Timestamps: 00:29 Mike's take on neutral neck, spine positioning, pelvic tilt, etc. 10:09 What's the biggest thing's Mike learned from the last gaining phase/offseason 20:19 Impact of travelling and different equipment 26:56 Is there a point in building a strength base for hypertrophy 42:01 Balancing recovery while participating in another sport 48:06 Mike explains overloading and lighter days in the context of a hypertrophy microcycle
I'm surprised Mike said there's no evidence for strength to get you bigger. I was under the impression that work in about the 3-5 rep range improves your ability to recruit more muscle fibers and increases force output. Logically, if you were stronger, you'd be able to progressively overload with more weight and get bigger
@@RobertWadlow292 This is also the experience of most of us that lift. Develop a strength base is still great advice for a new lifter. What Mike say's is also great for intermediates and advanced people Lift lighter and keep your joints healthy.
@@johnfurr5698 I like lighter weight for more "isolation" type exercises because I feel the muscle working better. Like for shrugs, I load up in the 12-20 RM zone otherwise I don't feel my traps contracting if I go heavier. Same approach for avoiding tendonitis and joint issues
Revive Stronger if it helps i actually had a request for a question to be answered, which i know you can discuss. How being a parent impacts bodybuilding as a hobby. I know the obvious answer is ‘negatively you dickhead 😂’ But personally since becoming a parent i went full on dadbod, and only then got in to lifting as a hobby and I’m now in the best shape of my life, which probably wouldn’t have happened if i hadn’t become a parent.
Sooo good. Also, that discussion around strength for muscle growth really came in a good time for me. I kinda sorta had a mini breakdown when I was looking at my lifts and trying to see significant increase in weight but didn't see one. I'm still kinda disappointed with my results thus far, but I've forgot to think about things like form and the influence of hitting depth on lifts, feeling your muscles more etc when seeing those numbers. I squated like 70 kilos once with an *almost* 90 degree depth, but now I go down as much as I can with 65 kilos. And that for itself is a huge thing, so thanks for that!
"Gettin stronger is a symptom of getting bigger" pure gold I wasted lots of time when i was younger buying into the strength equals size philosophy, when i dropped the weight and increased the volume I got much much bigger
Sure, but once you decided to switch to hypertrophy work you were able to use much higher weights because you were stronger.. I still think that for new lifters the best advice is develop a strength base. Even if that's just 4-6 months of starting strength. Plus it teaches you how to strain and push hard which helps when you up the rep ranges. Personally I do both concurrently. Strength day's were I focus on daily maxes and sets of 3-5 and volume day's were I drop the weight and do 305 sets of 10-12 reps. This seems to work well for me as in early intermediate.
@@johnfurr5698 not at all, i dropped my weights and got bigger. You dont need to train for low rep strength AT ALL if physique development is your goal. There is absolutely no need to train in the 3-5 rep range if you want to look good naked. You are wasting half of your workouts mate
Super relevant talk about management of multi sports. I've tried to combine high level basketball with several fitnessclasses AND bodybuilding..for two years now. I basically tried to eat two big meals in a row to use your analogy. I won't punish my nervous system like that again when the Corona times are over. I will say, to me basketball represents my favorite food - peanutbutter. It (at least in my mouth) tastes redicolously great, but it has a lot of calories and it only tastes like one thing. So it can't be like a main dish for me. On the other hand - fitness and bodybuilding might not represent such an incredible taste, but more like a low calorie dish where more variation is possible, so that I won't grow tired of the taste either. So for now, I find opting that option more sustainable and adding an occasional peanutbutter dessert when I want to. That way it's easier to control and I won't feel like puking like when I eat too much of it. And, imagine that you could actually watch someone eat peanutbutter and feel a lot of joy even though you won't get to eat it yourself? That's what I love when I watch basketball on TV .)
very intelligent guest...for a change...He is absolutely right you get big to get strong not strong to get big ...5 to 10 builds muscle progressively by tearing down the muscle and rebuilding ...!
One point that i think should be added to the discussion on the value of strength in hypertrophy is that when plateaus are reached and progress stalls in some of the bigger compound movements strength blocks could be used to train the nervous system and better innervate the muscle(s), meaning the muscle could be used more efficiently, which may allow for more overload in later mesos.
At the very end, when Mike discusses the 3 various back days and working through the 5-10, 10-20 and 20-30 ranges, if I understood correctly, he means this in just a special sort of recovery week of training, right? I ask because I thought that he's always preached (at least its stated in scientific principles of strength training; rp blog, etc.) that you want to stay closer to the 8-10 rep range to build muscle.
It's specificity and Scientific principles of strength training is an entirely different context. Best wait for the hypertrophy book that comes out next year. While the majority of your work is probably best held in the 8-12 rep range, other rep ranges offer some alternative strategies - Pascal
Regarding the question whether building a strength base, prior to hypertrophy training, is necessary or not. I always understood it didn't have to do with the objective of simply being able to use more weight to do the exercise, but rather as being able to activate more muscle fibers (thus overloading the muscle) due to increased motor units recruitment (which Mike says, in the interview, is important for hypertrophy). Of course, a higher neural efficiency will lead to a higher load being used at whatever rep range, to some extent. Whether such increased motor recruitment (for the purpose of hypertrophy) is more efficiently acquired with a strength focus or directly by training exclusively on a "hypertrophy" rep range (due to the importance of specificity), is something I don't know. But it would be interesting to hear his thoughts on this. Thanks for sharing these videos with us.
Very good point and it seems like experience strength athletes can recruit more motor units. Thing is though, the stronger you are, the less you probably can do (and need) which could possibly be detrimental because the risk is getting increasingly higher too. I think, it's probably good to have a solid base and probably detrimental to be extremely strong :) - Pascal
The moment I heard Mike say "idk if you do this, but when I have an idea, I imagine someone really smart ask me the most embarrassing and difficult questions" I knew why he's a doctor in the field. That's not only the way to be a really good scientist, but really difficult to imagine what the flaws of your idea could be, because you had the idea and didn't see the obvious flaws when constructing it. Like damn, if I was to make a story, I'd have enough trouble in just trying to make a character that's much different from myself and things I know and how I think.
The correct question then seems to be: will getting stronger in the 1-5 rep range carry over to 5-15 range? This is what needs to be investigated. If your main focus is hypertrophy I do think your focus should be the rep range Mike promotes, but if you just can't get stronger anymore at a certain rep range no matter what you do, then I think there could be some merit to doing a strength cycle and see what happens. Be your own scientist. The same in reverse: a powerlifter stalling might need to consider chasing hypertrophy for a while to see if the new growth improves his leverages and maybe this newly acquired mass can be maintained and eventually adapt to be neurally recruited in a lower rep range.
1. How do you gain lat width when suffering with Scapular winging? 2. It is easier to accumulate higher volume from cable machine exercises than free weights(DB). Does it actually mean better gains or does the resistance curve offered by the machine really plays a part in helping gain more muscle?
At 31:00 Mike seems to be disputing the idea ('dogma') that increasing weight (which makes you stronger) makes you bigger- rather, increasing volume (number of hard sets) makes you bigger. However, I'm confused by this. Virtually all scientific studies of muscle hypertrophy have their subjects increase the weight once they reach the top of the specified rep range, while keeping volume fixed. And they do indeed grow! This seems to contradict what Mike is suggesting here. Can you please clarify?
Thanks. It appears that the answer depends on how one defines 'volume'. Some define it as # of sets, others as sets x reps, others as 'volume-load' or sets x reps x load (as you defined it above). The way I look at it, in order to grow you need to do more and more mechanical work over time. That work can come in the form of increasing # of sets and/or load per set.
That all studies do this isn't correct. Cody Haun looked at exactly this, set progression without load increments and hypertrophy occurred. That is even more data that volume becomes more important once a certain threshold of intensity is met. - Pascal
Thanks for the reply Pascal. Please note that I didn't say *all* studies- but *virtually* all studies. Yes, I'm familiar with Cody's study- which suggests that muscle growth can be achieved by simply increasing volume, while keeping load fixed. But that doesn't mean that increasing volume is the main or only requirement. Numerous studies, by Brad and others, show that muscle hypertrophy can occur by increasing load, while keeping the number of sets fixed. So volume is not necessarily the 'main driver' of hypertrophy. Incidentally, there seems to be a debate going on as to whether the growth seen with increasing volume is largely due to water retention or sarcoplasmic vs myofibrillar hypertrophy (as per the review at Stronger by Science). It appears that Cody Haun is examining this hypothesis in his current work...see preprint here: www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/596049v1.full
@@copernicus99 yeps and I find it quite an interesting subject when it comes to the type of hypertrophy and I could imagine, their may be something to it. If course you can progress via intensity/load progression, however, I'd assume that for purely physique and hypertrophic outcomes, at some point, it would yield to more diminishing returns and my assumption would be that if a certainty threshold is met, volume is more important. Of course, it could turn out that I'm completely wrong. What's clear though is that both are important and you can't have one without the other :)
Yes, I agree. Perhaps the most general guideline for building muscle would simply be to strive to do progressively more quality work in the gym over time. That increase in work could come in the form of more weight within a specified rep range or more sets, or both.
I think the problem with an anterior pelvic tilt is not the increased risk of back injurie, but depending on your anatomie an increased risk for hip problems like hip impingement.
If I'm in the middle of a meso cycle and can't get back to the same equipment for 2 weeks, should I start my mesocycle from where I left off when I get back?
@@Pler1978 Wow I made a spelling error. Wow. Yet, I am still doing actually something with my life. Yes, I am pursuing a scientific degree. And you? You hate on someones spelling error.
Perfect timing! I was just thinking about strength for hypertrophy which worked great until this year. After cutting I'm down to the same weight as last year but +50lbs on my squat, +30lbs on log clean and press and +80lbs on deadlift. I might be at the point where dedicated hypertrophy blocks are needed rather than riding the strength gains to extra size
Btw I assume you weren't curious, but you're right, Ryu Hayabusa is the protagonist of Ninja Gaiden, first on NES (8-bit nintendo in the 80's/90's), later in the xbox and playstation games. You actually knew approximately the character. Really good games, albeit hard.
What are your thoughts on comparing a double progression of sets and load vs reps and load? Example on Overhead Press: 2 sets 4 reps 3 sets 4 reps 4 sets 4 reps Add load 2 sets 4 reps VS 2 sets 10 reps 2 sets 11 reps 2 sets 12 reps Add load 2 sets 10 reps Which would result in better hypertrophy? Which would result in better strength gains?
@@AberrantArt more sets would most likely provide higher 1 rms simply because of the increased practice. If the volume is kept equivalent ie 4 x 8 vs 8 x 4 then hypertrophy would equivalent. The issue is that more sets is less time efficient than more reps. Because of this, you would have less time for accessory movements and there by less volume overall, leading to less potential for hypertrophy overall. If time is no issue then you can hit your mrv using higher sets and lower reps no problem, but most of us dont have that luxury.
@@grizzlymanverneteil4443 I agree. I think there might be a small difference with intensity as well. Imagine 8 sets of 4 compared to 4 sets of 8. Using the same weight on the bar would be less intensity because of the rest time between all the sets. In summary, I think there is a difference, mainly intensity when volume and weight on the bar is equated. As an extreme example, compare 1 set of 20 reps to 4 sets of 5 reps.
Is maintenabce phases necessary (5-10 rep, 6-8 sets) maint kcal) needed on diets? Since the volume is never getting as high as on kcal surplus, is it needed to reduce the volume training fatigue? Say you start the diet, cycle through mev mrv, rinse repeat. Then do a metabolit phase. After this, change all excersises go through mev mrv, rinse repeat again. Finnish of the diet by starting a metabolite phase on maint or slighty kcal surplus to end the diet and prime for gaining.
How can you explain someone who is consistently making strength gains in rep ranges between 8 all the way up to 30 reps. Have done high volume, low volume etc. Diet is dialed in. Gaining wait. Sleeping. Etc. But actual measurable hypertrophy isn’t taking place? Is it possible to recover from a strength perspective but not from a hypertrophy one? I personally can make very consistent strength gains. Adding reps and then weight, but no measurable hypertrophy takes place. I’m an intermediate lifter. Definitely have plenty of room to grow for sure. Especially when comparing lagging body parts.
I was formerly a Dr. Mike Hater; until recently he'd never really "walked the walk" in terms of actually demonstrating that the contrarian things he's been claiming could produce good results. He hadn't exactly shown up in great shape in his first show, either. Now, however, he's really looking like he could easily be a competitive 212 ifbb pro these days however. I'm excited to hear his thoughts on this persistent but vague notion of a "strength base for hypertrophy".
#SQUAAAAAAAD 🔥! I’ve been wondering who the “rather large man who you know we love to discuss delayed muscle growth, rushing gaining phases, and much more” was, as Ryan said in the newsletter! I was thinking about dr Mike (Israetel), but he would’ve been discribed as “a fucking HUGE man” 😂 Edit: okay, Ryan please, Dr Mike isn’t a “rather big” man 😂 hahaha, have you seen the size of his legs?!!! 😱 It’s insane! 💪 Second edit: My physio says I have extreme lordosis.. Is looking up still safe for me..? 🤷♂️
@@norbertmalecki4774 he mentions "special sport supplements" from time to time in several podcasts. but yeah you can hear it here as well if you pay attention ;) also the dude weighs between 210lbs - 250lbs ish. and always with visible abs
That tan is not Natty! Caught! Check out golden era bookworm channel, so many old school body builders doing insane lifts. 400lb over head tricep pull overs!? As I remember from Dr yessis interview with Dr israetel, body building and sports science has barely changed in the last 40 years. These golden era magazines and publications are for sale and also proves body building might of been more practical and functional than compared to today.
@@ReviveStronger yeah I was looking at golden era stuff and even silver era, bronze era, body building and they were doing more compound movements even over head presses from a kneeling position, keeping the body tricked, and a lot of those guys have such amazing work out routines. Even from the 1940s those guys look like they barely lift but are jaaaacked and thickkkk. There's a whole list of body builders and even Bruce Lee info about exact training, his isometrics, bodybuilding, his obsession with forearms and pullups. He actually didn't do any isolated back work. This info is hard to come by because this guy had all these 1940s-1980s+ body building magazines and articles hidden away. :) Channel was called golden era bookworm
Because, if you use your head, you can decipher what is relevant to only drug users versus what is relevant to all lifters. Mike gaining a bunch of muscle on his last mesocycle while already being jacked... not applicable if you're not using drugs and are that size. Lordotic back while squatting... applicable to all of us. You can't simply deny advice because one uses steroids. You have to understand if the drugs play a specific role in the statement/claim/situation.
Agree with Soulless. Ones personal decisions don't play a role in scientific facts and objective observations. If your physics prof is taking all the cocaine in the world, is the stuff he's teaching automatically invalid? Every enhanced athlete has been natural before. In Mike's case, 12 years and continuing working with hundreds of natural athletes. - Pascal
If you regress in a movement's weight after rotating it back into your program, does this matter for hypertrophy? Or is it better since you have less weight to work with to fatigue the muscle? Thanks!
No, it's probably due to the specificity and technical efficiency. Once you had time to get used to it again you'll probably outperform your past self - Pascal
Timestamps:
00:29 Mike's take on neutral neck, spine positioning, pelvic tilt, etc.
10:09 What's the biggest thing's Mike learned from the last gaining phase/offseason
20:19 Impact of travelling and different equipment
26:56 Is there a point in building a strength base for hypertrophy
42:01 Balancing recovery while participating in another sport
48:06 Mike explains overloading and lighter days in the context of a hypertrophy microcycle
two weeks ago!? Steve, you're killing me!
@@gpness that's nothing. We've already recorded things months in advance ;)
- Pascal
I'm surprised Mike said there's no evidence for strength to get you bigger. I was under the impression that work in about the 3-5 rep range improves your ability to recruit more muscle fibers and increases force output. Logically, if you were stronger, you'd be able to progressively overload with more weight and get bigger
@@RobertWadlow292 This is also the experience of most of us that lift. Develop a strength base is still great advice for a new lifter. What Mike say's is also great for intermediates and advanced people Lift lighter and keep your joints healthy.
@@johnfurr5698 I like lighter weight for more "isolation" type exercises because I feel the muscle working better. Like for shrugs, I load up in the 12-20 RM zone otherwise I don't feel my traps contracting if I go heavier. Same approach for avoiding tendonitis and joint issues
Can this just be the Mike Israetel podcast ? I just want to listen to this man every week lol.
You can, RP+! Links in the description ;)
- Pascal
@@ReviveStronger yeah would love Mike on every week! you two are the best podcast team in the biz.
Tell Mike we want more sport scientists podcasts Pascal! Please!!
each time mike speak
i learn a ton of things
this guy is a god damn encyclopedia
That's how it's supposed to be!
- Pascal
As others have said, the steve/mike duo is always brilliant. Great episode
Fenderman, thanks a tonne ;)
- Pascal
Revive Stronger haha sorry pascal, i count yours and steves almost as a standard listen at this point ive heard so many 😂😂😂
@@fenderman21guitar haha, no worries, I'm used to "thanks so much Steve"...okay, hahaha
Revive Stronger if it helps i actually had a request for a question to be answered, which i know you can discuss.
How being a parent impacts bodybuilding as a hobby. I know the obvious answer is ‘negatively you dickhead 😂’
But personally since becoming a parent i went full on dadbod, and only then got in to lifting as a hobby and I’m now in the best shape of my life, which probably wouldn’t have happened if i hadn’t become a parent.
@@fenderman21guitar cool, will quickly throw it into the next improvement season (if I don't forget about it until then 😂😅)
Yoooo! Please keep pumping out the episodes with Mike!!
We most definitely will!
- Pascal
mike pulled a reverse michael jackson on us!
Ie. not molesting children?
- Pascal
@@ReviveStronger LOL that was evil pun
Mike is just 🙌🙌🙌. What keeps me coming back is the discussions between you two. Please keep them coming. Thanks
He's just the man!
- Pascal
Love Mike, he"s my go to fitness encyclopedia
He's the man!
- Pascal
Love listening to Mike!
It's always worth it!
- Pascal
I'm scared that I will someday finish every mike podcast there is and I won't know what to do
We got you covered ;)
- Pascal
Sooo good. Also, that discussion around strength for muscle growth really came in a good time for me. I kinda sorta had a mini breakdown when I was looking at my lifts and trying to see significant increase in weight but didn't see one. I'm still kinda disappointed with my results thus far, but I've forgot to think about things like form and the influence of hitting depth on lifts, feeling your muscles more etc when seeing those numbers. I squated like 70 kilos once with an *almost* 90 degree depth, but now I go down as much as I can with 65 kilos. And that for itself is a huge thing, so thanks for that!
Love hearing that! That sounds like progress to me
- Pascal
DR. MIKE ftw 💪🏼 Perfect timing before a Saturday “Pull Accessory”. Thanks as always, looking fantastic (per social media)
Hopefully it turned out to be a good session
- Pascal
Great episode with Joe Rogan, Steve
Matt McLeod The only time Joe hasn’t talked about DMT
Lolz^^
- Pascal
Revive Stronger 😉😂
I bet rogan would have you 2 on his podcast. Ever tried to get on it?
"Gettin stronger is a symptom of getting bigger" pure gold
I wasted lots of time when i was younger buying into the strength equals size philosophy, when i dropped the weight and increased the volume I got much much bigger
Mate, me too. I was into powerlifting and thought that only because I'm getting stronger I'm getting bigger as well and voila, still small
- Pascal
Sure, but once you decided to switch to hypertrophy work you were able to use much higher weights because you were stronger..
I still think that for new lifters the best advice is develop a strength base. Even if that's just 4-6 months of starting strength. Plus it teaches you how to strain and push hard which helps when you up the rep ranges.
Personally I do both concurrently. Strength day's were I focus on daily maxes and sets of 3-5 and volume day's were I drop the weight and do 305 sets of 10-12 reps. This seems to work well for me as in early intermediate.
@@johnfurr5698 not at all, i dropped my weights and got bigger.
You dont need to train for low rep strength AT ALL if physique development is your goal.
There is absolutely no need to train in the 3-5 rep range if you want to look good naked. You are wasting half of your workouts mate
i enjoy listening to Mike for some reason ..
some reason?! ;P
- Pascal
I studied under him in university. He has a phenomenal way of keeping your attention.
This channel needs to blow up! I'm shocked that your sub count is so low (no offence). Your time will come dude keep up the great work
None taken and I appreciate the compliment, please share with anyone who might like it :) - Steve
Yasss been waiting for Mike to comeback for another podcast
You can always count on us
- Pascal
Great stuff and loved the explanation of the strength to hypertrophy rep range
Glad to hear that you've enjoyed it!
- Pascal
I LOVE MIKE!
Mate, me too!
- Pascal
Seeing Dr Mike on my TH-cam newfeed...Instant like!
That's the way!
- Pascal
Super relevant talk about management of multi sports. I've tried to combine high level basketball with several fitnessclasses AND bodybuilding..for two years now. I basically tried to eat two big meals in a row to use your analogy. I won't punish my nervous system like that again when the Corona times are over. I will say, to me basketball represents my favorite food - peanutbutter. It (at least in my mouth) tastes redicolously great, but it has a lot of calories and it only tastes like one thing. So it can't be like a main dish for me. On the other hand - fitness and bodybuilding might not represent such an incredible taste, but more like a low calorie dish where more variation is possible, so that I won't grow tired of the taste either. So for now, I find opting that option more sustainable and adding an occasional peanutbutter dessert when I want to. That way it's easier to control and I won't feel like puking like when I eat too much of it. And, imagine that you could actually watch someone eat peanutbutter and feel a lot of joy even though you won't get to eat it yourself? That's what I love when I watch basketball on TV .)
very intelligent guest...for a change...He is absolutely right you get big to get strong not strong to get big ...5 to 10 builds muscle progressively by tearing down the muscle and rebuilding ...!
He absolutely is a very smart man
- Pascal
Loved the talk. And mike at low bf% looks great man, good for him!
Damn even the nostrils look ripped!
Keep it up, thanks for the great content! ✌️
I saw him in person and he did a fantastic job with this cut!
- Pascal
This was a real good one
Cheers Mike!
- Pascal
So awesome to hear up close how you got so ripped, veiny, and lean!
Happy you've enjoyed it
- Pascal
Mike literally looks 10 years younger. wtf
Yeah the average person prob doesn't appreciate how many years extra weight can add to how you look!
He's Benjamin Button
- Pascal
His head became so small during his cut :DD As always thanks you two!!
Haha, gotta lose the fat from everwhere ;P
- Pascal
One point that i think should be added to the discussion on the value of strength in hypertrophy is that when plateaus are reached and progress stalls in some of the bigger compound movements strength blocks could be used to train the nervous system and better innervate the muscle(s), meaning the muscle could be used more efficiently, which may allow for more overload in later mesos.
Yeah, can definitely be incorporated
- Pascal
Has Mike ever talked with Quinn henoch about a lordotic back and tendency to result in hip impingement in some people?
I honestly don't know. Sorry
- Pascal
At the very end, when Mike discusses the 3 various back days and working through the 5-10, 10-20 and 20-30 ranges, if I understood correctly, he means this in just a special sort of recovery week of training, right? I ask because I thought that he's always preached (at least its stated in scientific principles of strength training; rp blog, etc.) that you want to stay closer to the 8-10 rep range to build muscle.
It's specificity and Scientific principles of strength training is an entirely different context. Best wait for the hypertrophy book that comes out next year. While the majority of your work is probably best held in the 8-12 rep range, other rep ranges offer some alternative strategies
- Pascal
Regarding the question whether building a strength base, prior to hypertrophy training, is necessary or not.
I always understood it didn't have to do with the objective of simply being able to use more weight to do the exercise, but rather as being able to activate more muscle fibers (thus overloading the muscle) due to increased motor units recruitment (which Mike says, in the interview, is important for hypertrophy).
Of course, a higher neural efficiency will lead to a higher load being used at whatever rep range, to some extent.
Whether such increased motor recruitment (for the purpose of hypertrophy) is more efficiently acquired with a strength focus or directly by training exclusively on a "hypertrophy" rep range (due to the importance of specificity), is something I don't know.
But it would be interesting to hear his thoughts on this.
Thanks for sharing these videos with us.
Very good point and it seems like experience strength athletes can recruit more motor units. Thing is though, the stronger you are, the less you probably can do (and need) which could possibly be detrimental because the risk is getting increasingly higher too.
I think, it's probably good to have a solid base and probably detrimental to be extremely strong :)
- Pascal
The moment I heard Mike say "idk if you do this, but when I have an idea, I imagine someone really smart ask me the most embarrassing and difficult questions" I knew why he's a doctor in the field. That's not only the way to be a really good scientist, but really difficult to imagine what the flaws of your idea could be, because you had the idea and didn't see the obvious flaws when constructing it. Like damn, if I was to make a story, I'd have enough trouble in just trying to make a character that's much different from myself and things I know and how I think.
Thanks for sharing this, this was great indeed!
- Coach Jess
I need more in depth Pizza to Cake ratio discussions
We'll make that happen!
- Pascal
The correct question then seems to be: will getting stronger in the 1-5 rep range carry over to 5-15 range? This is what needs to be investigated. If your main focus is hypertrophy I do think your focus should be the rep range Mike promotes, but if you just can't get stronger anymore at a certain rep range no matter what you do, then I think there could be some merit to doing a strength cycle and see what happens. Be your own scientist. The same in reverse: a powerlifter stalling might need to consider chasing hypertrophy for a while to see if the new growth improves his leverages and maybe this newly acquired mass can be maintained and eventually adapt to be neurally recruited in a lower rep range.
1. How do you gain lat width when suffering with Scapular winging?
2. It is easier to accumulate higher volume from cable machine exercises than free weights(DB). Does it actually mean better gains or does the resistance curve offered by the machine really plays a part in helping gain more muscle?
1. training back and fixing it
2. No, I wouldn't think it would be beneficial. However, both can be pulled off...probably
- Pascal
Mike has evolved into a rare shiny pokemon.
Better catch 'em now!
- Pascal
He's an orange now
At 31:00 Mike seems to be disputing the idea ('dogma') that increasing weight (which makes you stronger) makes you bigger- rather, increasing volume (number of hard sets) makes you bigger. However, I'm confused by this. Virtually all scientific studies of muscle hypertrophy have their subjects increase the weight once they reach the top of the specified rep range, while keeping volume fixed. And they do indeed grow! This seems to contradict what Mike is suggesting here. Can you please clarify?
Thanks. It appears that the answer depends on how one defines 'volume'. Some define it as # of sets, others as sets x reps, others as 'volume-load' or sets x reps x load (as you defined it above). The way I look at it, in order to grow you need to do more and more mechanical work over time. That work can come in the form of increasing # of sets and/or load per set.
That all studies do this isn't correct. Cody Haun looked at exactly this, set progression without load increments and hypertrophy occurred.
That is even more data that volume becomes more important once a certain threshold of intensity is met.
- Pascal
Thanks for the reply Pascal. Please note that I didn't say *all* studies- but *virtually* all studies. Yes, I'm familiar with Cody's study- which suggests that muscle growth can be achieved by simply increasing volume, while keeping load fixed. But that doesn't mean that increasing volume is the main or only requirement. Numerous studies, by Brad and others, show that muscle hypertrophy can occur by increasing load, while keeping the number of sets fixed. So volume is not necessarily the 'main driver' of hypertrophy.
Incidentally, there seems to be a debate going on as to whether the growth seen with increasing volume is largely due to water retention or sarcoplasmic vs myofibrillar hypertrophy (as per the review at Stronger by Science). It appears that Cody Haun is examining this hypothesis in his current work...see preprint here: www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/596049v1.full
@@copernicus99 yeps and I find it quite an interesting subject when it comes to the type of hypertrophy and I could imagine, their may be something to it.
If course you can progress via intensity/load progression, however, I'd assume that for purely physique and hypertrophic outcomes, at some point, it would yield to more diminishing returns and my assumption would be that if a certainty threshold is met, volume is more important. Of course, it could turn out that I'm completely wrong. What's clear though is that both are important and you can't have one without the other :)
Yes, I agree. Perhaps the most general guideline for building muscle would simply be to strive to do progressively more quality work in the gym over time. That increase in work could come in the form of more weight within a specified rep range or more sets, or both.
I think the problem with an anterior pelvic tilt is not the increased risk of back injurie, but depending on your anatomie an increased risk for hip problems like hip impingement.
I think this can be a different beast in it for itself (Speaking from personal experience)
- Pascal
If I'm in the middle of a meso cycle and can't get back to the same equipment for 2 weeks, should I start my mesocycle from where I left off when I get back?
I think, you can probably work around it with other machines. It it's a one time thing, changing it up to similar movements should be fine
- Pascal
Do you variate in a 16 week cut with excersises? Or use the same and maintain strength on those?
@@Pler1978 Wow I made a spelling error. Wow. Yet, I am still doing actually something with my life. Yes, I am pursuing a scientific degree. And you? You hate on someones spelling error.
variate? u talk enjlishh?
You could but for 16 weeks, I'd just stick with the same
- Pascal
@@EmperorPenguinXRemas yikes.
Perfect timing! I was just thinking about strength for hypertrophy which worked great until this year. After cutting I'm down to the same weight as last year but +50lbs on my squat, +30lbs on log clean and press and +80lbs on deadlift.
I might be at the point where dedicated hypertrophy blocks are needed rather than riding the strength gains to extra size
i was there.....
Great to hear and congrats!
- Pascal
Btw I assume you weren't curious, but you're right, Ryu Hayabusa is the protagonist of Ninja Gaiden, first on NES (8-bit nintendo in the 80's/90's), later in the xbox and playstation games. You actually knew approximately the character. Really good games, albeit hard.
Thanks for sharing this :)
- Coach Jess
Just in time :)
Did Mike just competed? He looks very tanned..
Daniel Bazak I don’t think so, he was supposed to tho I believe
@@jakobwrenne4440 oh that's unfortunate, I'd love to see Dr. Mike on stage, it could be pretty dope lol
Daniel Bazak Yeah it would be awesome!
Yeah, something came up and he couldn't do the show. But he now knows that he can do it :)
- Pascal
thanks man cool
Thanks as usual :)
- Pascal
gang gang this shit finna b litt
It is!
- Pascal
What does mike use, or you Steve to measure body fat, LBM, and muscle mass?
I know that Mike is using Calipers but more to see how things are, not truly for bf%
- Pascal
'my favorite economist'
So vice versa though, building a muscular base FOR strength later on is the key
It will for sure help!
- Pascal
Mike looks like a space marine, I know there is a scale issue but we can fix that in photoshop
What are your thoughts on comparing a double progression of sets and load vs reps and load?
Example on Overhead Press:
2 sets 4 reps
3 sets 4 reps
4 sets 4 reps
Add load 2 sets 4 reps
VS
2 sets 10 reps
2 sets 11 reps
2 sets 12 reps
Add load 2 sets 10 reps
Which would result in better hypertrophy?
Which would result in better strength gains?
I use adding sets at lower rep ranges when training newer guys or my kids just to keep form in check. Surely my anecdote trumps all.
@@grizzlymanverneteil4443 thanks GrizzlyVerne
Aside from form avoiding form break down, do you see any other benefits or differences?
@@AberrantArt more sets would most likely provide higher 1 rms simply because of the increased practice. If the volume is kept equivalent ie 4 x 8 vs 8 x 4 then hypertrophy would equivalent. The issue is that more sets is less time efficient than more reps. Because of this, you would have less time for accessory movements and there by less volume overall, leading to less potential for hypertrophy overall. If time is no issue then you can hit your mrv using higher sets and lower reps no problem, but most of us dont have that luxury.
@@grizzlymanverneteil4443 I agree. I think there might be a small difference with intensity as well. Imagine 8 sets of 4 compared to 4 sets of 8. Using the same weight on the bar would be less intensity because of the rest time between all the sets.
In summary, I think there is a difference, mainly intensity when volume and weight on the bar is equated. As an extreme example, compare 1 set of 20 reps to 4 sets of 5 reps.
@@AberrantArt right, variations in intensity will change some results, but volume is the primary driver of hypertrophy, not intensity.
Please ask Mike next time his thoughts on the use of neurotyping for training?
I have the feeling that I know the answer already
- Pascal
@@ReviveStronger and that would be?
@@Mikaeel84 same as with the validity of genetic testing
@@ReviveStronger well if I knew what he thought about everything already I wouldn't be asking you to ask him for me. Thanks😒
@@Mikaeel84 true. If you want to submit questions, please join our Facebook group. There we're asking every once in a while for questions
Is maintenabce phases necessary (5-10 rep, 6-8 sets) maint kcal) needed on diets? Since the volume is never getting as high as on kcal surplus, is it needed to reduce the volume training fatigue?
Say you start the diet, cycle through mev mrv, rinse repeat.
Then do a metabolit phase.
After this, change all excersises go through mev mrv, rinse repeat again.
Finnish of the diet by starting a metabolite phase on maint or slighty kcal surplus to end the diet and prime for gaining.
I wouldn't do them during a deficit but implementing strategic breaks.
- Pascal
How can you explain someone who is consistently making strength gains in rep ranges between 8 all the way up to 30 reps. Have done high volume, low volume etc. Diet is dialed in. Gaining wait. Sleeping. Etc. But actual measurable hypertrophy isn’t taking place? Is it possible to recover from a strength perspective but not from a hypertrophy one? I personally can make very consistent strength gains. Adding reps and then weight, but no measurable hypertrophy takes place. I’m an intermediate lifter. Definitely have plenty of room to grow for sure. Especially when comparing lagging body parts.
What makes you think you aren't growing? Is nutrition dialed in? What about lifestyle, sleep, etc?
- Pascal
This tan really changes Mikes look haha
Someone’s been hitting the tanning beds!
Just sun exposure
- Pascal
Is this the recommendations now:
10-20 rep, mev-mrv, 10-25sets, 4-7week, 1 deload (do this meso 2 times), kcal surplus
15-30 rep+metabolite techniques, mev-mrv 20-40 sets, 3-4weeks, 1 deload (do this meso 1time), kcal surplus
5-10 rep, maint volume 6-8 sets, 3week 1 deload (do this meso 1 time), kcal maintenace
That seems solid. Only thing I wouldn't do is 20-40 sets on a metabolite when your previous mev-mrv was in the 10-25 set range ;)
- Pascal
💪💪❤️❤️‼️
Thanks!
- Coach Jess
I was formerly a Dr. Mike Hater; until recently he'd never really "walked the walk" in terms of actually demonstrating that the contrarian things he's been claiming could produce good results. He hadn't exactly shown up in great shape in his first show, either. Now, however, he's really looking like he could easily be a competitive 212 ifbb pro these days however. I'm excited to hear his thoughts on this persistent but vague notion of a "strength base for hypertrophy".
Big props to you to give him a chance and not be stuck in your hate. Honestly, respect that!
- Pascal
Red.
imagine getting arm bared by Dr Mike.... this is why id never do jujitsu.
I don't know if I'd like that or not ;)
- Pascal
Kinky lol
it’s like dr mike refuses to acknowledge the rampant anabolic use in pro bodybuilders like that isn’t the main reason they are so big
I thought the same thing but I think he's comparing bb's on steroids to powerlifters on steroids. Such as Larry Wheels.
#SQUAAAAAAAD 🔥!
I’ve been wondering who the “rather large man who you know we love to discuss delayed muscle growth, rushing gaining phases, and much more” was, as Ryan said in the newsletter! I was thinking about dr Mike (Israetel), but he would’ve been discribed as “a fucking HUGE man” 😂
Edit: okay, Ryan please, Dr Mike isn’t a “rather big” man 😂 hahaha, have you seen the size of his legs?!!! 😱 It’s insane! 💪
Second edit: My physio says I have extreme lordosis.. Is looking up still safe for me..? 🤷♂️
#SQUAAAAAAAAD
@Eugene Stoner - That’s the plan! 💪
@Ferrari - FCK YES! 👊
Squad dude needs to take a deload week from revive stronger podcast. Atleast that's what pascal told me!😂
Squad Gainz!!!
- Pascal
What, deload from the podcast?! Fuck no! ;)
- Pascal
Mike, your head looks like it belongs to a beach model in California - tan and lean 😎
Looking good!
- Pascal
Ayooooooo!
Aaaaaayo!
- Pascal
he looks like big ramy lol
Just with about 70lbs missing
- Pascal
Mike looking like a thicker Dwayne Johnson in this
Haha, rampage
- Pascal
31:50
Mike looking jacked and tan
He most certainly does!
- Pascal
Is Dr Mike training without anabolic drug use?
what do you think he means by "special training supplements"?
@@afunkinduck4856 Oh, he said that? I didn't hear the entire podcast yet.
@@norbertmalecki4774 he mentions "special sport supplements" from time to time in several podcasts. but yeah you can hear it here as well if you pay attention ;)
also the dude weighs between 210lbs - 250lbs ish. and always with visible abs
That tan is not Natty! Caught! Check out golden era bookworm channel, so many old school body builders doing insane lifts. 400lb over head tricep pull overs!? As I remember from Dr yessis interview with Dr israetel, body building and sports science has barely changed in the last 40 years. These golden era magazines and publications are for sale and also proves body building might of been more practical and functional than compared to today.
Practical and Functional? For bodybuilding?
- Pascal
@@ReviveStronger yeah I was looking at golden era stuff and even silver era, bronze era, body building and they were doing more compound movements even over head presses from a kneeling position, keeping the body tricked, and a lot of those guys have such amazing work out routines. Even from the 1940s those guys look like they barely lift but are jaaaacked and thickkkk.
There's a whole list of body builders and even Bruce Lee info about exact training, his isometrics, bodybuilding, his obsession with forearms and pullups. He actually didn't do any isolated back work. This info is hard to come by because this guy had all these 1940s-1980s+ body building magazines and articles hidden away. :)
Channel was called golden era bookworm
I guess Jason Blaha was lying to us all this time. :(
who
@@sugarlife485 The man who founded the debunked axiom that "strength and size training go hand in hand."
@@ProphetFear size and strngth go hand in hand thats more like it
mike israetel is not taking into account that pro bodybuilding is all gear use and genetics and that none of them know how to train
I know that he very well does take that into account. While these play a major role, it's definitely not the only thing.
- Pascal
Why take advice from a drug user
i used to hate this fuckin druggy but he is actually correct in a bunch of shit plus hes funny...let him live
Because, if you use your head, you can decipher what is relevant to only drug users versus what is relevant to all lifters. Mike gaining a bunch of muscle on his last mesocycle while already being jacked... not applicable if you're not using drugs and are that size. Lordotic back while squatting... applicable to all of us. You can't simply deny advice because one uses steroids. You have to understand if the drugs play a specific role in the statement/claim/situation.
Agree with Soulless. Ones personal decisions don't play a role in scientific facts and objective observations.
If your physics prof is taking all the cocaine in the world, is the stuff he's teaching automatically invalid?
Every enhanced athlete has been natural before. In Mike's case, 12 years and continuing working with hundreds of natural athletes.
- Pascal
Real men don't juice
@@proteinman1981 xD
Dr. Mike looks like the Rock
If you regress in a movement's weight after rotating it back into your program, does this matter for hypertrophy? Or is it better since you have less weight to work with to fatigue the muscle?
Thanks!
No, it's probably due to the specificity and technical efficiency. Once you had time to get used to it again you'll probably outperform your past self
- Pascal