PTP just two exercises!?!

[Samurai Jack]

Well I finally found a copy of Pavel's Power to the People, and being the poor martial artist that I am, spent an hour and a half reading the darned thing in the bookstore. :cool:

Now perhaps because I was skimming, looking for the meat of the program I might have missed something, but it looked to me like Pavel was suggesting that the trainee only perform two sets of five rep stiff leg deadlifts and two sets of five rep one arm overhead presses per workout.

I like that since I train for intensity rather than volume, but after all the hub-bub I'd seen concerning volume training with PTP on this board I figured there'd be more to it. Did I miss something?

[IronFist]

He says only do it for Deadlift and Side Press.

Personally, I don't think side press is as awesome as everyone says it is.

When I do it, I do Squat, Bench, and Weighted Pullups. That covers every muscle group. Sometimes I switch it up and do DL, bench, and weighted pullups.

[FooFighter]

Monday-Wednesday_FRiday

I do two sets of 3-5 reps

1. Pistols with weights
2. Single arm push ups
3. Dead Lifts
4. Chin ups with weights
5. Saxon Press
6. Janda Sit Ups

Tues-Thurs-Sun

I do two sets of 1 sets of 5 (no rest between exercises)

1. Walking Lunges with weight
2. Single leg DL with Kettlebell
3. Bench
4. Reverse Pull ups using the Stability Ball
5. Body weight Shoulder Press in Pike position using the Ball
6. Dragon Flag
After this I usually do my yoga or flexibility training and light cardio using the treadmill, seated bike, or the precore machine if there is a pretty gurl next to it.

[Toby]

What's that got to do with this thread Foo? :)

Samurai, I used to do bench, squat, deadlift and weighted pullups. As I pushed my limits doing squat and DL in the same cycle became too tiring and I'd struggle with the ends of cycles. Now I do fortnightly cycles with bench, squat and weighted pullups cycles alternating with bench, DL and weighted pullups. Mon to Fri.

I also do supplementary stuff in between for stomach, forearms and general fitness (HIIT sprints and bike riding) as well as MA. The good thing about PTP is it doesn't hurt afterwards and the fatigue is very low. So I can do e.g. 350lb squat in the morning, ride my bike to uni an hour later and do sprints or MA in the afternoon with little built-up fatigue compared with a hypertrophic workout.

In answer to your question, Pavel advocates the two exercises because he considers those two to cover most of your body. Many people feel differently hence the slight variation in programs. We still stick to 2 sets of 4-6 reps, though. The idea is not to overdo it, though, so I wouldn't do e.g. 10 exercises in my PTP program each morning. As I said, 4 exercises for me was pushing it and I've since reduced it to 3. My 3 cover most of my body. The important thing is to pick compound exercises.

[abobo]

I've done squat, weighted pullups, and dips and I've done deadlift, bench, and weighted pullups. For the latter I didn't incorporate pullups until the third or fourth cycle.

The latter worked better for me.

[FooFighter]

Toby

My tread is example of PTP concepts. I am able to practice a vital
skill such as single arm push ups/pistols daily and increase in strength without overtraining. Unless my body building friends at the gym, I have broken all their rules while not getting drained, sore, or sick. Sometimes I do get sore, but I back off and go back again. My body building friends couldnt bench fives a week based on their methodology while I can. Other note, it is quite possible to Bench 10 times a week if you have unlimited hours or a power lifting professional using PTP.

[Ford Prefect]

IMO, the most important aspect of PTP is the cycling plan. Starting light with 2x5/day and slowly over the course of 2-3 weeks adding weight until you peak at your 5RM. Then dropping down to the starting weight + a little more and starting over again.

[Toby]

But Foo, you're not doing it right. The whole point is to train the neurological system to adapt to higher weights. To do this, you train the same exercise every day with gradual increases, not alternate two programs in one cycle. While that may work, it's not PTP.

[FooFighter]

Dear Toby:

There is no problem with my program and it works for me. There is no problem with my current cycle. I have just modified it to suit my temperament. I dont train to failure and I lift heavy and I rest a long arse time except the days I do one set. Instead of doing the same thing over and over again, I do the same function movement just in a different way. Besides doing one set is just GTG for me and gives me something to do on my flexibility and cardio days. Think outside the box.

[Samurai Jack]

Okay, thanks for the comments. I actually went back to the store and forked out the dough for the book. I'm interested in doing a few orthodox PTP cycles substituting dumbbell military press for one arm overhead presses.

I'd like to experiment with his "commando bear" thing after laying a good foundation with the first routine but he only gives two pages of the book to explaining the system. Basically it looks the same as a regular PTP only you do more sets like between 5 and twenty-five (!) for hypertrophy (yes some of us still wanna get big).

Pavel says you've gotta decrease frequency "somewhat" but he dosen't give any specifics which is too bad since he's so detail oriented with the rest of the book. Anyone care to point me in a direction?

[Toby]

Foo, you've got me all wrong. I'm not criticising your workout, I'm just saying it's not PTP. I'm sure it works for you, but you're supposed to train the exact same exercises each day, like I'm sure you know. E.g. I could switch out squat and deadlift every 2nd day, but I don't think it'd work for me. The exercises are similar, but I doubt I'd get the neurological carryover, which is the point of PTP. Anyway, like I said, not a criticism, just an observation.

[FooFighter]

Toby

The name of the game of PTP is MAX strength. You dont have to train the same exact exercises each day, Toby, on PTP. As long you practice the specific skill "regularly" you are still in realm of GTG and Max Strength. Moreover, "regularly practice" is pretty relative and it should be an open system. If want to follow PTP by the book and not adapt its principle to the larger picture than that is your choice. It is like the BIble, some are so caught up with the law that they forget the people are more important than the law which were made to serve them.

I practice the main specific skills for max strength three times a week; in between I need to also need to practice flexibility and cardio. The exercises I have chosen for those days are still done in Max strength/ PtP model. I do it for its tonic effect on my nervous system. Plus it gives me a sense of well being.

Toby, I am open for any criticism or observation. Thanks for your two cents.

[Toby]

That's interesting Foo. I was pretty sure it relied upon neurological training through repetition of specific exercises. I didn't realise you could switch exercises like that within a cycle. Anyway, as long as you're getting good results.

[Ford Prefect]

Toby,

PTP pretty much relies on neurological adaption through repitition. The step cycle is just to vary intensity so as to not to overtrain yourself. Basically how PTP works is to increase neurological activition through repition which strengthens neurological pathways used for that specific motor task. So you don't burn out, you alternate heavy weeks and light weeks. Pretty simple.

Once you have that figured out, you can make whatever adjustments suit you.

[Toby]

Yeah, I just thought it was repetition of e.g. a specific exercise at a time. Not that you could change exercises and still benefit from neurological adaption. I though changing exercises would be sufficient to disrupt the normal adaption process. So I thought I couldn't do 1 day squat, then 1 day DL, then 1 day squat, ... for a cycle.

[Ford Prefect]

You won't make gains as quickly in both lifts as if you focussed on just one, but it's certainly possible. In the old days of the AMEROSS training forum when Pavel was a contibutor there, he'd recommend that quite often.

[Samurai Jack]

Sorry to interupt everyone's debate, but I was hoping someone might be able to answer my earlier question:

For hypertrophy Pavel recommends using a PTP cycle but increasing the number of sets performed from the baseline two sets per workout per exercise, to between ten and twenty-five sets per exercise per workout.

Pavel states that you won't be able to maintain a five-day-a-week routine doing this though, so you should decrease the frequency.

He dosen't say by how much. Any ideas?

[Ford Prefect]

2-3 days per week

It's a basically the same concept of german volume training and optimized volume training.

[IronFist]

GVT = good for size, bad for strength. Some people actually lose strength while on GVT.

[Nick Forrer]

Question: how can a muscle get weaker as it gets larger?

Have i misunderstood?

As a muscle gets stronger it will get larger and vice versa, will it not?

Case in point: Every year they have a strongest man in the world contest where they drag trucks, carry boulders etc. and the last guy to win it was a polish guy (i forget his name) and this guy was HUGE and RIPPED. Not to mention the size of the other competitors.

I often see people say that hypertrophy and strength are two different things. Maybe thats partially true in terms of 1RM but in general terms I dont think so. Anyone got any sound arguments to the contrary?

[fa_jing]

Hi Nick. Ford Perfect had a great post on this, which I will quote:

Ford sez:
"As for muscle hypertrophy (growth) there are two types of hypertrophy: myofabrillar and sarcoplasmic.

Myofabrillar hypertrophy is a growth in the muscles contractile proteins/fibers themselves. The muscle actually gets denser.

Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is the growth in the amount of muscle sarcoplasm which is a jelly-like filler in between the contactile proteins from which the fibers extract their energy. Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is generally what is responsible for most muscle "growth" (ie getting "jacked")

FYI, there is a term called hyperplasia which refers to an increase in number of muscle fibers but it has been largely disproven.

Since you were asking about "growth", I'll concentrate on sarcoplasmic hypertrophy. Any hypertrophy is a result of the symbiotic relationship of intensity (as in % of your 1-rep max), rest time, and volume (amount of sets and reps). Since sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is a growth in the energy system in the muscle, it would make sense to target the energy system for the most growth.

This will lead to relatively low intensity, short rest, and moderate-high volume. The most obvious display of this is in the typical bodybuilder workout of 3 sets of 12 reps. 3 sets total is moderate volume, but if you condense rest periods to under a minute you will obviously be taxing the muscle's energy systems. Doing 12 reps per set will also cause you to use low intensity since not many people can lift a high % of their one rep max 12 times!

Obviously you can play around with this relationship of intensity, rest, and volume. If you raise the intensity, then you must raise the volume. I only say this because as intesnity goes higher, the amount of reps you can do goes lower. Say if you are only doing 4 reps of an exercise. That means that will now have to do 9 sets instead of 3 to get those same 36 reps.

This is why it seems like there are so many approaches to reach the same goal. On the surface, they look radically different, but underneath it all are the same basic principles of the Energetic Theory of Muscle Hypertrophy: Intensity Volume Rest"

Fa-Jing sezs: Both kinds of hypertrophy lead to increases in strength, but only sarcoplasmic hypertrophy leads to much increase in muscle size. An olympic weightlifter in one of the lower weight classes would concentrate on myofabrillar hypertrophy. A bodybuilder OTOH would concentrate on sarcoplasmic hypertrophy. A strong man competitor, with no/little concern about his weight, probably concentrates on both.

[Toby]

Nice post fa_jing.

Originally posted by Nick Forrer
... and this guy was HUGE and RIPPED. Not to mention the size of the other competitors.
These guys are so juiced up that they probably gain an inch on their bicep lifting a glass of milk ;).

[Nick Forrer]

Thanks for the repsonse fa jing

I have some questions though


Originally posted by fa_jing

As for muscle hypertrophy (growth) there are two types of hypertrophy: myofabrillar and sarcoplasmic.......... there is also a term called hyperplasia which refers to an increase in number of muscle fibers but it has been largely disproven.

How much evidence is there to support this theory. Any scientific studies you can link to? Or is it just the most plausible theory currently on offer. I remember there being some debate a while ago about which one accounted for muscular growth (hyperplasia or hypertrophy). Are the number of muscle fibres you have genetically predetermined? Do you grow any more between birth and adulthood?

Myofabrillar hypertrophy is a growth in the muscles contractile proteins/fibers themselves.

why wouldnt this make the whole muscle bigger?

Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is the growth in the amount of muscle sarcoplasm which is a jelly-like filler in between the contactile proteins from which the fibers extract their energy.

Okay. Its been a while since I was in to all this stuff (about seven years ago). However from what I remember- the basic unit of muscle contraction is the sarcomere. The sarcomere is made up of two protein filaments- myosin and actin. When a sarcomere is activated the mysion and actin slide towards one another- hence muscular ontraction. The energy for this is achieved through ATP- which is broken down into ADP and one phosphate thus releasing its energy. When this is done without oxygen present (anaerobically) lactic acid builds up as a by product.
Sarcomere activation also requires a chemical interaction between the electrolytes - namely sodium, potassium and calcium.
A lack of sodium is what causes muscular cramp. The electrolytes are stored in sarcoplasm. Hence an increase in the amount of sarcoplasm will result in an increase in the work rate of your muscles.

Is this right?

Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is generally what is responsible for most muscle "growth"

Again, are there any studies to confirm this?

Any hypertrophy is a result of the symbiotic relationship of intensity (as in % of your 1-rep max), rest time, and volume (amount of sets and reps).

Isnt another way to define intensity in terms of maximum effort i.e. if you can perform 10 reps of 100 kg but you only do 8 reps you are not performing at maximum intensity. Maximum intensity is training to failure. By momentarily attempting the impossible (the last rep of a set to failure) you are subjecting your body to the maximum stress possible and thus giving it the maximum stimulus for growth- since your body will try to compensate for the demands placed on it in that instant by increasing its work capacity, thereby ensuring that future demands of the same order of intensity will have less of an impact on its energy systems.

Since sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is a growth in the energy system in the muscle, it would make sense to target the energy system for the most growth......This will lead to relatively low intensity, short rest, and moderate-high volume.


Im not sure im convinced. Once you have subjected your body to the maximum stimulus possible (i.e. by training to failure-that is, by momentarily attempting the impossible) whats the point in doing more sets? All you are doing is making further inroads into your bodys recovery ability and thus incresing the amount of recovery time you will require while not giving it any more of a stimulus than you already have. Similarly by training at low intensity you are never momentarily attempting the impossible and thus never subjecting your body to a stress over and above that which it can comfortably handle. Consquently there is no compelling reason for it to overcompensate by increasing the size/strength of the muscle and thus better protect it from future threats to its homeostasis- just like how going out on a cloudy day, no matter how many times you do it, will not give you a sun tan because the intensity is insufficient. Of course this does depend on how you define intensity. I agree that continually perfoming 1RMS may not be optimal for hypertrophy. Personally I start at 6RMs and work my way up (however long that may take-weeks, months etc.) to 10. I then increase the weight so im back down to 6

[Ford Prefect]

How much evidence is there to support this theory. Any scientific studies you can link to? Or is it just the most plausible theory currently on offer. I remember there being some debate a while ago about which one accounted for muscular growth (hyperplasia or hypertrophy). Are the number of muscle fibres you have genetically predetermined? Do you grow any more between birth and adulthood?

There's quite a bit of eviodence to support this and more is coming with the advent of uninvasive scanning technologies. I don't know of any studies off the top of my head, but I do know of many books which touch upon and cite the studies:

Supertraining: Mel Siff
Science and Priactice of Strength Training: Vladamir Zatsiorsky
Power to the People: Pavel Tsatsouline

Most often, the studies citied above are from Medyedev who is a Soviet scientist. He first developed what is now known as "periodization".


why wouldnt this make the whole muscle bigger?

It would, but only very slightly. These are very small things we are talking about here and any growth is not very visible. The most common visual impact this will have is making the muscle appear denser.



Okay. Its been a while since I was in to all this stuff (about seven years ago). However from what I remember- the basic unit of muscle contraction is the sarcomere. The sarcomere ....

Is this right?

Pretty much. You missed a few details.


Again, are there any studies to confirm this?

Yes. The same as above. With the advent of modern medical technology there is more and more edvidence to support the Energetic Theory of Muscle Hypertrophy. Much evidence has come from post-mortum analysis of cross-sections of muscles in a variety of test subjects both human and animal.


Im not sure im convinced.

Well to each his own. You are also still measuring intensity by closeness to failure rather than percentage of your one-rep max (%1RM), which is the only real scientific way of measuring "intensity". Anything else like failure is just a perceptual thing that can change trainee to trainee, day-to-day depending on a number of varying factors.

By doing more than one-set to failure or close to it in a higher rep range (5+) you providing more stimulus for the muscle to grow. Not every fiber is fatigued in the first set of an activity. It's a safety mechanism built into the body. It won't be firing all available fibers at once. By pre-exhausting a number of fibers during a first set, your body will have to fire other fibers to compensate for the exhausted ones the next set. Etc etc.

[Ford Prefect]

BTW, I just did a google search on sarcoplasmic and myofabrillar hypertrophy and came back with numerous articles and studies citing the same phenomena we are discussing here. Take a peek.

[Suntzu]

i guess classes are paying off........ cuz i understood what was just being said in this thread...... now if i can just pass these finals......