“Renaissance periodization has jumped the shark” - Alex Bromley. Any thoughts on this video?

[lovely_krystal86]

I’ve been a big fan of Dr Mike. But I have noticed I’ve been overthinking shit a lot lately. Interested in a discussion about this video!

 

[tennille]

@lovely_krystal86 The more content you consume the more you realise it's just different paths to the same goal. Each creator chooses their path and carves their own 'style' of delivering that message.

In the end you just lift consistently with progressive overload in a calorie surplus, that's all it boils down to.

Never watched this dude but I enjoy both GVS and RP content and learn from both.

 

[debslabs]

@tennille I realise there’s really on the principles of frequency, volume and intensity, and all of them choose which one to emphasise. Thing is, it can change over their lifting career, and it’ll certainly change over yours. The important thing is to just absorb as much of their experience as possible, and also see how they modify the basic exercises to suit them as time goes on.

 

[dsx]

@debslabs Former athlete 20+ years training you nailed it.

 

[cpf]

@tennille I swear to God people get so lost in the minutiae. You summarized it perfectly. If people spent even a fraction of the time they do trying to get that extra 1% from maximizing their workout, actually in the gym lifting, they’d probably see even better results

 

[ingridls]

@tennille Yeah I mean there’s obviously not one way to get huge. Huge jacked dudes now train way different from huge jacked dudes 50 years ago yet both used methods that worked.

 

[johnc101]

@tennille i think there are objectively better and worse paths given different contexts, though, and i think it's beneficial to discuss them. lift consistently with progressive overload in a calorie surplus - that's starting strength. nobody serious about bodybuilding recommends starting strength and you'll end up fat and unaesthetic if you just follow its advice without looking for other opinions.

i think the problem with certain creators, like Dr Mike, is they have a vested interest in their "methodology" and only pay lip service to the fact you can do other things to have success. especially when they have such a big reach now (which is what the original video from GVS is highlighting), they are influencing a lot of people very directly towards their method (which they obviously believe is the best way, but there's really no evidence of this). their method hasn't produced much on the professional scene and amateur reports have been very mixed anecdotal results from what i've seen, but they act like they have it figured out. the problem becomes that they can't change their opinions much or concede they may be wrong and other methods may actually work better, because they've built a business and brand around theirs - yet being "science-based" the whole point is to hypothesize, test, reflect, change opinions as necessary. and if they go too far in the "all things work, keep it broad, progressive overload, calorie surplus, go by feel" etc. direction then there's really no value in them as a content creator because we all know that - so it's a catch 22 for them in a way.

and yes, again, they do pay lip service to other methods and note that other things may work - but it's kinda clear that their belief is that other things work due to genetics, individual variation, etc. and the RP methodology is what works for everyone. but realistically, it could be the opposite - Mike didn't train that way when he was natural and the results have not spoken for themselves regarding it

 

[iamorange]

@tennille Jeff Nippard started this shit. Everyone started taking his videos as gospel in like 2017, then Mike came on the scene and now the science nerds worship him instead.

 

[violetsmith]

@tennille Its not different paths to the same goal. Mike doesn't know how to train anymore since being not natty. He is on steroids and on steroids anything works. Anyone should watch his training where he does hack squats and leg curls. Claims 0 RIR. More like 3 RIR. Made that ridiculous 45 sets of quads a week video that is complete rubbish. The study was with 60 seconds rest between sets. Yeah maybe you need 45 sets to get growth if you are doing a warm up weight for everything because you are so exhausted with no rest.

Naturals need progressive overload and genuine 0 RIR not the volume pump stuff (no coincidence that most people on steroids advocate high reps with lighter weights as makes it easier for them to recover from tendon wise and less risk of injury for them but they aren't close to failure).

 

[mommajulesberry]

@violetsmith mike encourages doing an amount of volume that you can recover from (in terms of performance and soreness) primarily from straight sets in reasonable rep ranges and adding reps or weight week to week. he posts his training and has tons of compound movement 6-10 rep work.
the messaging on the ultra high volume stuff seems to be “if you can recover from it locally and are willing to put other muscles on the back burner there might be value in increasing past the old scientific consensus during specialization blocks”.

these are generalizable principles which some people take too far but certainly dont fall apart if you’re not on a gram of tren.

 

[violetsmith]

@mommajulesberry Ultra high volume stuff is rubbish and so is the 45 sets a week thing he promoted.

 

[mommajulesberry]

@violetsmith there is a difference between “you should do this” and “you could possibly see benefits going up to a surprisingly high volume if you dont run into joint pain, if your lifts go up and you manage overall fatigue, tentatively try it out” (which people who have watched the full video with milo should take away from it)

 

[onepassionate1]

@violetsmith I don't know why this is getting down voted. The 0 rir bit in particular i feel is true if you watch the vids on YouTube.

 

[holydan86]

@violetsmith Always hilarious when dudes come here and make absolute claims like "experts on gear who have trained thousands of naturals don't know shit" and "naturals need to do THIS specific thing I've been doing and nothing else will ever work for them".

I've never trained with 0 RIR and I've been highly prioritising lighter weights on higher reps for years and I'd bet my house my physique still blows yours out of the water.

This attitude is so dumb.

 

[alexandria281]

@holydan86 "I'd bet my house my physique still blows yours out of the water"

You can't make such a claim and not provide evidence. Post it

 

[holydan86]

@alexandria281

https://imgur.com/a/zDmFaHQ

 

[alexandria281]

@holydan86 You do look very good

 

[dragonfruit10]

@holydan86 What naturals has Mike trained using RP methodology that have had success directly from RP? Not aware of any perhaps you can list some?

 

[cbrooks624]

@lovely_krystal86 I don't think there's much merit to this video given that most of the things they're criticising Mike for he agrees with, there are plenty of videos with him saying most people don't train hard enough etc.

That said, I do find Mike can be quite dogmatic at times and when he's 'wrong' will say it was just a joke anyway but I do think the vast majority of what he teaches is bang on.

Mike is also obviously playing to the YouTube algorithm, he's making a shit load of money and he's obviously going to try to maximise that but he's turning into a bit of a guru , Huberman is another example. What the guy in the video said about the students creating the syllabus is true to this extent

I'm my opinion, get your information from a range of sources, including anecdote because the science is far from perfect, and be wary of anyone being dogmatic, it's true that there are many ways to skin a cat even if it is my most hated saying.

 

[auxier587]

@cbrooks624 Curious, what does Dr. Mike get wrong?