Interesting program:

[vin]

Someone over at Men's Health recommended this routine to me: http://www.ruggedmag.com/index.php?type=Article&i=3&a=8 (If my enter key worked, I'd use it right about here). It looks pretty radical to me. Definitely different from anything I've tried before. Has anybody out there tried this? If not, do you have an opinion on it anyway? Good, bad, whatever. I'm looking for a program to start next week, and I'm tempted to give it a shot (although it looks like it'll make for some rather dull (and short) workouts). My overall goal is pretty much maintenance at this point.

Hello Vin,
I did the original 'ripped, rugged, and dense' but not the new 2.0 version. I had mixed results from the first program, but with so many variables (diet, amount i was running) it is hard to say if I gave the program a fair shake. Have you tried the first one? I know Danish Dynamite on MH has done the first one, and is as likely as anyone to have done this version..may want to search for his responses or send him an email..

[Bill Hartman]

Vin,

Not to seem disrespectful, but what do you see in this that is so radical?

5 x 5 has been around since Bill Starr wrote about it about 25 years ago. The author just spread out the volume over 4 days.

If you're well fed and low in psych. stress, you should see some nice functional hypertrophy and strength. If you want to vary it, you can combine days 1 & 2 or 3 & 4 and take a day off in between.

Bill

[vin]

Hey - No I haven't tried the first one (http://www.t-mag.com/nation_articles/214rip.html). It actually looks a little more interesting (although clean and presses scare me a little). If you've tried any programs that you really enjoyed - let me know! I checked out Homegrown over at Men's Health, but frankly it would just be impossible to pull off those 'quad sets' at my gym (in terms of getting access to the equipment I needed *when* I needed it).

http://www.t-mag.com/nation_articles/249out.jsp

The Outlaw Strength workout..

I liked this workout, it incorporated a lot of exercises in ways I had never done them, and I was sore as heck afterward..there is a minimum on tri-sets and such so securing the equipment at the gym is a little easier. Its not a real long program 7 weeks, but I saw nice results. I should mention, as the author does, that it is a little more geared to 'getting ripped' than 'getting big'..so a bit depends on your goals. I still was running about 30 miles a week, A1 to A2..never pushing my aerobic threshold or doing VO2 stuff..

[Genius]

"More weight = more microtrauma = more growth"

I like this portion of the article you posted. This is the theory I have gone by, and it has reaped some very good gains for me. Of course I have workouts in the higher rep ranges periodically, but for the most part I keep the reps low in combination with heavy weight. Some like to claim that the amount of time under pressure is the most important aspect that comes into play when shooting for more growth. However, I disagree somewhat. While IMPORTANT I do not think it is the MOST important aspect. I believe the amount of stress you are putting on the muscle, form, intesity, AND time under pressure are all important. More weight means more stress. Generally it is thought that 5 reps is the minimum amount needed to induce hypertrophy, but some have had success off of fewer. The best I can suggest is to cycle through, because higher rep ranges are important too. Do not sacrifice form simply for the satisfaction of completing one more rep. Somewhat off topic I know, but rep ranges and weight amount discussions really spark my interest.