Take one week off every month

Well, I don’t think is that hard to explain, LV. When you are making gains, your penis is adapting to a stressor in a given way - growing. If you surpass the ability of the body (specifically, the penis), to adapt in a given way, your bodypart will try adapt differently: supposedly, becoming stronger; if this kind of adaptation can’t happens because work is, again, too high in intensity (or time), than you can have lose of gains and/or injuries.

When you are growing, you have the kind of adaptation you want; now, why do you want to expect to hit a plateau before deconditioning? When you become conscious of a plateau, a different kind of adaptation has gone for some weeks or even months, so we can refer to what ShyMpls said. On the adverse side, if gains are going on, your body is adapting the way you want; what happens if rest for a week?

You can lose a little of what you gained, but this will also be regained easily, because your penis is still in a ‘fresh state’, if it’s clear what I mean; if some of the work was too much when you was growing, it can also happens that in the week of rest you grow.

So, resuming, the logic is that if you rest before hitting a plateau you lose little, where if you expect to hit a plateau for resting, you lose a lot. Just that simple :)

About bodybuilders, I have to say that they don’t plan so rigorously their training for a very simple reason: drugs. There isn’t anymore any scientific way of training in bodybuilding, because everytime a stalling is encountered they just go augmenting doses or using another kind of drug.

But if one trains naturally, taking a week off after some weeks is the way to go. The basic model of weigthlifting training of Russians before the diffusion of steroids, for example, the Verhochansky pyramidal training, was a period of 6 weeks training, 2 weeks of total rest, and another two weeks of very light training to recall previous adaptation.

Old weigth trainers, and also old strongmen, always agreed on this principle: never touch your max in training, or you’ll plateau for a long time.

marinera,

Thank you for your reply. I’ll just write points so my reply is easier to read:

1. If work is too high in volume or intensity your body may either be (a) unable to adapt given the time for healing, nutrition, sleep, etc. (b) injured. Agreed, but we are discussing a break inserted in a routine that does not purposely overload fatigue (a) or cause injury (b). In both of these cases a break is reasonable obviously, but again, not what we are discussing.

2. In the first case, I do not hope to reach a plateau. If I reach one, I consider my program to be not optimal: ideally, I should develop a program that does not allow a plateau to begin - because plateaus waste time. In the second case, rest wastes time, and rest here = less gain. The negative effect of taking a break (regaining ‘easily’) is irrelevent because there is still no reason to take the break. We must first show a reason, and then way the positive and negative - and here there is no positive. Finally, again, the work should not be too much, otherwise you have overloaded fatigue, and that is (a) above and again something that I do not do, but may have its place is included purposely in a routine.

3. Your conclusion is logically correct if we assume what you assumed (that a plateau takes longer to recover from than maintenance deconditioning breaks). However, it is actually irrelevant to my question earlier: I am not stating that given deconditioning is valid, we should only wait until plateaus to condition. Rather, I am stating that I do not believe deconditioning is valid in and of itself - therefore the breaks are not relevant. Do you see what I mean?

Actually, natural bodybuilders are known to be even more rigorous in training. I am not sure if it is different in Europe, but in the US natural bodybuilders have less variables to deal with (competitive bodybuilders I mean) and usually end up being extremely rigorous in nutrition and training. This is well known, I’d refer you to long-time posters on forums such as DiamondDelts over at bodybuilding.com forums, or DoggCrap at Intense Muscle (who is an AAS user, but his routines are used by naturals also). This is simply well-known anyway.

Ah yes, that was a very old style of training. That has died out in the US heavily because more efficient methods have been discovered.

I am actually a powerlifter, not a bodybuilder, and therefore can comment heavily on the last point. What you are saying is true, with regard to all out lifts (deadlifts, bench press, squats), but absolutely false with regards to the exercises that we actually use (one legged squats, hack squats, floor presses, etc.) - we max out, just not to a 1 rep max. We do not train the real lifts, we train around them. All lifts in training must be totally exhaustive. The only people who don’t do this in powerlifting are Russians really…I’ve noticed they are still using older systems. Check out Westside Barbell’s system to learn more…you’ll see that despite not reaching a 1 rep max, they are totally exhaustive (recoverable fatigue is reached - and they do not over-fatigue in order to necessitate a break).

Anyway this discussion is irrelevant, I just brought it up as a comparison, sorry to sidetrack.

So basically what you’ve said is:

Given deconditioning is beneficial, it is preferable to take routine breaks from training instead of awaiting a plateau to take a longer break. I absolutely agree with you. However:

I do not see how deconditioning is beneficial. I explained my reasoning in my previous post and specified the assumed premise which needs to be refuted for deconditioning to make sense. Growth must be seperated from adaptation.

You are assuming that the cause of a plateau is reversed by stopping the stimulus. I do not think so (refer to previous post please). I do not see how this can be, deconditioning does not make sense unless you are overloading in stimuli intensity/volume and unable to recover (which is a completely separate matter, referred to as (a) above) or injured (b). If not, it doesn’t seem reasonable that simply stopping the stimuli and restarting it can cause a difference (again previous post).

Thank you for your reply and I look forward to understanding how you believe that deconditioning is reasonable, specifically, how gains are not irrevocably tied to adaptation, and how adaptation can be removed without gains being removed in a linear fashion.

By the way, I misunderstood your post. I thought you meant natural bodybuilders are less rigorous marinera. My apologies.

Westside Barbell members are using steroids or not?

"Below is an excerpt from a T-Nation interview with Louie Simmons(LS).

NM: What is your stance on the use of steroids?

LS: …… I've done anabolic steroids straight for the last 28 years.

NM: Do you cycle?

LS: No, I stay on. I don't believe in periodization in training, either. I use mostly anabolics like Equipoise and Laurabolin until it's time for a competition, and then I do the harder androgens. I do not take Anadrol. I've never had any problems. I know guys who take much more than I do, to the point where you can call it abuse, and they don't seem to have any problems, either. There\’s no possible way I can train the way I do without taking anabolics"

http://tnation. tmuscle.com/fre … ns_and_steroids

Still, WSB is based on changing the exercises they pull really heavy (that aren’t the competition exercises, anyway) every 3-5 weeks or so:

"You will, for the most part, pick an exercise and work your way up to a maximum effort single. This will be repeated for 3-5 weeks or until you can no longer set a personal record. Then you switch exercises. This stops you from getting burned out by using the sam exercises week after week and keeps you setting PRs (very good for motivation) and keeps you lifting weights that are at or above 90% without burning out after a few weeks.

http://www.deep squatter.com/st … deep/louie2.htm

And : were you do see ‘Natural competitive bodyduilders’? You do believe in Santa Claus also?

You could also be interested in the fact that those old Russian methods are the same WSB system is based on, and, also, Russians (or ex Russians) are very strong in powerlifting and weightlifting at the present days. Never heard of Boris Sheiko?

>>You are assuming that the cause of a plateau is reversed by stopping the stimulus. I do not think so (refer to previous post please).

Well, your previous post is very long and I can’t understand what your point is. Maybe writing things in a less complicated way would save some time to readers.

I think plateaus are caused by an excess of stimuli, in frequence and/or intensity; so, of course, ceasing the stimuli before the plateau is encountered will avoid stalling. This seems logical to me. What part you don’t understand, exactly?

1. I thought your mentioning of "strongmen" was irrelevant to the AAS issue. You will be hard pressed to find a competitive powerful who does not take AAS my friend.

2. Natural competitive bodybuilding is a well-known matter, and highly regulated: Natural Contests - Bikini, Physique, Figure, and Bodybuilding is an example of a natural league of competitions. There are no natural bodybuilders in the Arnold or Olympia, but there are secluded events for natural lifters.

Former USSR states have a large number of lifters.

Anyway this is irrelevant.

Please read my last post. Deconditioning makes sense IFF (if and only if) you can seperate gains from adaptation - if this is not clear, you decondition (sit around waiting), and you become less adapted to stimuli (stressor), and yet maintain some of your gains. This is what deconditioning means: size gains have a nonlinear relationship with adaptation, so that if you decondition, you lose more adaptation to stimuli (the plateau feeling) than you do gains.

If the relationship is linear, then deconditioning and coming back would mean that you would end up taking a step back and a step forward. If the relationship is nonlinear, then you can take one step back and two steps forward.

Do you understand what I mean?

Now in my last post (original one stating the deduction), I explained that ASSUMING that physical gains and adaptation cannot be separated (linear relationship, or almost), then deconditioning does not make sense. Please reread my post, it is quite rigorous, and tell me what you believe with regard to this.

Now given this major issue of the linear or nonlinear relationship between adaptation:

How exactly does deconditioning work? My whole conception of growth here must be wrong… I cannot see how the body would react in such a manner.

What deconditioning sort of means here is illustrated by this example (again, just an example, this sort of hypertrophy is different and I am not assuming collagen or smooth muscle react the same way):

The process of suiting a stimuli is as, for example, as you become stronger a lighter dumbell (15 lbs.) becomes easier to lift, you gain muscle, and eventually you can’t gain any more from it and need a heavier dumbell or different exercise.

Now the deconditioning theory is saying that your reaction should not be to use a different exercise, or even to pair up exersies to take benefits of co-dependent effects, or even that you simply increase intensity - they are saying you stop working out. Go home. Relax. Come back in 2 weeks and try to lift the 15 lb. dumbell, and you will now be able to gain.

I agree you might be able to, because you lost adaptation (got weaker). But didn’t you also lose most, if not all, of your muscle that you gained to be able to lift the 15 lb. dumbell? Even if you did not lose all of this, this seems that it will eventually be a dead end. Even if the relationship is non-linear, you will eventually not be able to gain any more from that 15 lb. db, no matter how many times you take breaks and go back to it.

Correct?

Also, your point was that you should not wait until you become unable to grow from that 15 lb. dumbell, but rather, you should take breaks in between - don’t reach the plateau, such that you gain and lose, gain and lose, etc.

I agree that your point seems logical, in COMPARISON to waiting for a plateau. But why is deconditioning optimal in the first place? How does this make sense? Grab a heavier dumbell, use a different exersize, or begin to use multiple exersizes simultaneously to derive codependent effects (clamp and pump =D).

That’s what I was saying. Strongmen always adviced to stay away from all-out efforts. Their motto was something like : "Stay fresh". Steroids changed all.

Free market was a well-known matter also, but it was a fraud also. I don’t think actually exists a large number of competitive BBs who don’t use at all drugs. You can have a different opinion, of course.

I already answered to this. You can separate gains from adaptation, because there is more than one kind of adaptation. When all kind of adaptations are impossibile because the stimuli is too much for intensity and/or frequence, you’ll have a regress and/or an injury. It seems to me that there isn’t a problem of logic, but a problem of opinions; you are assuming that your opinions are logical, where the opinions of those who differs are automatically dumb.

Dumb? No not at all. I actually asked you to explain because I wanted to understand the reasoning, in case I approach a plateau. I was not trying to convince you, quite the opposite. Your posts are always intelligent and very helpful - otherwise I wouldn’t have asked for help. You are also much more experienced than me with this specific topic, so I assumed you would know something that shows a flaw in my reasoning - as in “that’s not the way growth is occurring, adaptation is not directly related to gains, etc.”

I think the reasoning on both our sides is logical. That’s why I pointed to the premise. I think the major issue is that you believe that adaptation and gains have a nonlinear relationship. I guess this may be the case, maybe collagen or smooth-muscle hypertrophy is different than other bodily adaptation. It still seems odd to me, as if we are missing something… I think as long as you are not over-loading fatigue, carefully manipulating various stimuli simultaneously, and do not injur yourself, deconditioning is simply a step backward. If you over-loaded on fatigue, are isolating one stimulus, or are injured, then it clearly makes sense.

17ml, I have done exactly that. I never went more than 3 weeks to a month without taking off a week (or 2) and the only “decon break” I took was about this time last year for a month, only because I just stopped. It amazes me almost everyone else does a routine for months on end and then the complaints start. I can’t gain, I stopped growing, what am I doing wrong etc etc….

Look at bodybuilding, the pro’s train for weeks, then take time off to heal. Yet there are the gym rats who show up, barely move weight, go constantly and look the same small ass way they did a year ago. As Ronnie Colman said, everyone wants to be a bodybuilder, but ain’t no one want to move heavy ass weight!
17ml, I had hit a barrier with my overhead press 2 weeks ago. So, I took a week off. I went to the gym yesterday, after loading up on some protein, and hit 225lbs (x4 reps). Healing your pecker frequently, will help more than you think.

Suppose that you have repeteadly this experience: you are training, you are gaining strength/size, then, suddenly, progress cease; you insist, what happens?

When you know how things go, you think: maybe I am accumulating fatigue without knowing; so, it would be wise taking a rest before hitting a plateau.

Another way to avoid plateau could be changing techniques after some weeks. Unfortunately, the OP has tried such a number of different techniques at the same time that this can’t help that much. Beside that, changing techniques can help to overcome fatigue of CNS or specific muscular groups.

In PE, one is hitting the same tissues despite using different exercises, and the role of CNS is not relevant. So, other than switching from totally different things (for example from jelqing only to streching only), changing things has less potential benefit, I guess.

Of course there isn’t a linear relationship. Suppose you gain 1/2” doing 15 minutes of jelqs everyday; will you gain 1” doing 30 minutes?

I suspect, on the adverse, that the problem lies in this: you are supposing that stimuli and adaptation are the same thing. That’s not true: stimuli are the cause, adaptation is the (hoped) effect. Between cause and effect there is a delay. That’s why you can’t see when a plateau is coming.

Let’s add this: gains don’t come in a continous fashion, but in a discreet way; AKA, they come (most of times) in spurts. As a matter of fact, many report having a spurt of gains after taking a week or two off.

Ah that makes much more sense. I was waiting for a reply like this!

I’m not sure if the CNS is the main issue though. There is a lot of debate about grips/positions in BB’ing - I am of the camp that believes that minor changes in lifts can affect muscle groups differently (others believe for example that the chest is just one muscle - incline vs. decline is irrelvant on benching). I didn’t mean moving from say chest flys to benching, which is a CNS issue I think.

Okay so your argument about switching is really quite relevant. So we can’t switch that easily without affecting totally different things. But, we can still use different exercises simultaneously, which probably (assume) fatigue us in different ways, to decrease the intensity on each one…like using pumping in combination with clamping.

The major idea I have is that I feel that reaching a plateau is inefficient. We should try to devise programs that might cause less gains per space of time, but that do not accumulate fatigue. So I might, for example, trade in one of my daily clamping sets for pumping (remember our PM’s about codependent gains), thereby incurring less clamping fatigue over time and more fatigue of a different kind, which might affect the penis differently. Additionally, instead of taking a week off per month, I could take one off per week, probably saving some gains with similar effects.

Basically I’m saying that we should be able to devise systems that don’t halt. If they halt, we have wasted time. This mine mean forgoing gains in the short-run.

On the other hand, overloading on fatigue and then breaking to recover might have some marginal benefit. I’m not sure. Like clamping marathons and then breaking for a week. I’ve tried this and had negative effects, but I guess overloading on fatigue depends on the exercise.

Excellent post.

I have always been extremely interested in the discrete nature of PE gains. People seem to gain VERY suddenly, and then stop for long periods, and then gain again, etc. Good point…but why? I am not assuming it to be truly continuous, but do you think it is a natural discrete event? Or are we stimulating it correctly (nutrition, sleep, whatever) and then failing somehow to continue?

Indeed. Stimuli -> adaptation. But, adaptation is connected to stimuli. Now remember how I said in the deconditioning break you would lose your muscle (bodybuilding)? Well, you’d also lose it if you stopped working out period. PE gains don’t seem to be that way. This is evidence for your argument - collagen and smooth muscle hypertrophy don’t have the same stimuli -> adaptation relationship it seems.

Very good points.

That’s the idea at the base of the ‘take 1-2 weeks off here and there’.

It’s hard to say how pumping fatigue the penis, really. Most of pumpers go too much in pressure because they don’t feel any fatigue or discomfort or even tension. So, if we add pumping to clamping, it’s hard to say what the sum could be.
Maybe doing say a month of clamping, then a month of pumping would be better, because is more simple. Just an idea.

Yes, it depends on the exercise. I think it depends on the intensity of the stimuli, also. If one wear an extender, taking a week off is not required I think. It’s a low intensity stimuli, that doesn’t cause appreciable damage. Heavy hanging would be another story, and so jelqing or clamping. The amount of damage a given technique is causing is relevant to know the amount of programmed rest is required - it could be a day or a month.

Maybe calling it ‘programmed rest’ would be a better choice, also; deconditioning is a word used when one is already stalling, where here we want to avoid stalling at all.

Okay then we are actually completely in agreement. I also realize that fatigue will be reached…my issue was with the idea of going so far as to reach fatigue and then “deconditioning.” The started of the thread had a similar idea, but the issue is that it seems quite adhoc and unnecessary (1 week off). Arbitrary. We should determine the least amount of time off, or switch exercises, to get the most gain without reaching plateau.

This pumping idea is EXTREMELY interesting. I wish we could try it out. The month idea is okay, but realize that any codependent effects will be removed automatically. On this note: Berrett replied on the original thread a little while ago with some pump/clamp experience, check it out.