Jeremy,

I didn't stay with the program for more than six weeks, because I was losing
strength. I was planning on two months minimum, but I doubt that two more weeks
of the same would have made any good. Anyway, it didn't work well for ME -- but
I never get enough sleep, my training schedule is too loose and so forth... my
time management leaves much to be desired. It might work very well for someone
more organized. Actually, I think his principles would be effective for
bodypart specialization on many people.

I don't have a specific rule for the time I stay with a program. I go by how it
feels, so if it feels good I stay with it until I burn out, like I stayed with
John Casler's training style. (Very effective for strength and muscle growth!)
I change things within two weeks if I just know that changes are needed. For
example, this bodypart split I'm on right now: I found that my triceps were
always sore, and it really hindered my shoulder and chest work. I like heavy
weighted dips, which hit my shoulders and triceps and chest really hard, so I
had to group all those bodyparts into a single day out of necessity. I can't
train the three in separate days or my triceps just never recover.

I had also been trying to tack barbell shrugs at the end of chest day, but soon
realized that after working chest really hard, I can't shrug worth a damn. You
know, that kind of thing.

-----Original Message-----
From: Miguel Angel Perez [mailto:metalhead2_mx@...]
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 10:18 AM
To: Perez, Miguel
Subject: Rv: [HIT Digest] Re: Results (or lack thereof) after Waterbury program
proxy


--- hmmmhmmhm <hmmmhmmhm@...> escribió:

> Para: Hitdigest@yahoogroups.com
> De: "hmmmhmmhm" <hmmmhmmhm@...>
> Fecha: Sat, 08 Sep 2007 17:41:45 -0000
> Asunto: [HIT Digest] Re: Results (or lack thereof)
> after Waterbury program proxy
>
> Hi Miguel shame Waterbury didn't produce gains for
> you. How long did
> you stay with the workout? Have you thought about
> sticking with the
> Waterbury but going for strength increases with it,
> I'm thinking that
> may tip you into growing mode.
>
> I think I usually stick with a workout for to long 6
> months I was on
> my previous workout and although I gained strength I
> achieved no real
> growth. Do you go by a rule of thumb where by if no
> growth is achieved
> over a certain time period you change regime?
>
> Good luck with the body part split workout.
> Jeremy
>
>
> Miguel Angel Perez <metalhead2_mx@...> wrote:
> >
> > Update: The Waterbury-style scheme did not work
> at
> > all for me. No strength, no growth, no fat loss
> or
> > anything. Well, I didn't fail -- I just found one
> > more thing that didn't work. I'm going with
> something
> > different now, specifically a one-bodypart-a-day
> > split, a la Wayne Rowley. It's definitely bodypart
> > splits for me.
> >
> > Wayne Rowley, you out there, old chap?
> >
> > Miguel
> >
> > --- Miguel Angel Perez <metalhead2_mx@...>
> > escribi�:
> >
> > > Jeremy,
> > >
> > > Actually I was reading a Chad Waterbury article
> > > today
> > > (I had a printout with me on the plane; I'm up
> in
> > > Salt
> > > Lake City right now) and the program that he
> > > outlined
> > > was somewhat similar to what you mention. I,
> like
> > > you, am coming off several weeks of strength
> > > training.
> > > I used an extremely-low-freq program not unlike
> > > Clint
> > > Michels's, or Mentzer's consolidation routine.
> For
> > > strength, man does it work! I finished that
> > > four-week
> > > phase with my stiff-legged deadlift up to 315x12
> > > easy,
> > > my leg press at 900x8 and 1000x6, my dumbbell
> row at
> > > 110x12, and my weighted dip at +75x9. I
> improved my
> > > numbers vastly in all four lifts, and now it's
> time
> > > to
> > > put those strength gains to the test with a
> higher
> > > frequency and volume (as well as more calories).
>
> > >
> > > Now Waterbury says that when on a high-freq
> program
> > > you just hit the muscle very often and do not
> focus
> > > on
> > > strength increases. You just pound the muscle
> > > several
> > > times a week with different exercises and
> > > parameters,
> > > and then you back off for a few days and let the
> > > body
> > > catch up. Supposedly, this is when you grow,
> > > provided
> > > you're eating correctly.
> > >
> > > He has you do a heavy, a medium, and a light day
> on
> > > this program. So what I'd like to do is to take
> for
> > > example my leg press and do 1000x6 on the heavy
> day,
> > > 750x10 on the medium day, and 600x16-20 on the
> light
> > > day. If nothing else, it's an interesting
> change,
> > > so
> > > I might give it a shot.
> > >
> > > Cheerio,
> > >
> > > Miguel
> > >
> > > --- hmmmhmmhm <hmmmhmmhm@...> escribi�:
> > >
> > > > Cheers Miguel.
> > > > I have just started a more volume based
> workout
> > > that
> > > > a friend has had
> > > > great results from. I am doing 4 sets
> sometimes 3
> > > > per exercise .Two or
> > > > 3 exercises a body part 3 times a week [3 way
> > > split]
> > > > but trying to
> > > > resist the temptation of going to failure. I
> have
> > > > not been on a
> > > > program that doesn't include reps to failure
> > > before.
> > > > I am hoping the
> > > > change in pace and extra sets work.
> > > > The increased number of sets has resulted in
> > > baking
> > > > off the intensity
> > > > a while as you suggested.
> > > > Jeremy
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Jeremy,
> > > > >
> > > > > That sucks that you didn't gain any size
> from
> > > all
> > > > that work.
> > > > Anyway, you did gain a lot of strength, and
> that
> > > > will eventually lead
> > > > you to mass gains if you consolidate your
> strength
> > > > increases and don't
> > > > let them disappear. Maybe you could now drop
> > > back
> > > > into a less
> > > > demanding maintenance routine with the heavier
> > > > weights you can now
> > > > move, and stay with that routine for awhile
> just
> > > > maintaining. I've
> > > > always felt that real strength gains mean that
> not
> > > > only can you move
> > > > heavier weights now, but you can handle them
> with
> > > > the same level of
> > > > effort it took to handle the lighter weights
> you
> > > > were using before,
> > > > with the same quality of execution.
> > > > >
> > > > > That kind of gains will stay with you, as
> > > opposed
> > > > to going from 110
> > > > kilos with good form and focus to 140 kilos
> with a
> > > > shortened ROM,
> > > > choppy form, fewer reps, and no quad focus.
> Nope
> > > > -- that 140 kilos
> > > > should feel just as manageable as did the 110
> > > kilos
> > > > before. If it
> > > > doesn't you didn't get stronger, you're just
> > > > straining more.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think you need to keep eating well, rest,
> and
> > > > back off on the
> > > > training for a little while, either in
> intensity
> > > or
> > > > training
> > > > frequency, maybe even lighten the loads or do
> > > fewer
> > > > sets temporarily
> > > > while your body catches up. You're burned
> out.
> > > > >
> > > > > Miguel
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail and any
> > > > attachments are
> > > > intended only for the use of those to whom it
> is
> > > > addressed and may
> > > > contain information that is confidential and
> > > > prohibited from further
> > > > disclosure under law. If you have received
> this
> > > > e-mail in error, its
> > > > review, use, retention and/or distribution is
> > > > strictly prohibited. If
> > > > you are not the intended recipient, please
> contact
> > > > the sender by reply
> > > > e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
> > > > message and any
> > > > attachments.[v1.0]
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > >
> > > > > From: Miguel Angel Perez
> > > > [mailto:metalhead2_mx@]
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 8:58 AM
> > > > > To: Perez, Miguel
> > > > > Subject: Rv: [HIT Digest] Re: Results of my
> new
> > > > workout correction
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- hmmmhmmhm <hmmmhmmhm@ escribi�:
> > > > >
> > > > > Para: Hitdigest@yahoogroups.com
> > > > > De: "hmmmhmmhm" <hmmmhmmhm@
> > > > > Fecha: Sun, 13 May 2007 18:32:59 -0000
> > > > > Asunto: [HIT Digest] Re: Results of my new
> > > > workout
> > > > > correction
> > > > >
> > > > > I read this and realized it comes across
> as if
> > > I
> > > > > have put on muscle
> > > > > when I was trying to say I haven't, apart
> from
> > > > > perhaps a bit on my
> > > > > back. I put on no weight apart from when
> like I
> > > > said
> > > > > I ate more nuts
> > > > > etc and that was fat.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jeremy
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Well thought Id mention how I got on with
> my
> > > > new
> > > > > workout which was
> > > > > Casler style [three work sets 20r/10r/5r]
> > > > >
> > > > > I started properly early November and on
> > > nearly
> > > > > every workout since
> > > > > [3 times a week] I have gotten stronger on
> at
> > > > > least one set often
> > > > > every set of a exercise and sometimes all
> > > > > exercises.
> > > > > As I expected I was getting a rep or two
> more
> > > > > usually. I do recall
> > > > > occasionally adding weight and reps.
> > > > > I added 30 kilos to my 5 rep squat set it
> has
> > > to
> > > > > be noted though that
> > > > > half way through the cycle I went up a
> pin. On
> > > > the
> > > > > big exercises I
> > > > > added about 10 or twelve kilos per set.
> > > > > I really enjoyed the extra time in the gym
> and
> > > > > working in different
> > > > > rep ranges.
> > > > >
> > > > > The strange thing is have put on much
> muscle
> > > but
> > > > I
> > > > > do feel my back has
> > > > > grown [thickened] and has a bit more
> detail,
> > > but
> > > > > my arms and legs are
> > > > > the same as before. I have had problems
> with
> > > > > injury so I haven't
> > > > > trained my triceps throughout and when I
> have
> > > > its
> > > > > been a low ROM. I
> > > > > also was only able to train my chest and
> > > > > shoulders for a few months
> > > > > due to injury. But the leg and back work
> have
> > > > been
> > > > > used constantly. I
> > > > > did have a few weeks off training
> altogether.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I was taking in more protein than I
> normally
> > > > would
> > > > > do.
> > > > > I haven't been able to get my hands on
> protein
> > > > for
> > > > > a few weeks so I
> > > > > have tended to eat more nuts etc. This has
> led
> > > > to
> > > > > a weight increase
> > > > > but it seems to be fat.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thinking about it my back had the most
> > > constant
> > > > > volume and seems to
> > > > > have improved which is interesting.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am still getting a rep here and there
> more
> > > on
> > > > > the workout but feel
> > > > > its starting to run its course as I will
> > > improve
> > > > > on one set then the
> > > > > next one I will lose a few reps.
> > > > >
> > > > > I would have thought strength increases
> > > without
> > > > > resulting growth can
> > > > > happen to a point and its individual but I
> > > must
> > > > > have had enough
> > > > > calories if I put on some fat. And surely
> > > > strength
> > > > > increases require a
> > > > > good amount of calories to be consumed?
> > > > >
> > > > > Any thoughts welcome
> > > > > Jeremy
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> __________________________________________________
> > > Correo Yahoo!
> > > Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y
> > > antispam �gratis!
> > > Reg�strate ya -
> http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com/
> > >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Correo Yahoo!
> > Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y
> antispam �gratis!
> > Reg�strate ya - http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com/
> >
>
>
>


__________________________________________________
Correo Yahoo!
Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis!
Regístrate ya - http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com/