• Keep up to date with Ausbb via Twitter and Facebook. Please add us!
  • Join the Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

    The Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Ausbb- Australian Bodybuilding Forum stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.

    Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.

Sheiko

I thought WA states were on the 27th April?
Good luck anyway man, you will smash it
 
hmm.
ill hit #37 after comp this weekend.
my targets are set on nats as it is anyways. i mean ill be attempting(and getting) new pb's this weekend, but GPC nats is the end goal.
thinking #37,#37,#32. i have 13 training weeks between states and nats.
 
Yeah that plan looks ideal. If you have no issue with volume then don't reduce volume- if anything you can increase it. But the safe approach is to run 37 and based on how it goes first time through consider whether you can handle increased volume. The normal approach is just to add a set to the top set, of if you're still a little way out from comp you can add a rep to the top sets. One or the other- not both. Increased reps with build more work capacity, shift the intensity up slightly and increase time under tension. The Bates reduced volume is reduced for people who struggle with volume, like Dave himself- who is in his 40s and got beat up doing the plan as written. The limiting factor for volume is recovery/fatigue.
 
Just sayin
Medvedyev recommends less volume for unrated lifters
If you disagree then fine I guess
 
cheers steve.

oni why would i change anything this early?
one cycle of 29 tells me nothing more than i can handle more volume. :)
after a few cycles ill know whats what. and adjust accordingly.
 
0ni said:
Just sayin
Medvedyev recommends less volume for unrated lifters
If you disagree then fine I guess
Click to expand...

He has done #29 and said that he felt fine. That provides sufficient information to suggest he can handle the volume. Recommendations to reduced volume tend to relate to the limiting factors I referred to above. Don't make out like I'm disagreeing with Medvedyev by suggesting that a person who has done a rated template and coped shouldn't reduce volume.
 
Timeah said:
cheers steve.

oni why would i change anything this early?
one cycle of 29 tells me nothing more than i can handle more volume. :)
after a few cycles ill know whats what. and adjust accordingly.
Click to expand...

yeah- that sounds like a sensible approach. Most people find 37 yields better results in squat and bench, simply because its more balanced. I believe the original plan runs 29-30-31-37-32, but I know plenty who have found 30-31 unproductive. Thats why Dave Bates based his prep cycles on 37.
 
Spritcha said:
He has done #29 and said that he felt fine. That provides sufficient information to suggest he can handle the volume. Recommendations to reduced volume tend to relate to the limiting factors I referred to above. Don't make out like I'm disagreeing with Medvedyev by suggesting that a person who has done a rated template and coped shouldn't reduce volume.
Click to expand...

Man you jump gun on accusations way too early
 
Timeah said:
cheers steve.

oni why would i change anything this early?
one cycle of 29 tells me nothing more than i can handle more volume. :)
after a few cycles ill know whats what. and adjust accordingly.
Click to expand...

I wasn't really suggesting that you drop volume immediately
There is also being able to handle volume and it being the right amount. The "reduced volume" makes it sound like it's the pussies version but it has you doing 9x3x80% on bench with a long pause on every rep lol. With the decreased volume you get your worksets at a higher percentage and less warm-ups. It might be better for you- or worse. Take a look at the BMF Sports boards and you'll see there what people total and the sort of volume they run. You see plenty of people start off on the reduced volume 13 week cycle

I wouldn't change midway through though otherwise you don't even know if 29 worked for you if you don't follow it up and peak lol

Kaz: I couldn't care less. I say that competing in a tested fed doesn't mean you don't take PEDs and vice versa and he carries on like I insulted his mother. I say that he is the strongest guy in Australia and he carries on like I was accusing him of being holier than thou and only here to advertise how cool he is. I explain why I said one thing because it's the guidelines of a certain strength coach and he carries on like I was accusing him of directly critisizing him. It's fucking ridiculous
 
I think you just need to pull your head in and move on instead of attempting to bait an argument
 
0ni said:
Kaz: I couldn't care less. I say that competing in a tested fed doesn't mean you don't take PEDs and vice versa and he carries on like I insulted his mother. I say that he is the strongest guy in Australia and he carries on like I was accusing him of being holier than thou and only here to advertise how cool he is. I explain why I said one thing because it's the guidelines of a certain strength coach and he carries on like I was accusing him of directly critisizing him. It's fucking ridiculous
Click to expand...

In Steve's defence the PED was fucking annoying and you brought it up all the time. I know because I told you to shut up about it several times too. ASADA can stalk places like this and can be very fast to jump to conclusions.

The other things I did not read they way you did at all.
 
I don't want to argue about stuff for the sake of it.
The term reduced volume comes from Dave Bates. I'm well aware of the BMF forum, I was around when it started. Many of the guys on there that ran the reduced volume form are people I know. I communicated regularly with Dave Bates and Eric while they were developing the templates. They are largely the work of Dave who understands the number crunching. I had weekly email contact with him for over a year when I was fully doing the sheiko thing. It's my understanding that the reduction in volume was a response to the original being a little too much. There were later incarnations that included higher loading, some of which was developed with me while I was trained equipped. The simple point I was making was that if someone runs 29 as is and it's no issue then they probably don't need to reduce volume.
 
It was made for himself because he is 40 something yes
My point, which was obviously lost completely, was that the lower volume might be better for him as it was for me. I coped fine on 29-30-31 but the gains were nowhere near as good as following the volume recommendations. Will Tim be the same? Only Tim probably cares enough to find out
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top