Max- OT?

[smittygouv]

I did a search within the forum and I see that a good number of you have tried the max-OT training series. I just finished scrawny to brawny and i'm looking to start a new program. My main goal is hypertrophy. Saying that, a couple of buddies referred me to AST Sports Science - Max-OT Introduction and rave about Max-OT. It has shown pretty good results with them, but I'm skeptical. My skepticism about Max-OT lies within the rep ranges (4-6) for most exercises. Do you think it would be more beneficial for me to do a traditional hypertrophy program (8-12 reps), or would you recommend I give Max-OT a shot?

[PowerManDL]

Hypertrophy = sufficient work + progressive overload + food

So that means the answer is "yes".

[Rawgrip]

But All I Care About is Hypertrophy?

Also, let's not forget the neural components that have nothing to do with hypertrophy . Hypertrophy over a period is strategically induced microtrauma through progressive loads (i.e. increased workload by raising weight/more work with same weight/combination). And really, you don't get much out of one session so the name of the game is looking at progression over an extended period. Enhanced neural capability leverages your ability to do this and the resulting hypertrophy gains. Better neural = better potential hypertrophy. Don't believe me, think about the much loved "newbie gains" where everything works. What is this phenomenon - muscle is muscle? Well the main driver is rapidly developing neural adaptation and that drives weight on the bar which drives progressive loading which drives hypertrophy. Doh.

So now we know hypertrophy and that neural adaptation is a good thing not some unrelated oddball of nature to be shunned. I'm not saying you need to do a pure powerlifting or peak strength routine and focus on the extreme end of max singles and doubles either - merely that some neural focus is quite helpful and should absolutely be a part of any mid to long-term plan.

Well what's the best way to get a lot of hypertrophy for those looking to add muscle mass? Well, the body is a system and adapts best as a system. This is what makes squats, deads, rows, cleans, presses, and snatches very effective. You are using a large portion of your body's musculature to move a heavy weight (think intensity) through a fundamental range of motion. This is full body lifting stressing a large portion of the body's musculature all at once (microtrauma - especially good to bring up weak links and solidify the body's capability to work well as a single unit - and this is what "functional" is all about anyway). So adding weight to these exercises should net hypertrophy over the entire body. And we all know how hard it is to grow a muscle in isolation and that the body tends to stay within reasonable parameters of balance, just look at the curl boys who otherwise would all have huge arms - the training and workload is there and hitting the target muscle, the body just doesn't adapt like that past a fairly marginal point.

5x5 and Hypertrophy (Stopping Insanity 1)
Also, I keep hearing "5x5 will put muscle on you if you eat enough but it is not a hypertrophy program."
1) No program will put muscle on you if you don't eat enough, come the hell on.
2) As discussed in the Training Primer, hypertrophy is mainly centered around relatively high levels of tension (load on the bar relative to your capacity) and volume of work. 5 sets of 5 reps enable both and strike a good balance (not golden, not directly from God, not the only rep and volume range you'll ever need, not magic - just a good general balance for highly productive core lifts).
3) Load progression (through adding absolute weight/tension, volume/work or a combination yielding more total workload over a period) is fundamental to hypertrophy. One of the things that enables this progression and subsequent hypertrophy is neural adaptation - rapid neural adaptation facilitating progressive loading is what is behind the newbie gains that everyone enjoys early in their training career (so yes, it matters). Sets of 5 are very good at driving the neural adaptation and far better than higher rep ranges (and so is higher frequency which is why you see 2-3x weekly sessions on the same lifts). Combine that with levels of tension and enough workload and you get a very balanced program. Keep in mind, this isn't about maximizing hypertrophy for a single workout. This is about maximizing hypertrophy over a period of time, and the continued neural adaptation allows for more load on the bar and total workload - hence hypertrophy providing your diet is geared to that goal.
4) That doesn't mean that sets of 5 are the end all be all of programming. All that means is that it's a decent foundation, it works well, there are very good reasons why it works, and I'd venture for most people, no matter how advanced or for most specialized purposes, it would be useful for at least part of the year.
5) And just for the record, a complete hypertrophy plan is likely going to require multiple phases to bring one's physique to the pinnacle of achievement - if that is the goal and someone is narrow-minded enough to believe that I'm actually talking about a career or even a yearly plan. Just to be clear - this is the type of work that gets the novice started or helps someone pile on the foundation muscle to move up a weightclass.

This is just of madcows 5x5 website still worth a reading Training Primer

I still think any training needs to work on periodization. Another thing why keeping your training regime the same is not so beneficial because your body adapts
after 4 weeks and you need change (Not to sure now, Mark Rippetoe mentions it on a crossfit interview) Thats why periodization stages work great.

[smittygouv]

Thanks. Great info guys.


So I'm curious, do people use the "rep rules of lifting" just as reference points? I'm guessing this is the case. As long as we progressively overload and develop substantial amounts of microtrauma hypertrophy is inevitable (with the correct nutrition of course). I guess my question is: If we ignore neuronal adaptation and other benefits of periodization, are there large differences of microtrauma produced between a 5 rep program and an 8-12 rep? Or does it just not matter all that much?

[PowerManDL]

I've yet to see an actual study showing any difference in size or strength gains due to varied rep ranges. In fact the vast majority of it shows that as long as you're where you need to be in terms of weight on the bar and total amount of work done at that weight, the rep range is pretty much meaningless.

And of course you can't neglect food, which is easily the far more important, and most neglected, factor.

[StuWard]

Different people will react differently to different rep ranges but overall you will get a different response to each ranges. Best is to rotate through each range within a workout, a micro cycle or a meso cycle according to your preferred program design. All of it is useless of course if you don't allow for recovery between workouts.

[Rawgrip]

Originally Posted by StuWard

Different people will react differently to different rep ranges but overall you will get a different response to each ranges. Best is to rotate through each range within a workout, a micro cycle or a meso cycle according to your preferred program design. All of it is useless of course if you don't allow for recovery between workouts.

Sounds about right... personally im not a fan of using high repetition ranges. If you want to get conditioned perform GPP but i use exceptions to this rule i.e. rehabilitation phases etc. I tend to concentrate on total tonnage (progressively adding more weight). Sometimes i might use higher rep ranges to shock the body or do something different.

[eastcoastsurfer]

I did max-OT years ago. I don't remember the exact details, but I used their principles in some of my own workouts until I moved to NROL. I do remember it being an effective program.