| || |
After reading many replies on these subjects, I think many people really don′t understand the ideas behind these. It seems that some people are under the impression that when someone is doing a consolidation routine, that ′they could do much better doing a lot more′. Maybe, maybe not. It depends if the person is using the consolidation routine out of necessity or out of an idea that it′s magic.
If a person can train each muscle twice a week AND make progress, of course they will do better training in that manner. The consolidation workouts and the whole idea of reducing frequency and volume is for people who NEED less. Who cannot gain on more. Thinking that if your doing great training once a week, you′ll do much better training once a month, is obvious nonesense.
For example, I know for a fact, if I train each muscle 2x per week, I gain faster, but not for long. This tells me that optimum stimulation is too much for my recovery. Maybe if I didn′t have to work and life was easy, if I could sit around all day in pure peace, then I could train at my optimum stimulation levels, but life didn′t deal me that hand. It′s the same with people who find they need to train even less frequently. They had to keep paring things down, over time, until they found where they could at least gain.
People come on here, scoffing at how these people doing very little training are not supermen or Arnold clones. They state how this is evidence that this training doesn′t work. What is not understood, is that people who NEED less training are not in a position to gain extremely well no matter how they train. That they finally found some way to at least gain a bit. All the successful methods that cator to people in this position, such as Hardgainer Methods, Superslow, HD, etc. Are merely trying to help the people find a way to just gain something.
OK, rant done!