Alternating Heavy (failure) & Light (non-failure) Sessions

[M.J.H.]

All of this talk about rep schemes, and training to failure vs. not training to failure got me to thinking. Well, in my experience training, and going to different gyms, etc. It seems that the majority of the biggest guys, in one form or another for whatever reason, don't seem to go that heavy at all. This is not to say that they don't go to failure, because I don't pay much attention to that. But in terms of the weight their using vs. what they're capable of using, it seems light. Now the rest of the large guys I see in gyms go extremely heavy.

So what I am questioning, as I have seen some guys do in the past, is split up their training with heavy and light sessions. For example lets say today I hit chest extremely heavy, to failure, balls to the wall, including intensity techniques like dropsets, CAT, etc. Then my next chest session maybe take it easy, much lighter weight, very shy of failure, focusing more on technique, muscle contractions, etc.

Any opinions? SF? Chris? Gopro?

 

[Saturday Fever]

Eat. Lift. Grow.

It really is that simple. However, and as we discussed earlier, I have to agree with Dr. Siff on this topic. Obviously you have to be dedicated to get big. But there comes a point when genetics plays a far more superior role than training and diet and dedication.

Some have said "Anyone with favorable genetics who uses large quantities of drugs will probably get big no matter what kind of weight training and rep speed they use", a comment which is probably far closer to the truth than any religious proclamations about specific magical muscle-building formulae.

 

[M.J.H.]

Agreed. Eat, lift, and grow is definitely something that I think more people need to apply. Most people do overthink things. But do you think that alternating heavy/light sessions would be effective? As opposed to heavy all the time, etc.