High Frequency Routine

**maverick** · 16-Apr-07, 10:10 AM

Thinking of giving this a shot. I think I'm finally mature enough for this type of program. last year, no way, I'd be adding all types of crap to it:

Bodybuilding.com - Mike Mahler - High Frequency Training: Avoid Overtraining!

I'm starting to get a little achy from the constant heavy training. Also, I wanted to start upping the frequency of my workouts to start on the path of burning more calories for the summer months (I've only been hitting about 2 weight sessions a week, minus grip). I think this would be just what I need and what I like, all good exercises, no filler. Plus, Mike Mahler has pretty much the exact body type that I'm looking for. Not that I think any one workout can create a body, but the cioncidence doesn't hurt.

I was thinking squats, bench press, pullups, and clean & jerk (never done it so i want to learn it). I'd be doing abs and grip on the weekend. Thoughts? Opinions? I know its a bit of reading, but its pretty interesting.

Mr VW · 16-Apr-07, 01:55 PM

It seems like a really interesting approach. Would you be starting with 3 days a week? Can you only pick 4 excercises? I think its really worth a try, maybe I'll try it after I finish my cycle of HST. Be sure to tell us how your body responds to this.

Khaine · 16-Apr-07, 02:07 PM

It's a very basic approach to a highly effective method... I like HFT... I never took it further than 4 full-body workouts tho, but for specialization, I was doing as many as 8 workouts in a given week... It works, if it's somewhat intelligently designed...

You could take a look at some of Waterbury's stuff if you want to get into HIGH frequency training, but it requires that you have the time to hit the gym often and also takes some 'breaking in', as it's difficult to go from 2 to 6 full-body workouts outright...

**maverick** · 17-Apr-07, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr VW

It seems like a really interesting approach. Would you be starting with 3 days a week? Can you only pick 4 excercises? I think its really worth a try, maybe I'll try it after I finish my cycle of HST. Be sure to tell us how your body responds to this.

I just started a new journal centered around it.

**maverick** · 17-Apr-07, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Khaine

You could take a look at some of Waterbury's stuff if you want to get into HIGH frequency training, but it requires that you have the time to hit the gym often and also takes some 'breaking in', as it's difficult to go from 2 to 6 full-body workouts outright...

Thanks for the tip. I've been reading through his HFT handbook. Its funny, a few changes and all the sudden its a hypertrophy program instead of strength "skill" training.

17-Apr-07, 05:06 PM

There seems to be a HUGE difference in philosophies between Waterbury and Mahler.

Waterbury seems to be going up to 8 exercises of 3 sets vs Mahler going 4 exercises (max) at 3 sets. Or am I missing something?

Khaine · 17-Apr-07, 06:26 PM

Well, Waterbury cycles rep ranges and subsequently, has a higher overall volume... The highest volume week in the Mahler program is at 75 reps per bodypart (incidentally, the same as Starr's 5x5), whereas Waterbury programs can be double that... The rep/load alterations and exercise cycling of the latter prevent neural pathway burnout and CNS overload...

There are similarities too though... Like the focus on compund exercises, the progression plan and obviously, the frequency...

Having admittedly never tried the Mahler program, I can only make assumptions regarding its focus, but it appears more strength oriented, whereas Waterbury's programs are typically hypertrophy based...

18-Apr-07, 04:46 AM

Thanks for the explaination Khaine. After re-reading Waterburys several times I wonder if the natural athlete would make any progress on his program? i'm not familar with his training philosophy regarding 'enhancements'.

Khaine · 18-Apr-07, 05:11 AM

If I remember correctly, he won the 'training program of the year' award three years in a row over at t-nation, for ABBH, QD and P10 respectively... I'd interpret that as them working decently for natural trainees... Can't remember him taking a stance on steroids to be honest...

Personally, I've enjoyed Waterbury's programs... I never tried the one mentioned in the above article, but his philosophy has worked for me... I used AoW to get back in shape and P10 to break my arm plateau (way too early in terms of development, but they've been bothering me for years)... My QD experiment was cut short after two weeks, due to illness, and I intend to rerun that program when my schedule allows... I've yet to go through his more advanced HFT routines (well, P10 is pretty hardcore as far as volume goes, but it's still just a specialization program) and probably won't for a while, as I have a LOT of other stuff to try out...

There's also the matter of resonance... His philosophy just resonates with me personally, moreso than most other coaches... I think it's important to find a training philosophy that appeals to you, so you can work from a template and set up your training on your own, rather than 'program hop' your whole life... That said, I'm still experimenting with other programs...

[/rambling]

**maverick** · 18-Apr-07, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Khaine

There's also the matter of resonance... His philosophy just resonates with me personally, moreso than most other coaches... I think it's important to find a training philosophy that appeals to you, so you can work from a template and set up your training on your own, rather than 'program hop' your whole life... That said, I'm still experimenting with other programs...

I think thats a great point to mention. It's just like I say with diet, pick healthy foods you like or there's no way you are going to stay consistent. Same thing goes for training, pick programs/trainers/coaches you like or, you know the rest.

BTW, I thought the same thing too Ironman about Waterbury's schedules for the natural lifter. I guess there's an assumption though that at regulated intensity levels, over time, you can adjust to the increased volume. Perhaps its something I'll give a shot once my workload capacity is increased from the Mahler routine.

18-Apr-07, 09:02 PM

Part of the reason I asked was a_welch and I were talking about the Velocity Diet on t-nation and he thought it was suited for juicers rather than naturals. I add to that my opinion that coaches who are not into enhancements tend to bring that out at some point in their writings, while those who accept it as part of the business tend to keep quiet about the subject and have no opinion.

And I could very well be wrong on that assumption. I've read some of Waterburys writings but not nearly enough to make a claim of knowing his thought patterns on this subject.

Khaine · 19-Apr-07, 05:07 AM

You know, come to think of it, I can remember it coming up in one of his HFT threads, as he used Cirque de Soleil performers as an example of high frequency users... When confronted with the fact that most Cirque performers were probably juicing, he said they were only an example, and that the program was intended for natural trainees... I believe this was his P10 article...

I dunno, I've tried some high volume programs in my life, and I get the sneaking feeling that none of them come close to the volume of a 'juicer program'... 150 reps per week is nothing special on a spec program and considering other factors (varied rep ranges, exercises, never going to failure, building up work capacity), it never occurred to me as 'juicer volume'... And, more importantly, none of them FELT excessive to me... I don't know tho, I could just respond well to volume, although my GVT experience hardly reflects that...

As for the V-Diet, well... It's looks nuts... I've toyed around with the idea, if for nothing else, then to see if I can finish it as an exercise in perseverence, but it's definitely not for everybody... I won't take more of a stance on that until I've actually done it tho...

**maverick** · 19-Apr-07, 08:56 AM

Yeah, that diet looks simple and brutal. Anyone ever done it, successfully or otherwise? I like food too much, I don't know that I would survive it.

20-Apr-07, 04:40 AM

Okay, Waterbury's could be reasonable, its only 150 reps per week? I didn't do the math and make a count. The 4 exercises per day seems a little too light to me on the Mahler protocol. 20 reps for 5 days? mmmmmmmmm

As to the V-diet - I'm trying it now. Been on it 10 days and have lost 11 pounds of fat and muscle. Not sure if I am going to get through the weekend on it either, and that is only because I bought one flavor of protein. I'm finding I'm dreading drinking the stuff now. I bought 5 pounds from True Protein (thanks for the discount code, mav) and should have purchased 5 different flavors. Didn't realize how quickly one flavor can go stale.

**maverick** · 20-Apr-07, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IronMan

Okay, Waterbury's could be reasonable, its only 150 reps per week? I didn't do the math and make a count. The 4 exercises per day seems a little too light to me on the Mahler protocol. 20 reps for 5 days? mmmmmmmmm

To start its 20 reps a day for 5 days (4 exercise x 5 reps x 1 set) but by the final part of the cycle, its 60 reps a day for 5 days (4 ex X 5 reps x 3 sets).

Quote:

Originally Posted by IronMan

(thanks for the discount code, mav)

No problem, enjoy. I have ALWAYS ordered the chocolate and nothing else and never got sick of it. But then again, I've never had more than 2 shakes a day. Keep us posted on your success and sanity with that V-Diet.