Gaining Muscle and Losing Fat (2015)

[wjk]

Well, I seem to be where I can be, naturally anyway. And although I wouldn't mind getting a bit stronger and adding a couple more pounds of muscle, I'm not complaining. If you've been at it long enough, at a certain point in middle age it becomes about maintenance.

As for your doing more sets to get both stronger and leaner, I fully understand the rationale (and lived by it for years), but the research seems to indicate that most people tend to overshoot on volume beyond what is necessary. I won't pretend to know where the volume sweet spot is. But I can tell you that I'm doing a lot less volume than I used to a few years earlier, and I don't seem to be regressing. And up until the point where I dropped the volume, I was no longer progressing either. So, in retrospect, all that extra volume appears to have been superfluous. I should point out, though, that intensity was always very high, so that part has been a constant.

If you are referring to strength and size, I found that changing my routine every few weeks was the key (at a later age). This included switching from high volume/low weight, low volume/heavy weight, high volume moderate to heavy weight, pyramiding of various styles, adding negatives, super slow reps heavy and/or light, basically an infinite different varieties of approach...whatever kept me from getting bored. Super-setting different groups in ever changing combos over time when possible gave me more efficient workouts. I would use both machines and free weights and utilize various combos of compound and isolation. I still utilize such variety.

At the age of 50 (it might have been a year or so earlier), I began reading Muscle Mag (no longer in circulation), and tried every technique I read about for 2 to 4 weeks at a time (as I described above). I made my biggest and fastest gains between age 50 and 55, including PR's in every muscle group (except quads...knee issues). Between the age of 35 and 50, I never changed my routine...and never got stronger or bigger after the first few months of training.

Again, at least for me, I have little doubt in my mind that variety was the key. (I did so with lots of whey and vitamins...no steroids). I think that variety is more important than the amount of reps and weight utilized, though they are absolutely a factor, too. I found the greatest strength gains came from the slow positive and negative approach...kind of like Mentzer's approach. Those, and centuries are the most brutal workouts for me.

I've just completed a several weeks break after a fairly long period of moderate to heavy weight at high volume, and now will reset to my personal beginning. I didn't really make much gains this last time, but my training was interrupted by transportation problems followed by the gym closing for a time from storm damage, so I don't want to blame the routine or age. I did pick up a few pounds (not presently dieting).

Anyway, after long breaks (over two weeks for me), I start with 1/5th of my max weight per muscle group, and do 48 reps for 1 set, 3 or 4 different exercises per group. After a few weeks I'll add 36 reps for 2 sets at 2/5 max weight, and when I get to 24 reps for 2 to 3 sets at 3/5 of max, I'll begin to once again start mixing things up. I have no plan as to what variety I'll do then, but after a break, and especially at age 56, the high rep/low weight routine to get back in the game seems to "rehab" my joints as I prepare to move into moderate and heavier varieties again.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

Go nuts:

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/1...of-almonds-everyday-can-boost-diet-health.htm

 

[Frederick Foresight]

If you are referring to strength and size, I found that changing my routine every few weeks was the key (at a later age). This included switching from high volume/low weight, low volume/heavy weight, high volume moderate to heavy weight, pyramiding of various styles, adding negatives, super slow reps heavy and/or light, basically an infinite different varieties of approach...whatever kept me from getting bored. Super-setting different groups in ever changing combos over time when possible gave me more efficient workouts. I would use both machines and free weights and utilize various combos of compound and isolation. I still utilize such variety.

At the age of 50 (it might have been a year or so earlier), I began reading Muscle Mag (no longer in circulation), and tried every technique I read about for 2 to 4 weeks at a time (as I described above). I made my biggest and fastest gains between age 50 and 55, including PR's in every muscle group (except quads...knee issues). Between the age of 35 and 50, I never changed my routine...and never got stronger or bigger after the first few months of training.

Again, at least for me, I have little doubt in my mind that variety was the key. (I did so with lots of whey and vitamins...no steroids). I think that variety is more important than the amount of reps and weight utilized, though they are absolutely a factor, too. I found the greatest strength gains came from the slow positive and negative approach...kind of like Mentzer's approach. Those, and centuries are the most brutal workouts for me.

I've just completed a several weeks break after a fairly long period of moderate to heavy weight at high volume, and now will reset to my personal beginning. I didn't really make much gains this last time, but my training was interrupted by transportation problems followed by the gym closing for a time from storm damage, so I don't want to blame the routine or age. I did pick up a few pounds (not presently dieting).

Anyway, after long breaks (over two weeks for me), I start with 1/5th of my max weight per muscle group, and do 48 reps for 1 set, 3 or 4 different exercises per group. After a few weeks I'll add 36 reps for 2 sets at 2/5 max weight, and when I get to 24 reps for 2 to 3 sets at 3/5 of max, I'll begin to once again start mixing things up. I have no plan as to what variety I'll do then, but after a break, and especially at age 56, the high rep/low weight routine to get back in the game seems to "rehab" my joints as I prepare to move into moderate and heavier varieties again.

Hi wjk,

Yes, I understand that exercise variety is supposed to be a good thing. I have no doubt it has value, but a minority of people believe, based on ~some research, that it might be overvalued. Again, not without value, just oversold. Personally, I don't really like much in the way of variety. And I certainly don't need it to keep from getting bored. In fact, as I probably noted somewhere earlier in this thread, I don't know how anyone can get bored when they are challenging themselves to their limit. That is especially the case for me now that I have an abbreviated workout routine.

Regarding the variation of weights and reps, I'm also familiar with periodicity and its promise of breaking through plateaus, and I have played around with it (a bit) in the past. Again, I just don't like it much. Perhaps my inflexibility is holding me back, but I doubt that the opportunity cost is very meaningful. Please keep in mind that I've been workout out pretty much my whole adult life. At a certain point, you reach your genetic potential and stop getting stronger regardless of the tweaking, and just work on holding on to what you have.

http://www.cbass.com/Winett_BassAge.htm

http://www.ageless-athletes.com/genetic_limits.php

But if you are still making gains then, by all means, more power to you!

 

[CaptainObvious]

If you are referring to strength and size, I found that changing my routine every few weeks was the key (at a later age). This included switching from high volume/low weight, low volume/heavy weight, high volume moderate to heavy weight, pyramiding of various styles, adding negatives, super slow reps heavy and/or light, basically an infinite different varieties of approach...whatever kept me from getting bored. Super-setting different groups in ever changing combos over time when possible gave me more efficient workouts. I would use both machines and free weights and utilize various combos of compound and isolation. I still utilize such variety.

At the age of 50 (it might have been a year or so earlier), I began reading Muscle Mag (no longer in circulation), and tried every technique I read about for 2 to 4 weeks at a time (as I described above). I made my biggest and fastest gains between age 50 and 55, including PR's in every muscle group (except quads...knee issues). Between the age of 35 and 50, I never changed my routine...and never got stronger or bigger after the first few months of training.

Again, at least for me, I have little doubt in my mind that variety was the key. (I did so with lots of whey and vitamins...no steroids). I think that variety is more important than the amount of reps and weight utilized, though they are absolutely a factor, too. I found the greatest strength gains came from the slow positive and negative approach...kind of like Mentzer's approach. Those, and centuries are the most brutal workouts for me.

I've just completed a several weeks break after a fairly long period of moderate to heavy weight at high volume, and now will reset to my personal beginning. I didn't really make much gains this last time, but my training was interrupted by transportation problems followed by the gym closing for a time from storm damage, so I don't want to blame the routine or age. I did pick up a few pounds (not presently dieting).

Anyway, after long breaks (over two weeks for me), I start with 1/5th of my max weight per muscle group, and do 48 reps for 1 set, 3 or 4 different exercises per group. After a few weeks I'll add 36 reps for 2 sets at 2/5 max weight, and when I get to 24 reps for 2 to 3 sets at 3/5 of max, I'll begin to once again start mixing things up. I have no plan as to what variety I'll do then, but after a break, and especially at age 56, the high rep/low weight routine to get back in the game seems to "rehab" my joints as I prepare to move into moderate and heavier varieties again.

Absolutely right IMO to go in with less weight and higher reps after a layoff. When I went back into the gym in a serious way last spring I went too heavy too quick and promptly ended up with a sore left shoulder and bicep which took months to get better. Fooled myself into thinking, hey, this isn't all that much and it wasn't, 20 f'n years ago. I'm 64 and have to be careful. Injuries, even slight ones at this stage of the game are stubborn. I'm just now moving from a more cardio based routine to weights again. Upside is I found some interesting new routines with the Wall Ball and Kettle bell. Downside is there are chicks lifting more than me. Getting old ain't for pussies.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

Downside is there are chicks lifting more than me.

 

[wjk]

At a certain point, you reach your genetic potential and stop getting stronger regardless of the tweaking, and just work on holding on to what you have...

I think I'm probably getting close to that point. I'm no longer able to top, or even match my PR's from a few years ago with one or two occasional exceptions. I think when I reach a point where mind over matter becomes matter over mind, I'll know it's time to back off. (Actually, I'm going to back off before that happens, otherwise it will be too late.)

 

[wjk]

...Injuries, even slight ones at this stage of the game are stubborn...

I was just telling a friend at the gym today (by the way, it's good to be back at it) that at my age, tendon injuries take forever to heal...like never!

I check those limits by starting all weight exercises with one, two, or three partials, increasing depth each rep until max acceptable, and doing so with each increase in weight to determine my range for that set (even on this ultra light routine I just started yesterday). Been doing that for many years and believe have prevented injuries by simply knowing I can't push a certain limit at a given time. They seem to act like a mini-warm up for that angle and weight, as well. I'm far more worried about tendon injuries than muscle injuries. I've never had a muscle injury that I can recall beyond being overly stiff on occasion.

 

[wjk]

Downside is there are chicks lifting more than me.

There could be an advantage to this scenario, especially in the bench press safety spotter dept. You could ask a hot chick to spot you...a particularly interesting situation if you are on the decline bench...however, a serious distraction might require the assist, furthering the potential embarrassment of being out-lifted by a 90lb model type. (There could also be a problem if your wife is at the gym with you.)

 

[Frederick Foresight]

Exercise as Medicine: The Dose-Response Relationship of Exercise:

http://www.bodybyscience.net/home.html/?page_id=221

The piece was written by the authors of Body By Science, so the views are somewhat unusual compared to conventional wisdom. And although I don't buy into the idea of only doing one set of 5 exercises only once a week, the article is thought-provoking. I think it's worth reading if for no other reason than to temper all the hoopla out there.

 

[wjk]

Exercise as Medicine: The Dose-Response Relationship of Exercise:

http://www.bodybyscience.net/home.html/?page_id=221

The piece was written by the authors of Body By Science, so the views are somewhat unusual compared to conventional wisdom. And although I don't buy into the idea of only doing one set of 5 exercises only once a week, the article is thought-provoking. I think it's worth reading if for no other reason than to temper all the hoopla out there.

Interesting read.