[RichieP]

I'm looking at reducing my lifting frequency and volume.

Have been lifting 10+ years, and ideally would like to minimize effort and time spent on this from now on and channel energy elsewhere (work, play, other more fun exercise). Want to maintain as much mass and strength as I can long-term.

I'm not massive but I have a "rugby center" -looking physique - decent muscle mass and athletic/powerful look.

Anyone have experienced reducing their lifting to absolute minimum for maintenance? What routine is OK long-term?

How little is it possible to do and still maintain strength and size - how few sets, and how infrequently?

I care more about mass than strength, although would like to retain both.

Current regime has been 3-6 sets per body part every 4-7 days, reps in the 7-12 range. Compound freeweights. I'm finding less and less joy in it though and need the energy for other pursuits.

How about one set of 12 reps in a few basic compounds once every 7-10 days? Enough? too little?

[RichieP]

Just found this -
https://bretcontreras.com/how-much-train...nd-muscle/

- He did one 30 min workout every 5 days. One set to failure, for 8 exercises. Lost no strength and size in four months.

Now that looks promising.

[Valentine]

Yes. Look into High Intensity Training:

I've been on a routine of ~3 hours a week for several years and made gains. If I wanted to go to maintenance probably ~1.5 hours a week would do it.

Science shows that amount of sets is irrelevant - we make similar gains whether it's 1, 2, etc even 15 sets.

Rep count per set also makes ~10% difference.

Quote:

How about one set of 12 reps in a few basic compounds once every 7-10 days? Enough? too little?

That's enough. I make gains on a two set per body part program, it more depends on relative intensity of the set than the amount of reps/sets/frequency.

[AboveAverageJoe]

I have always found body-weight exercises to be ideal for maintenance put on by years of lifting. Lifting weights just gets boring when you have doen it for so long. The bodyweight exercise is a good change.

[aeroektar]

(10-02-2016 03:27 PM)RichieP Wrote:  

Just found this -
https://bretcontreras.com/how-much-train...nd-muscle/

- He did one 30 min workout every 5 days. One set to failure, for 8 exercises. Lost no strength and size in four months.

Now that looks promising.

Just gave that a read and it looks good, heres the routine

Quote:

warm-up (5 minutes)

full squat – 45 x 5, 135 x 5, 225 x 3
bench press – 45 x 5, 135 x 5, 225 x 3

strength training portion (around 25 minutes) – do one superset and then rest around 3 minutes before doing the next superset

A1: full squat – one set to failure with 275 lbs (around 10 reps)
A2: bench press – one set to failure with 245 lbs (around 8 reps)
B1: deadlift – one set to failure with 405 lbs (around 10 reps)
B2: chin up – one set to failure with 70 lbs (around 3 reps)
C1: military press – one set to failure with 175 lbs (around 6 reps)
C2: one arm row – one set to failure with 160 lbs (around 10 reps)
D1: barbell walking lunge – one set to failure with 225 lbs (around 16 steps)
D2: hanging leg raise – one set to failure with bodyweight (around 30 reps)

I'd probably give something like that a try. Sometimes I get sick of the same thing over and over again, training with supersets like this is good change of pace and if you workout with enough intensity its brutal and rewarding. You could even throw in a third circuit if/when you feel like it or incorporate drop sets to increase intensity, the big thing is your still getting the main benefit of only working out once every 5 days.

[Kaizen]

I'm a skeptic when it comes to that super slow high intensity stuff.

I Wasted 6-9 months doing it.

Sounds amazing in theory. Small problem not a single guy doing it looks good. Even the dude giving that talk.

Went to a gym that specializes in this stuff. Knew there was a problem when the owner didnt look like he ever lifted.

I know the OP is interested in maintenance so it's possible, Im just very weary of this method for any purpose, based on my experience.

(10-02-2016 03:51 PM)Valentine Wrote:  

Yes. Look into High Intensity Training:

I've been on a routine of ~3 hours a week for several years and made gains. If I wanted to go to maintenance probably ~1.5 hours a week would do it.

Science shows that amount of sets is irrelevant - we make similar gains whether it's 1, 2, etc even 15 sets.

Rep count per set also makes ~10% difference.

Quote:

How about one set of 12 reps in a few basic compounds once every 7-10 days? Enough? too little?

That's enough. I make gains on a two set per body part program, it more depends on relative intensity of the set than the amount of reps/sets/frequency.

[Valentine]

(10-02-2016 05:58 PM)Kaizen Wrote:  

I'm a skeptic when it comes to that super slow high intensity stuff.

I Wasted 6-9 months doing it.

Sounds amazing in theory. Small problem not a single guy doing it looks good. Even the dude giving that talk.

Went to a gym that specializes in this stuff. Knew there was a problem when the owner didnt look like he ever lifted.

I know the OP is interested in maintenance so it's possible, Im just very weary of this method for any purpose, based on my experience.

Super Slow isn't the same as High Intensity Training, though a fair amount of HIT trainees also do SS.

If you look up HIT trainees there's tons of bodybuilders who train that way e.g. Mike Mentzer:

[Lagavulin]

Dorian Yates was also famous for only doing one working set per exercise. Although he would do a couple of warm up sets first and go all out on his working set.

I'm not sure how good an example a pro body builder is though as you have to factor in the steroids that Mentzer and Yates were undoubtedly taking.

I suspect that to maximise results from minimal training you would have to optimise the rest of your lifestyle - make sure your diet and nutrition is on point and get plenty of sleep.

[Kieran]

Going from the volume your currently doing to the routine you've suggested is a big reduction, and I would expect to see at least some detraining.

Like the poster a few posts above, I'm also skeptical of very low volume routines. Most studies I've read over the years, showed that more sets were superior to one, and I've personally always needed volume for both strength and size gains (and I'm a fairly typical hard gainer whom these low volume routines are supposedly great for). Also, any time I see beginners, the ones that hit it really hard with a load of movements end up bigger and stronger than those that follow lower volume programs such as SS (and that isn't even as low volume as some of these HIT routines).

In regards to Mentzer, he built his body with volume, and only later moved to HIT as far as I'm aware (and as mentioned there were large amounts of drugs involved too, as well as a lot of warm up sets which are still volume). It's also not at all unusual for bodybuilders to spread misinformation. Another point is that pretty much no trainers in S & C that I'm aware of, the field which pretty much leads the way in research in training, use a HIT approach with their athletes (not even during maintenance blocks).

[RichieP]

Nice, thanks guys. I will play around with this and see "how low I can go".

Yeah I'm also skeptical of pro BB'ers doing HIT, and I also believe the super-slow stuff is rubbish for gains - I intend to train at a normal speed.

Regardless, I like this idea of 1 set every 5-6 days. Maybe 2 sets for some exercises if I'm feeling energized.

If rep numbers start to slide a bit, I can go back to a couple of weeks of higher volume and they will come back.

I dont mind doing 4-6 week chunks of "maintenance" even if it slips a bit - the point is to just free up chunks of time, and more energy to invest elsewhere.

[BelyyTigr]

(10-02-2016 02:08 PM)RichieP Wrote:  

I'm looking at reducing my lifting frequency and volume.

Have been lifting 10+ years, and ideally would like to minimize effort and time spent on this from now on and channel energy elsewhere (work, play, other more fun exercise). Want to maintain as much mass and strength as I can long-term.

I'm not massive but I have a "rugby center" -looking physique - decent muscle mass and athletic/powerful look.

Anyone have experienced reducing their lifting to absolute minimum for maintenance? What routine is OK long-term?

How little is it possible to do and still maintain strength and size - how few sets, and how infrequently?

I care more about mass than strength, although would like to retain both.

Current regime has been 3-6 sets per body part every 4-7 days, reps in the 7-12 range. Compound freeweights. I'm finding less and less joy in it though and need the energy for other pursuits.

How about one set of 12 reps in a few basic compounds once every 7-10 days? Enough? too little?

I think its really difficult to give an ultra scientific answer because there are a fair few variables eg genetics, what else you are doing, what level of muscularity/defn you want.

My view is that for most of us we are being conditioned into vastly over training.
I was advised to do about 14/16 or so exercises, most of them 5 sets each. Over time it became far too much, given the intensity I was applying. I thought "oh why am I being lazy again" but then I realised that I was just overtraining and I should have listened to my body and instincts.

Look at some of the hardcore bodybuilders in history, some of whom didn't even feel any soreness after training. The industry WANTS us to overtrain, to sell more gym hours and more recovery supplements.

So u might want to factor that into your decision.
_________________
I now feel that once a week per body part is enough for good growth. Maybe even once every 8 days.

I've heard that a FORTNIGHTLY session on a body part will maintain mass. Perhaps thats 8 or 9 days for growth and the remainder days for muscle loss? On my experience that seems to make sense.

Perhaps the exception is if you want to be an elite bodybuilder (who'll prob use steroids anyway!)
In that case you aren't just doing "biceps" you are doing 3 or 4 different parts of the tricep.
That means you have to split your programme and do more regular workouts.

Also I think u need some sort of regularity with training eg get it into your "body clock". ANd get some cardio and flexibility work too.

Nowadays I don't just want bulk, I want martial arts ability. And that includes plyometric power, cardio and internal (traditional Chinese) forms of power. And I think u can do a hell of a lot with the weekly/fnightly system for muscle mass.

[RexImperator]

Chris from Good Looking Loser says he hardly lifts now since he injects TRT.

[RichieP]

Yeah definitely agree that most of us are probably overtraining.

Anyway I did a short and sharp workout today, just 2 sets per exercise... got through more lifts than usual, and had energy afterwards. Will see how this goes.

I think as long as I actually track reps, and make sure I'm doing the same /more reps per set on my first (and maybe only) set, then it's just quite unlikely I will lose anything much. The demand on the body is still just as high, just less volume. So if I get 2-3 workouts in a row with a decline in reps/weight, then I will change it up. But otherwise I will assume I am maintaining.

[Lagavulin]

(10-03-2016 12:37 PM)RichieP Wrote:  

Anyway I did a short and sharp workout today, just 2 sets per exercise... got through more lifts than usual, and had energy afterwards. Will see how this goes.

I do this sometimes when I'm pushed for time. I seem to be able to push through a workout quicker even when doing the same number of total sets using this method. You might do less sets per exercise but you can hit the body part from more angles, it's an enjoyable way to train.

Something else I'll do if I know I'm going to struggle to get into the gym as much as I'd like for a short period is do my chest workout at home. By doing 10-15 sets of various types of press up you can smash out a good workout in half an hour and get a great pump.

Of course for gaining and maintaining mass nothing beats heavy compound lifts but I think this takes a toll on the body as you age. Once you start to slow down, and pick up injuries you realise that you have to be smart about how you train.

Get a pull up bar and some resistance bands and do the odd workout at home but make sure you get your heavy lifting in frequently at the gym, mix it up but strike a balance. That maybe sounds a bit vague but I guess you have to try different things and see what works for you. My two cents.

[Truth Teller]

Mark Chaillet (powerlifter of the 1980s) had a very minimalistic routine:

Train two days per week:

Tuesday: Squat up to a maximum single (probably something like 90% of 1 RM).

Saturday: Bench press up to a maximum single (same as squat). Deadlift up to maximum single.

[AWright]

Some form of high intensity with compound movements would be the best. Three days a week, 30-45 minute workouts working up to max sets of 3 in a few compound exercises.

[SegaSaturn1994]

(10-03-2016 03:05 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  

Mark Chaillet (powerlifter of the 1980s) had a very minimalistic routine:

Train two days per week:

Tuesday: Squat up to a maximum single (probably something like 90% of 1 RM).

Saturday: Bench press up to a maximum single (same as squat). Deadlift up to maximum single.

This may be good for some athletes but inadequate for people who desire an impressive V-shaped physique.

[roberto]

@BelyyTigr- we don't use text speak here mate.

But thanks for the correct use of the word 'whom'.

Personally I have other things to be doing than lifting, but I know I can't get by without hitting the weights. I'm going to try a one set routine for a bit. Had a go last night and enjoyed it. Knowing that you won't have to do a particular exercise again makes you more inclined to push for total complete failure. If that's all I need to trigger a growth response, great. Less messing around adjusting the weights too, as you just do a few more reps if it's easy. We'll see how it goes long term.

[Truth Teller]

(10-04-2016 12:06 PM)SegaSaturn1994 Wrote:  

(10-03-2016 03:05 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  

Mark Chaillet (powerlifter of the 1980s) had a very minimalistic routine:

Train two days per week:

Tuesday: Squat up to a maximum single (probably something like 90% of 1 RM).

Saturday: Bench press up to a maximum single (same as squat). Deadlift up to maximum single.

This may be good for some athletes but inadequate for people who desire an impressive V-shaped physique.

Chaillet had a pretty damn good physique.



That being said, he was a powerlifter, not a bodybuilder.

[BelyyTigr]

(10-04-2016 12:21 PM)roberto Wrote:  

@BelyyTigr- we don't use text speak here mate.

Didn't know a "u" and a "defn." counted as full blown text speak here..

Bt whtevr np m8. L8ers - as some would say in London!

[Mjölnir]

^ Don't start shit man..

Richie P, you could maintain muscle mass with 1 workout every 5-7 days. But that workout would be longer..

Personally I would split into a upper body routine and a lower body routine.

Generally speaking if you keep your strenght you'll keep your muscles.

Example:

Workout A -

Bench Press 5x6

Overhead Press 3x10

Pull ups 5xF

Bent over rows(supinated grip) or Pendlay rows 3x6

Workout B -

Squat - 6x15-10-8-6-4-2 Increase weight at each set*

Deadlifts - 6x10-8-6-4-4-2 *

Calf raises - 5x15 (gotta keep them calves)

Just make sure you hit complete muscle fatigue at the end of each rep of the last set.

That's just example of routines I would enjoy doing that would take me 1 hour each time, keeping a 2 hour/week work volume. There are X possibilities of paths you could take and be able to maintain the muscle.

You don't really need much to keep muscle mass, there's no secret behind it. As long as you keep your diet on point.

And no, your arms won't get smaller.

[SegaSaturn1994]

(10-04-2016 12:24 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  

(10-04-2016 12:06 PM)SegaSaturn1994 Wrote:  

(10-03-2016 03:05 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  

Mark Chaillet (powerlifter of the 1980s) had a very minimalistic routine:

Train two days per week:

Tuesday: Squat up to a maximum single (probably something like 90% of 1 RM).

Saturday: Bench press up to a maximum single (same as squat). Deadlift up to maximum single.

This may be good for some athletes but inadequate for people who desire an impressive V-shaped physique.

Chaillet had a pretty damn good physique.



That being said, he was a powerlifter, not a bodybuilder.

That's fine but he was probably on steroids and had good genetics anyway. If he did bodybuilding, his body would have looked better and his spine would have aged slower. Deadlifts and squats are pretty risky.

It's not so much about the rep range or lifting heavy or light; it's just that powerlifting moves are tests of strength. They are not meant to target the whole body and they do not. Many powerlifter guys do also do accessory work that develops those muscles ignored by powerlifts so they can have complete and wholesome development as well.

[Truth Teller]

Don't know about genetics, but probably to steroids.

I don't think you realize how ridiculously muscular some powerlifters are. I don't care how many reps you do, if you can bench press 500 raw, you're going to have a big chest. If you can deadlift 700, you'll have a muscular back. If you can squat 600, you'll have legs.

With regard to the deadlift and squat, you're just wrong. They're risky if you do them incorrectly. They're safe if done with good form.

Assistance work varies among powerlifters. Strikeback is the guy to ask about it.

[SegaSaturn1994]

(10-05-2016 12:15 AM)Truth Teller Wrote:  

Don't know about genetics, but probably to steroids.

I don't think you realize how ridiculously muscular some powerlifters are. I don't care how many reps you do, if you can bench press 500 raw, you're going to have a big chest. If you can deadlift 700, you'll have a muscular back. If you can squat 600, you'll have legs.

With regard to the deadlift and squat, you're just wrong. They're risky if you do them incorrectly. They're safe if done with good form.

Assistance work varies among powerlifters. Strikeback is the guy to ask about it.

The vast majority of people do not have it in them to ever get close to those weights and the risks outweigh the benefits when it comes to gains.

Every time you hunch over to pick something up, you're straining your discs. Now imagine doing the same while picking up the heaviest weight you can master. Nobody does singles or goes to failure with good form; at least not a young red blooded guy; they will always hunch over because the strongest muscles take over and they do what they can to get the weight up. You literally cannot do deadlifts without putting your spine at risk unless you're lifting the weight off the rack or have disproportionate monkey arms. Front squats may be safer due to the neutrality of the spine but once again when you're standing on hard floor and balancing hundreds of pounds on your body, a little misalignment or slipping can cost you very dearly. Any employer who would require their employees to lift even 150 pounds (as a male) using the form required of the deadlift would be seen as highly irresponsible; deadlifts violate the teachings of physical ergonomics. All of this risk of injury and death can be avoided by using machines such as the back extension bench and concentrating on individual muscles using reasonable weights instead of hoping that one lift will develop them all. +

[Fortis]

Sega,

Unless you're getting paid to lift, there is no point in pulling your max. I have no dreams of a 700-pound deadlift, 500-pound squat and 500-pound bench. I am acquainted with a guy who runs a successful gym for a living and even he doesn't attempt the 500-pound bench. He mostly sticks around 400 and even I think that's pointless.

I've been deadlifting pretty consistently for 3 years and my back actually becomes weaker when I cut that lift out. I don't mean weaker as in lower numbers on other exercises, but I start to get back pain at work (I have a desk job.)

I've tried subbing in hyperextensions but it just isn't the same. Some dudes can get by on hypers, but I don't really see the risk in pulling 5x10 deads with light-medium weight. My spinal erectors just aren't the same without deadlifts. It might just be how I'm built.

I don't squat often because of a knee injury a month ago (got it while walking outside, not lifting) and do leg press instead and I see it in the way my legs look. They're smaller and that snarl of muscle above the knee is lacking.

I train mostly for aesthetics so I tend towards medium weight, so take anything I say with a grain of salt, but I've never been injured despite consistently deadlifting.