they weren't saying don't add weight.
19
00:00:53.160 --> 00:00:58.160
They were saying like, don't go from like a 10 RM
20
00:00:58.290 --> 00:01:02.070
to an eight RM to a six RM, you know, across a mesocycle.
21
00:01:02.070 --> 00:01:06.390
And on the surface, the rationale seems sound,
22
00:01:06.390 --> 00:01:09.840
but there's some things to consider here.
23
00:01:09.840 --> 00:01:11.493
So the crux of their argument,
24
00:01:12.660 --> 00:01:15.030
we know there's a dose response relationship
25
00:01:15.030 --> 00:01:17.670
between set volume and hypertrophy.
26
00:01:17.670 --> 00:01:19.800
And depending on which paper you read,
27
00:01:19.800 --> 00:01:22.290
that can be very, very pronounced,
28
00:01:22.290 --> 00:01:25.590
up to, I don't know what the Schoenfeld paper was.
29
00:01:25.590 --> 00:01:28.290
I mean, there was an astronomical amount of sets.
30
00:01:28.290 --> 00:01:31.290
It was like 30, 40 sets per body part per week or something.
31
00:01:31.290 --> 00:01:34.170
But in general, you know,
32
00:01:34.170 --> 00:01:37.140
you're going to see this bell curve, this inverted U-curve.
33
00:01:37.140 --> 00:01:40.320
So we know up to a point, you know,
34
00:01:40.320 --> 00:01:44.130
hypertrophy is going to increase and then either plateau or,
35
00:01:44.130 --> 00:01:45.300
you know, if you really overdo it,
36
00:01:45.300 --> 00:01:47.223
start to, you know, go down.
37
00:01:49.470 --> 00:01:51.780
And so we know that that relationship is intact,
38
00:01:51.780 --> 00:01:55.980
but we also know based off of plenty of meta-analytic data
39
00:01:55.980 --> 00:01:59.010
that similar hypertrophy can occur
40
00:01:59.010 --> 00:02:00.630
across a spectrum of loading ranges.
41
00:02:00.630 --> 00:02:04.110
So even though we're not saying six to 30,
42
00:02:04.110 --> 00:02:06.630
you know, a set of six and a set of 30
43
00:02:06.630 --> 00:02:10.110
are the exact same stimulus, they're not,
44
00:02:10.110 --> 00:02:14.433
but in the duration of the studies being examined anyway,
45
00:02:16.050 --> 00:02:17.580
hypertrophy is pretty similar.
46
00:02:17.580 --> 00:02:19.440
And I think the overall theme here
47
00:02:19.440 --> 00:02:21.360
is it's not load dependent.
48
00:02:21.360 --> 00:02:23.400
Like we know we can grow with light loads.
49
00:02:23.400 --> 00:02:25.260
We know we can grow with heavier loads,
50
00:02:25.260 --> 00:02:26.760
assuming set volume's adequate.
51
00:02:26.760 --> 00:02:29.490
So because of that,
52
00:02:29.490 --> 00:02:33.060
if load doesn't really matter and volume does,
53
00:02:33.060 --> 00:02:35.130
why should we focus on load progression?
54
00:02:35.130 --> 00:02:37.290
Shouldn't we just progress volume?
55
00:02:37.290 --> 00:02:41.273
So, and then they had argued
56
00:02:43.140 --> 00:02:45.870
that the reduction in reps and increase in load,
57
00:02:45.870 --> 00:02:48.700
so like kind of a linear theme across the block
58
00:02:49.800 --> 00:02:52.173
would be suboptimal for hypertrophy.
59
00:02:53.073 --> 00:02:56.220
And this wasn't, if I recall,
60
00:02:56.220 --> 00:02:59.610
this wasn't included in their actual paper,
61
00:02:59.610 --> 00:03:04.610
but I think it was on a blog post maybe of theirs
62
00:03:05.250 --> 00:03:06.083
or something,
63
00:03:06.083 --> 00:03:10.170
but the idea of like the minimal effective dose
64
00:03:10.170 --> 00:03:15.150
is going to increase pretty rapidly.
65
00:03:15.150 --> 00:03:18.510
Like you think of that curve that I showed you yesterday,
66
00:03:18.510 --> 00:03:22.470
it's like the argument would be you would benefit
67
00:03:22.470 --> 00:03:25.920
from an addition of sets on a weekly basis, potentially,
68
00:03:25.920 --> 00:03:29.253
because that curve is gonna shift at a pretty rapid rate.
69
00:03:30.510 --> 00:03:34.440
In novices, that could potentially be true.
70
00:03:34.440 --> 00:03:36.510
But in advanced athletes,
71
00:03:36.510 --> 00:03:37.343
we talked about how
72
00:03:37.343 --> 00:03:39.900
that curve shifts relatively slowly, right?
73
00:03:39.900 --> 00:03:44.900
So the idea of like needing to add sets
74
00:03:44.910 --> 00:03:46.950
to stay above your minimal effective dose,
75
00:03:46.950 --> 00:03:50.040
like that really only would be the case
76
00:03:50.040 --> 00:03:51.750
if you're chronically training
77
00:03:51.750 --> 00:03:53.460
at your minimum effective dose.
78
00:03:53.460 --> 00:03:55.050
'Cause if you're somewhere in the middle,
79
00:03:55.050 --> 00:03:55.950
if you don't add sets,
80
00:03:55.950 --> 00:03:58.440
like probably the worst thing that can happen
81
00:03:58.440 --> 00:04:01.230
is you shift a little bit on the left side of that curve.
82
00:04:01.230 --> 00:04:03.060
Does that make sense?
83
00:04:03.060 --> 00:04:03.893
Okay.
84
00:04:03.893 --> 00:04:06.450
So main arguments against,
85
00:04:06.450 --> 00:04:08.760
like in the research,
86
00:04:08.760 --> 00:04:11.613
like this question hasn't been answered, basically.
87
00:04:12.827 --> 00:04:15.810
The research that's showing this dose response,
88
00:04:15.810 --> 00:04:17.310
they're looking at groups
89
00:04:17.310 --> 00:04:18.930
with different volume prescriptions
90
00:04:18.930 --> 00:04:20.940
across like a given time period.
91
00:04:20.940 --> 00:04:24.030
So like an eight week time period, you know,
92
00:04:24.030 --> 00:04:27.360
one group doing, you know, less than five sets,
93
00:04:27.360 --> 00:04:28.680
one group doing 10 sets,
94
00:04:28.680 --> 00:04:31.113
one group doing, you know, 15 or 20.
95
00:04:32.721 --> 00:04:35.760
They're not examining the effects of volume increases
96
00:04:35.760 --> 00:04:37.440
within that timeframe.
97
00:04:37.440 --> 00:04:39.600
So groups aren't, you know,
98
00:04:39.600 --> 00:04:43.023
accruing more volume from week one to week eight.
99
00:04:43.950 --> 00:04:48.500
There is one study that we cited in our paper from Klemp,
100
00:04:49.740 --> 00:04:54.740
but I think they went from like 10 to 32 sets per week
101
00:04:54.750 --> 00:04:57.240
and I think at the halfway point
102
00:04:57.240 --> 00:05:00.840
they had saw like this increase in hypertrophy from like,
103
00:05:00.840 --> 00:05:03.060
I think it was maybe a 12 week study,
104
00:05:03.060 --> 00:05:05.370
from week one to week six, they saw this increase
105
00:05:05.370 --> 00:05:10.140
going from 10 to, like, might have been 20 sets.
106
00:05:10.140 --> 00:05:15.140
But then from week six to week 12, they saw a plateau.
107
00:05:15.180 --> 00:05:17.490
Like they didn't see any additional benefit from that.
108
00:05:17.490 --> 00:05:22.490
So that's some indirect evidence looking at this idea,
109
00:05:22.860 --> 00:05:24.030
but certainly supports the idea
110
00:05:24.030 --> 00:05:26.283
that there's kind of a sweet spot for volume.
111
00:05:27.710 --> 00:05:29.430
And then this is the big thing.
112
00:05:29.430 --> 00:05:34.430
Like I've had people ask me like,
113
00:05:34.507 --> 00:05:36.570
"Okay, so are you against adding sets?"
114
00:05:36.570 --> 00:05:37.980
And that's not the case, either.
115
00:05:37.980 --> 00:05:40.590
I think with anything here,
116
00:05:40.590 --> 00:05:43.920
like we talk about like metabolic stress
117
00:05:43.920 --> 00:05:47.190
and its role in hypertrophy,
118
00:05:47.190 --> 00:05:48.660
we can't say with certainty,
119
00:05:48.660 --> 00:05:52.170
but that doesn't mean that it's not a thing.
120
00:05:52.170 --> 00:05:53.877
Like it's just a hard thing to tease out.
121
00:05:53.877 --> 00:05:56.130
And so until this research is done,
122
00:05:56.130 --> 00:05:57.210
like we can't rule it out.
123
00:05:57.210 --> 00:06:00.670
So absence of evidence is not evidence of absence
124
00:06:01.890 --> 00:06:03.843
is a a good thing to keep in mind.
125
00:06:04.800 --> 00:06:08.094
And then there's just a lack of any evidence
126
00:06:08.094 --> 00:06:10.560
that we're aware of that supported the idea
127
00:06:10.560 --> 00:06:14.430
that increasing load and decreasing reps across a mesocycle
128
00:06:14.430 --> 00:06:19.410
was decreasingly stimulative or more fatiguing.
129
00:06:19.410 --> 00:06:22.350
In fact, higher rep ranges, like we've discussed,
130
00:06:22.350 --> 00:06:24.480
just tend to be more fatiguing.
131
00:06:24.480 --> 00:06:27.690
The perceived discomfort tends to be higher, as well, so.
132
00:06:27.690 --> 00:06:32.070
And then there's a potential increase of injury risk,
133
00:06:32.070 --> 00:06:36.810
you know, going from, you know, three sets,
134
00:06:36.810 --> 00:06:39.750
or, I'm sorry, like 10 sets to 20 sets, for example,
135
00:06:39.750 --> 00:06:42.120
across a mesocycle, like doubling your volume.
136
00:06:42.120 --> 00:06:44.963
And I'm not saying that's what they advocate all the time,
137
00:06:46.500 --> 00:06:49.080
but you know, depending on your magnitude of increase,
138
00:06:49.080 --> 00:06:52.740
it could be a pretty large increase in workload
139
00:06:52.740 --> 00:06:55.800
that could become problematic pretty quickly.
140
00:06:55.800 --> 00:06:57.840
And then the other thing to keep in mind,
141
00:06:57.840 --> 00:07:00.270
like there's a diminishing rate of hypertrophy
142
00:07:00.270 --> 00:07:01.230
with additional sets.
143
00:07:01.230 --> 00:07:06.230
So going from like five sets per week to 10 sets,
144
00:07:07.979 --> 00:07:12.979
it results in like a 36% increase, something like that,
145
00:07:13.530 --> 00:07:16.050
from one of Schoenfeld's meta-analyses,
146
00:07:16.050 --> 00:07:18.990
but it's not 100%.
147
00:07:18.990 --> 00:07:20.310
Like it's significantly less.
148
00:07:20.310 --> 00:07:21.870
Like as you add additional sets,
149
00:07:21.870 --> 00:07:25.470
your return on that investment gets smaller and smaller.
150
00:07:25.470 --> 00:07:28.110
So kind of keep that in mind.
151
00:07:28.110 --> 00:07:30.300
Like if there's a potential increase in injury
152
00:07:30.300 --> 00:07:33.693
with less to gain, you know,
153
00:07:35.280 --> 00:07:39.153
then it's something to keep in mind.
154
00:07:40.080 --> 00:07:41.700
But it's also like if you're in the gym
155
00:07:41.700 --> 00:07:46.560
and you are planning four sets but you only get to three,
156
00:07:46.560 --> 00:07:49.500
it doesn't mean you're gonna get, you know,
157
00:07:49.500 --> 00:07:51.600
75% of the progress you would have.
158
00:07:51.600 --> 00:07:53.430
It's probably higher than that.
159
00:07:53.430 --> 00:07:56.140
So it's kind of a good thing to keep in mind
160
00:07:57.390 --> 00:07:58.390
in that regard, too.
161
00:07:59.580 --> 00:08:02.580
All right, so when may an addition of sets be warranted?
162
00:08:02.580 --> 00:08:03.810
So like we discussed earlier,
163
00:08:03.810 --> 00:08:05.580
if work capacity is lower
164
00:08:05.580 --> 00:08:08.640
or you're fighting a lot of fatigue from one set to the next
165
00:08:08.640 --> 00:08:10.440
you go a little bit more submaximal,
166
00:08:10.440 --> 00:08:11.913
add some sets to make up.
167
00:08:13.680 --> 00:08:18.630
And then is performance improving over time?
168
00:08:18.630 --> 00:08:21.660
And this is sort of just looking at a program,
169
00:08:21.660 --> 00:08:23.700
and a lot of people just simply don't do this.
170
00:08:23.700 --> 00:08:27.030
And it's kind of obvious,
171
00:08:27.030 --> 00:08:31.680
but people are looking at what should be optimal on paper,
172
00:08:31.680 --> 00:08:33.270
but they're not really looking at
173
00:08:33.270 --> 00:08:35.130
what their training is actually doing.
174
00:08:35.130 --> 00:08:39.600
So if you're performing well and you're trending up,
175
00:08:39.600 --> 00:08:41.070
even if you're doing lower volume
176
00:08:41.070 --> 00:08:44.880
than maybe you think you should be doing,
177
00:08:44.880 --> 00:08:45.713
like that tells you
178
00:08:45.713 --> 00:08:47.670
you're above that stimulus threshold at least.
179
00:08:47.670 --> 00:08:49.860
Like at the minimum, you could probably keep doing
180
00:08:49.860 --> 00:08:52.620
that amount of volume and still progress.
181
00:08:52.620 --> 00:08:54.090
Like you don't have to add volume,
182
00:08:54.090 --> 00:08:54.923
but,
183
00:08:56.790 --> 00:08:57.780
you know, if it is,
184
00:08:57.780 --> 00:08:59.780
then we know we're operating above that.
185
00:09:00.690 --> 00:09:04.890
So thing to keep in mind, that stimulus threshold,
186
00:09:04.890 --> 00:09:08.100
it's influenced by adaptations,
187
00:09:08.100 --> 00:09:10.080
not what you did the session prior.
188
00:09:10.080 --> 00:09:11.250
Like your muscle doesn't know
189
00:09:11.250 --> 00:09:14.970
how much weight and reps you did, you know, the day before.
190
00:09:14.970 --> 00:09:19.970
So if it's not improving over time,
191
00:09:20.790 --> 00:09:22.640
the first thing you wanna do is audit
192
00:09:24.150 --> 00:09:25.320
kind of your behaviors here.
193
00:09:25.320 --> 00:09:29.970
So sleep, energy balance, that's a big one,
194
00:09:29.970 --> 00:09:32.850
protein intake, stress.
195
00:09:32.850 --> 00:09:37.850
Because if none of those are at a reasonable level,
196
00:09:38.160 --> 00:09:40.170
like adding volume is just gonna make
197
00:09:40.170 --> 00:09:41.763
the situation worse, right,
198
00:09:42.690 --> 00:09:47.010
'cause all of those relate to recovery and, you know,
199
00:09:47.010 --> 00:09:50.940
you should kind of know like no one that feels destroyed
200
00:09:50.940 --> 00:09:52.950
and they're not progressing things,
201
00:09:52.950 --> 00:09:54.810
like, "Maybe I just need to add more volume."
202
00:09:54.810 --> 00:09:56.380
You know?
(Brian laughing)
203
00:09:56.380 --> 00:09:58.890
Like, so it's something that, subjectively,
204
00:09:58.890 --> 00:10:01.233
I think most people probably know,
205
00:10:02.400 --> 00:10:04.440
but if recovery's in check
206
00:10:04.440 --> 00:10:08.190
and the other thing on this list that I should have added,
207
00:10:08.190 --> 00:10:10.050
especially considering this seminar,
208
00:10:10.050 --> 00:10:13.020
is like exercise execution and selection.
209
00:10:13.020 --> 00:10:17.100
So I've had people that have come to me.
210
00:10:17.100 --> 00:10:19.470
Like I had an athlete that said like
211
00:10:19.470 --> 00:10:22.710
his pecs were a huge weakness for him.
212
00:10:22.710 --> 00:10:25.387
And he's like, "Yeah, in the past,
213
00:10:25.387 --> 00:10:27.787
"like I've needed like 30 sets of pressing a week
214
00:10:27.787 --> 00:10:28.890
"to get it to move."
215
00:10:28.890 --> 00:10:32.760
And I thought like that seems kind of hard to believe.
216
00:10:32.760 --> 00:10:36.420
And so, you know, he sent video over
217
00:10:36.420 --> 00:10:39.540
and just his execution of the movement just wasn't,
218
00:10:39.540 --> 00:10:42.690
it was just a lot of delt and much less pec,
219
00:10:42.690 --> 00:10:44.160
and his delts showed that.
220
00:10:44.160 --> 00:10:47.903
So, what went from him thinking
221
00:10:47.903 --> 00:10:51.630
like 30 was his minimum effective dose,
222
00:10:51.630 --> 00:10:53.790
all of a sudden, you know, we refined his technique
223
00:10:53.790 --> 00:10:57.240
and he's back at a much more reasonable amount of volume.
224
00:10:57.240 --> 00:11:00.870
So audit exercise selection.
225
00:11:00.870 --> 00:11:02.760
You know, if you're going with more complex movements
226
00:11:02.760 --> 00:11:04.140
like we talked about,
227
00:11:04.140 --> 00:11:06.390
you may find that, you know,
228
00:11:06.390 --> 00:11:08.650
that set volume that was putting you
229
00:11:10.170 --> 00:11:11.550
in a more fatigued state
230
00:11:11.550 --> 00:11:14.100
could now put you right where you want to be.
231
00:11:14.100 --> 00:11:18.690
So, you know, you tend to be able to handle that volume
232
00:11:18.690 --> 00:11:21.190
a little bit better when things are more directed.
233
00:11:22.530 --> 00:11:24.510
All right, so if you're feeling healthy,
234
00:11:24.510 --> 00:11:26.220
know you're already operating, you know,
235
00:11:26.220 --> 00:11:28.440
below optimal set volume for a movement,
236
00:11:28.440 --> 00:11:30.880
like if you historically have performed well
237
00:11:31.770 --> 00:11:33.390
at a given volume,
238
00:11:33.390 --> 00:11:35.040
you know, you're well below that,
239
00:11:36.030 --> 00:11:39.393
then, yeah, you can definitely increase there.
240
00:11:41.370 --> 00:11:43.410
So Cass, we had talked about this some
241
00:11:43.410 --> 00:11:45.660
and this was kind of a question I had put
242
00:11:45.660 --> 00:11:47.010
just for open discussion,
243
00:11:47.010 --> 00:11:47.843
but
244
00:11:49.740 --> 00:11:51.630
how do you know
245
00:11:51.630 --> 00:11:55.560
where you're at in terms of that curve?
246
00:11:55.560 --> 00:11:59.410
Like what ways would you guys use to assess
247
00:12:00.420 --> 00:12:02.040
where you're at there?
248
00:12:02.040 --> 00:12:05.163
'Cause we never know definitively if we're in the middle.
249
00:12:08.970 --> 00:12:10.380
There's not a right or wrong answer here;
250
00:12:10.380 --> 00:12:14.580
it's just like, in your experience,
251
00:12:14.580 --> 00:12:17.523
when have you decided to add volume for somebody?
252
00:12:20.997 --> 00:12:22.680
Say they're controlling well,
253
00:12:22.680 --> 00:12:24.330
then maybe go easy,
254
00:12:24.330 --> 00:12:28.532
say that they know that hey can work and (indistinct).
255
00:12:28.532 --> 00:12:29.365
Yeah.
256
00:12:29.365 --> 00:12:31.271
And watch them (indistinct)
257
00:12:31.271 --> 00:12:34.183
and display that they can, then I say let's go for it.
258
00:12:34.183 --> 00:12:35.016
Yeah.
259
00:12:35.016 --> 00:12:38.074
Worst case, they don't make it and we adjust.
260
00:12:38.074 --> 00:12:39.540
Mm-hmm.
261
00:12:39.540 --> 00:12:42.180
Yeah, and I think, yeah, if they feel healthy,
262
00:12:42.180 --> 00:12:43.380
I think, is the big thing.
263
00:12:43.380 --> 00:12:45.330
If they're healthy and they feel good
264
00:12:45.330 --> 00:12:46.530
and they're progressing,
265
00:12:47.850 --> 00:12:50.490
I sometimes, and you know,
266
00:12:50.490 --> 00:12:52.950
he and I may have differing opinions on this,
267
00:12:52.950 --> 00:12:54.540
if someone's healthy and progressing well
268
00:12:54.540 --> 00:12:56.730
for their training status,
269
00:12:56.730 --> 00:13:00.960
I tend to be more reluctant to add volume in those cases
270
00:13:00.960 --> 00:13:04.110
because it's hard to know,
271
00:13:04.110 --> 00:13:05.970
like, it's kind of a gamble either way.
272
00:13:05.970 --> 00:13:08.010
Like you don't know definitively if it's gonna help.
273
00:13:08.010 --> 00:13:09.990
It could make things worse.
274
00:13:09.990 --> 00:13:11.977
And so if you are, and you're like,
275
00:13:11.977 --> 00:13:14.777
"Okay, maybe we're a little bit on the left side there,"
276
00:13:15.870 --> 00:13:18.000
be conservative with those increases.
277
00:13:18.000 --> 00:13:21.270
Like don't increase their volume by 50%
278
00:13:21.270 --> 00:13:22.370
or anything like that.
279
00:13:24.300 --> 00:13:26.343
Do you have anything else there?
280
00:13:28.530 --> 00:13:33.093
I mean, some personal anecdotes that I've used.
281
00:13:35.700 --> 00:13:37.380
I mean, the first thing is
282
00:13:37.380 --> 00:13:39.360
you're using your recovery as your barometer
283
00:13:39.360 --> 00:13:41.520
of if it's even an option, right?
284
00:13:41.520 --> 00:13:43.320
So that just has to be a given.
285
00:13:43.320 --> 00:13:45.780
So, yeah, if you are feeling healthy.
286
00:13:45.780 --> 00:13:50.463
So you can look at with your training,
287
00:13:52.500 --> 00:13:55.690
like I guess the simplest way that I would put this is
288
00:13:56.670 --> 00:13:59.163
if my recovery seems really good,
289
00:14:00.750 --> 00:14:04.583
I try and do one set that I didn't want to do.
290
00:14:04.583 --> 00:14:05.416
Okay.
291
00:14:05.416 --> 00:14:09.390
That's kind of like my way of kind of measuring that
292
00:14:09.390 --> 00:14:10.620
and like, I'm like, all right,
293
00:14:10.620 --> 00:14:13.263
I figured that like within the training session,
294
00:14:14.160 --> 00:14:17.370
if I did one set that I didn't wanna do, right,
295
00:14:17.370 --> 00:14:20.220
that means that like probably the next set
296
00:14:20.220 --> 00:14:23.310
is where I would've seen that significant drop off-
297
00:14:23.310 --> 00:14:24.143
Yeah.
298
00:14:24.143 --> 00:14:25.473
In performance and return.
299
00:14:26.550 --> 00:14:31.550
But you kind of have to gauge what that fatigue is,
300
00:14:31.860 --> 00:14:34.500
because if that fatigue carries outside of the session,
301
00:14:34.500 --> 00:14:36.120
then you probably overdid it.
302
00:14:36.120 --> 00:14:39.150
But if you do that one set that you didn't wanna do
303
00:14:39.150 --> 00:14:42.000
just because of the session, the fatigue within the session,
304
00:14:42.000 --> 00:14:44.760
but then you don't see that residual fatigue
305
00:14:44.760 --> 00:14:46.320
negatively impact you out of it
306
00:14:46.320 --> 00:14:48.240
and your recovery seems good,
307
00:14:48.240 --> 00:14:49.890
I think, if I had to guess,
308
00:14:49.890 --> 00:14:52.320
like of something that's just super practical
309
00:14:52.320 --> 00:14:55.500
that might be like kind of where to be.
310
00:14:55.500 --> 00:14:56.333
Yeah.
Right?
311
00:14:56.333 --> 00:14:57.720
'Cause that is what we're trying to do, right?
312
00:14:57.720 --> 00:14:59.850
We're trying to drive stimulus.
313
00:14:59.850 --> 00:15:01.500
And that means like if we're gonna be
314
00:15:01.500 --> 00:15:02.700
at the top of that bell curve,
315
00:15:02.700 --> 00:15:05.550
that means like we have to be pushing that boundary
316
00:15:05.550 --> 00:15:08.940
of when we would be going over, right?
317
00:15:08.940 --> 00:15:12.930
And the only way that we're knowing we're way back,
318
00:15:12.930 --> 00:15:14.130
you know, on the left side,
319
00:15:14.130 --> 00:15:15.960
where it's like we're doing too little
320
00:15:15.960 --> 00:15:18.090
is we're not making progress.
321
00:15:18.090 --> 00:15:20.700
So how do we know we're making progress as fast as we can?
322
00:15:20.700 --> 00:15:22.230
We can look for progress to slow down.
323
00:15:22.230 --> 00:15:24.030
We can look for progress to speed up.
324
00:15:24.030 --> 00:15:25.290
And in the moment we can be like,
325
00:15:25.290 --> 00:15:30.290
all right, well, if I know that the goal is overload, right,
326
00:15:31.440 --> 00:15:34.830
and that's like, well, okay, to overload my system
327
00:15:34.830 --> 00:15:38.610
I probably need to do just a little bit more
328
00:15:38.610 --> 00:15:40.920
than what my body wants to do, right?
329
00:15:40.920 --> 00:15:42.960
That's essentially what we're trying to do
330
00:15:42.960 --> 00:15:45.960
with progressive overload on a micro level,
331
00:15:45.960 --> 00:15:46.890
and on a macro level,
332
00:15:46.890 --> 00:15:49.740
I'm just looking at that from a fatigue standpoint
333
00:15:49.740 --> 00:15:50.610
of like, all right,
334
00:15:50.610 --> 00:15:55.110
progressive overload for like maintaining that in a session
335
00:15:55.110 --> 00:15:56.819
is just doing slightly more
336
00:15:56.819 --> 00:15:58.357
than my body would've been just like,
337
00:15:58.357 --> 00:16:00.157
"Yeah, that's our thing, that's what we do.
338
00:16:00.157 --> 00:16:01.140
"We can go now."
339
00:16:01.140 --> 00:16:03.420
It's like, yeah, and then just a little bit more
340
00:16:03.420 --> 00:16:05.639
so that the next time, that threshold's set-
341
00:16:05.639 --> 00:16:06.570
Yeah.
A little bit higher.
342
00:16:06.570 --> 00:16:07.800
Yeah, I think it's important, too,
343
00:16:07.800 --> 00:16:10.410
like if you think of that curve,
344
00:16:10.410 --> 00:16:13.710
like what is causing the right side of that curve
345
00:16:13.710 --> 00:16:14.730
to even exist?
346
00:16:14.730 --> 00:16:18.390
Like why does it go down and not go infinitely up?
347
00:16:18.390 --> 00:16:22.020
It's because of our ability to adapt to the stimulus,
348
00:16:22.020 --> 00:16:22.853
like our recovery.
349
00:16:22.853 --> 00:16:27.480
So using proxies for recovery, you know, within a session
350
00:16:27.480 --> 00:16:28.320
and, you know,
351
00:16:28.320 --> 00:16:30.630
paying attention to performance in subsequent sessions
352
00:16:30.630 --> 00:16:33.510
is gonna provide quite a bit of information there.
353
00:16:33.510 --> 00:16:34.343
Yep.
354
00:16:34.343 --> 00:16:37.890
And I think performance drops are valuable.
355
00:16:37.890 --> 00:16:42.890
So, I won't tend to progress like into multiple performance,
356
00:16:44.670 --> 00:16:47.207
or I won't tend to do sets into multiple performance drops.
357
00:16:47.207 --> 00:16:48.480
Right.
Right?
358
00:16:48.480 --> 00:16:50.973
I kind of think like for the most part,
359
00:16:51.870 --> 00:16:55.560
it's like once you start losing reps
360
00:16:55.560 --> 00:16:57.510
or start losing load, right,
361
00:16:57.510 --> 00:16:59.514
usually like the next set,
362
00:16:59.514 --> 00:17:02.040
it's like you lose it exponentially more.
363
00:17:02.040 --> 00:17:02.873
Yeah.
364
00:17:02.873 --> 00:17:03.810
And then it only goes down from that.
365
00:17:03.810 --> 00:17:07.590
So that could be a sign that you're moving a little bit,
366
00:17:07.590 --> 00:17:10.410
you're about to tip over to the right, right?
367
00:17:10.410 --> 00:17:12.060
And I would say anecdotally,
368
00:17:12.060 --> 00:17:15.150
when I usually do that one set that I don't want to do,
369
00:17:15.150 --> 00:17:18.780
it's usually still very close to the performance
370
00:17:18.780 --> 00:17:21.150
or a very, very subtle drop, right?
371
00:17:21.150 --> 00:17:22.170
It's that next set,
372
00:17:22.170 --> 00:17:23.370
the one you really don't wanna do,
373
00:17:23.370 --> 00:17:24.203
that's usually the one
374
00:17:24.203 --> 00:17:26.853
where you see like that big performance drop.
375
00:17:28.950 --> 00:17:29.970
Yeah.
376
00:17:29.970 --> 00:17:34.970
So, I think when people break that rule
377
00:17:35.490 --> 00:17:37.620
and they just see like random performance drops
378
00:17:37.620 --> 00:17:38.910
all over the place,
379
00:17:38.910 --> 00:17:42.030
I think in that case, it's not so much a volume issue.
380
00:17:42.030 --> 00:17:43.980
It's a work capacity or a conditioning issue
381
00:17:43.980 --> 00:17:46.560
that could be managed by just getting in better shape
382
00:17:46.560 --> 00:17:48.720
or managing their rest intervals.
383
00:17:48.720 --> 00:17:50.880
It's not so much that it was the number of sets.
384
00:17:50.880 --> 00:17:54.150
It was more so that the rest intervals
385
00:17:54.150 --> 00:17:58.080
or you're just simply way too outta shape
386
00:17:58.080 --> 00:18:00.580
for the type of training that you're trying to do.
387
00:18:02.010 --> 00:18:02.940
Cool.
388
00:18:02.940 --> 00:18:04.540
Does anybody have any questions?
389
00:18:06.930 --> 00:18:07.763
Nothing?
390
00:18:09.450 --> 00:18:10.533
Going once.
391
00:18:12.600 --> 00:18:14.700
Parking lot, like,
392
00:18:14.700 --> 00:18:16.740
you guys familiar with the parking lot scenario?
393
00:18:16.740 --> 00:18:19.860
This means that the question that you're gonna ask
394
00:18:19.860 --> 00:18:22.860
when we get off the stage and we're walking to our cars,
395
00:18:22.860 --> 00:18:23.823
ask them now.
396
00:18:26.370 --> 00:18:28.500
Yes, no?
397
00:18:28.500 --> 00:18:29.333
Everybody good?
398
00:18:30.300 --> 00:18:31.410
Okay, cool.
399
00:18:31.410 --> 00:18:32.243
Thank you, Brian.
400
00:18:32.243 --> 00:18:33.076
Yep.
401
00:18:34.704 --> 00:18:35.537
All right.
402
00:18:35.537 --> 00:18:38.787
(audience applauding)