Las superseries buenas para ganar volumen

soroll

soroll
Efectuar superseries de un grupo muscular produce un alto nivel de congestión en dicho grupo.
Pensais que por tanto es un buen método para lograr la hipertrofia muscular máxima?
 
Yo llevo haciendo superseries kasi medio año, y la verdad, he hipdertrofiado bastante,xro n 1 post q puse m dijeron (<ara mismo no m aqerdo muy bin fué, lo sinto...) q era mas bien para definición, no para volumen...Yo tanto por si es para volumen, como si no, suelo hacerlas de vez n qando, xq m nkanta la sensación q se keda despues de hacer superseries, "mola",jaja.No te he servido d muxa ayuda,jeje, xro n fin, he dejado mi opinion, valen tanto para markar (definir) como para ganar volumen, porque claro está, tambien depende de las repeticiones que hagas...Weno, de to2 mo2 ya opinará alguin cn muxisima mas experiencia q yo(vamos, cualkiera en este foro,jaja),y t aclarará la duda.
Saludos!!
 
Todas las opiniones son buenas.
A mi también me mola la sensación de quemazón al final de dos ejercicios seguidos. Es la ostia!
 
Creo que ese fui yo. Comenze a investigar y si se puede dar a Superseries para aumento de volumen, definicion, hasta para aumento de fuerza, dependiendo de la cantidad de repeticiones que hagas, de hecho eso es lo que estoy haciendo y me ayuda a agregarle intensidad a los entrenamientos.

Por ejemplo en una superserie de biceps y triceps haces 12rep con curl de barra e inmediatamente haces 12rep en pres frances, sentiras como te arden los brazos luego descansas 2min. Lo haces sucesivamente 12-10-8. En resumen haces la mismas cantidad de repeticiones como si fueran series normales, pero con la diferencia de haces 2ejercicios por vez.

Si quieres aumentar fuerza haces 4superseries de 6-4 repeticiones, etc. Haces la mismas cantidades de repeticiones que las series normales dependiendo de tu objetivo, ya sea definicion, volumen, fuerza.

En caso de hombros me gusta hacer triseries, aunque me agrada llamarla trisuperserie ya que los tres deltoides son antagonicos, como el deltoride anterior, posterior y medio, mientras un deltoide descansa el otro trabaja.

Espero haber sido de ayuda:

!!! MUCHA SUERTE !!!
 
yo lo que ago y e notado aumento es llegar siempre al fallo a todos los ejercicios de repente te vas a otro y sigues llegando al fallo asta k terminas k tu cuerpo empieza arder y a tener agujeta al dia siguiente pa mi lo mejor es llgar al fallo no dice la gente k llegando al fallo y aciendo 2 mas crece musculo pos yasta :p
 
Acaju dijo:
Por mi parte, y es solo mí opinión personal, las superseries son una de las tonterías más absurdas que se pueden llevar a cabo en un entrenamiento serio de pesas. No tienen cabida ni en volumen ni en definición.

Eso creo yo también, al menos si hablamos de lo que comúnmente la gente llama -de un modo impropio- superseries, es decir, series compuestas (dos ejercicios que inciden sobre el mismo grupo).

Sin embargo las superseries antagónicas -"pairings", o superseries a secas- son de gran utilidad, y no van a penalizarnos las cargas en absoluto.

Es interesante al respecto un interesante un artículo de Waterbury que, aunque en principio nada tiene que ver con el tema, explica bastante bien al asunto de las superseries, pues sobre él descansa la posibilidad de sacar el máximo provecho a sesiones cortas.

Ahí van los extractos:

(...)

I often get asked why I prescribe such short rest periods. Why not longer? First and foremost, shorter rest periods increase your fitness levels due to a higher cardiovascular demand. Second, shorter rest periods train your body to clear lactate more quickly.

Finally, research at the University Blaise Pascal in France demonstrated that three-minute rest periods were just as effective as five-minute rest periods for recovery. So more rest isn't necessarily better for performance recovery – there's a saturation point (something I ascertained years ago).

Furthermore, the importance of Sherrington's observation of reciprocal innervation can't be overlooked. Basically, reciprocal innervation states that when a muscle group is stimulated, the antagonist is inhibited. For example, if you're performing a set of biceps curls, your triceps are being inhibited.

This is a key principle in the organization of your nervous system, and it carries over into the design of many of my programs – especially my High Frequency programs. So even though you're not resting your entire body when you perform a biceps exercise between your triceps exercises, your triceps are being inhibited while you perform the biceps movement.

This inhibition is akin to giving your triceps a quick nap that accelerates recovery. A good example is static stretching after your workouts. The static stretch inhibits or relaxes your stimulated muscles, which allows for faster recovery.

Nevertheless, where most people get confused is when I prescribe, say, 60 seconds rest between sets of exercise pairings. If you're pairing bench press with rows, and if each set lasts 15 seconds, then the actual time between sets for the sameexercise isn't 60 seconds – it's 135.


So when you pair exercises, you can keep the rest periods relatively short, but allow for plenty of recovery. Even though it might seem that this doesn't constitute true recovery (since you're performing another exercise), don't forget about reciprocal innervation.


(...)

The point of this article is simple: HFT should revolve around exercise pairings. That's precisely why the High Frequency plan I designed in my Bodybuilding's Next Frontier article uses exercise pairings for all of the high frequency weeks. When you pair exercises, you're effectively able to increase the volume per minute that your muscles are exposed to. That's hugely important.

You see, I had to overcome many obstacles before designing an effective High Frequency plan – the biggest obstacle being fatigue. I had to try to find a way to keep each session as brief as possible since the number of workouts per week is very high.

One of the best ways to control fatigue is to limit the duration of your training sessions, and one of the best ways to keep your training sessions short is to use exercise pairings. But what do I mean by exercise pairings?

In a perfect world, the front of your body would be designed with a mirror-image of the back of your body. Except for a few pseudo-perfect pairings such as biceps/triceps and quadriceps/hamstrings, there really aren't any well-balanced pairings (even the bi's/tri's and quads/hams example isn't perfect since there are a different number of muscles on each side of the joint). But such an apparent design flaw is something you and I have to deal with, at least until I get that genetic engineering experiment I got going in my basement straightened out.

Take for example an overhead pressing and pulling exercise: military press and pull-ups. The design of the muscular system is set up so the pull-ups will have a distinct strength advantage over military presses due to a larger amount of muscle mass being involved with the former. In other words, if you want to perfectly balance the strength of the two, it would take some serious work; furthermore, it probably isn't necessary.


With military presses, the primary muscles being worked are the triceps, deltoids, upper traps, and upper pectoral fibers. Compare this with the pull-up that stresses your forearms, biceps, rear deltoid fibers, rhomboids, middle and lower traps, and the monstrous lats.

But you know what? This imbalance really doesn't matter. As long as you're pairing exercises as closely as possible, you'll reap the benefits of reciprocal innervation. In other words, a military press will inhibit enough of your pulling muscles to be effective.

So what about lower-body exercises such as squats? This is where it becomes virtually impossible to find antagonist pairings. Unless you relegate your lower body workouts to the leg extension and leg curl, there really aren't any good lower body pairings – at least on the surface.

I get around this issue by pairing upper and lower body exercises. If squats are performed, I'll pair this with an upper body exercise. Importantly, I try to avoid pairing a neurally demanding lower body exercise with a high fatigue upper body exercise. For example, full squats could be paired with hammer curls, but not push presses. And deadlifts could be paired with skull crushers, not pull-ups.


I like to describe this as the fatigue factor. Basically, I give a score from 1-10 (ten being the highest) to traditional exercises. The purpose of this rating is to pair high-score exercises with low-score exercises. Here's how some traditional exercises rate:

FATIGUE FACTOR

Traditional Deadlift – 10

Pull-up/Chin-up - 10

Hack Squat – 9

Push Press - 10

Back Squat – 9

Standing Military Press - 9

Front Squat – 9

Dips – 8

Romanian Deadlift – 8

Bentover Row – 8

Lunges – 8

Pulldown - 6

Leg Curl - 5

Bench Press – 5

Standing Calf Raise – 3

Seated Row – 5

Seated Calf Raise – 2

Standing Biceps Curl - 3

Anterior Tibialis Raise - 1

Lying Triceps Extension - 2

Importantly, these are merely arbitrary numbers I came up with. The point of this table is to loosely quantify how exercises rate on the fatigue scale. With lower-body exercises, you should pair them with upper body exercises on the opposite end of the fatigue scale.

For example, a low-rated lower body exercise such as calf raises should be paired with a more demanding upper body exercise such as the standing military press, or vice versa. Effective exercise pairings attempt to distribute the fatigability of each exercise as much as possible. In other words, don't always start your sessions with the most demanding exercises and end it with the easiest exercises – spread them out.

One last point to consider with exercise pairings is this: be cognizant of what muscles are being challenged with any exercise. If you want peak performance from two different exercises, they should target different muscle groups. This seems intuitively simple, but I see it overlooked all the time. Pairing the deadlift with an upper back exercise isn't a good idea.


Now that you have a better understanding of the importance of exercise pairings and how to effectively match exercises, it's time to move on to the do-it-yourself High Frequency parameters.

(...)

Let's review:

1. Use exercise pairings with 60-90 seconds rest between each exercise. This will keep the session length low and the volume per minute high.

2. Pair upper body exercises with a movement as close to the antagonist as possible (match pulling with pushing, or flexing with extending).

3. Pair high-fatigue lower body exercises with low-fatigue upper body exercises.

4. Use a set/rep volume of 24 for each exercise per primary muscle group (chest, back, shoulders, quads, hams, lower back, biceps, triceps, etc.)

5. Be creative!


(...)

With regard to the first part of this article, please don't assume that straight sets are useless. Like virtually any set of training methods, straight sets have their place (I've prescribed them many times). But for those who want to experiment with High Frequency plans, exercise pairings are your best bet because they'll allow you to get the job done in much less time while minimizing fatigue.
 
Y sobre su papel en una rutina de alta frecuencia, comparando el volumen por minuto en una 5x5 y en un EAV:


High Frequency vs. High Volume

On the surface, it might seem that my High Frequency Training plans are nothing more than a high volume program dressed up in a clever guise, but that simply ain't true.

Here's why:

Even though I'll admit that the genesis of my High Frequency plans was in accordance with basic high volume principles, they're not the same. If the answer to adding muscle was merely increased volume, then I'd simply add more reps, more sets, or more load to, say, three workouts each week. But there's a distinct flaw with this approach: it's not conducive to total-body workouts.

Eventually, the number of sets, reps, and exercises would protract each workout to the point of oblivion. Not to mention how damn fatigued you'd be by the time you reached your last few exercises.

High Frequency plans allow for a very high volume throughout the week by incorporating rest periods – even if just 8-24 hours – between workouts. This brief period of rest and recovery is enough to recharge your nervous system...if the weekly plan is intelligently designed.

If you can't recruit your highest-threshold motor units, then you're never going to build muscle fast. I've found ways to trick the nervous system into recovering more quickly between sessions by manipulating training parameters.

If your nervous system has recovered, you can train again, even if less than a day has passed! And that's what separates my High Frequency programs from any high volume plan.


Volume Defined


Before I delve deep into the elements of High Frequency programs, let's talk about the true definition of volume. Specifically, I want to talk about exercise volume.

I think many people are confused about what exercise volume consists of: volume isn't merely sets multiplied by reps. Exercise volume is defined as the load lifted times the total number of reps.

Load x Total Reps = Exercise Volume

Let's make things simple and start with a bench press workout. Let's say you used five sets of five repetitions (5x5) with ~85% of your one-repetition maximum (1RM). If your 1RM for the bench press is 350 pounds, here's how the volume would look for your bench press workout:

300 lbs x 25 = 7500 lbs

Due to the relatively large load, longer rest periods are often prescribed. Every coach differs on this point, but I often prescribe somewhere around 135 to 150 seconds rest between sets of the same exercise with the 5x5 method (more on this later). For now, all you need to know is that you performed 5x5 with 300 pounds with 135 seconds rest between sets.

Nevertheless, 5x5 appears to be anything but high volume. In fact, one of the tricky parts of writing articles is to try and explain training variables whose definitions have become as loose as a middle-aged porn star. Indeed, I'm still not sure what high volume means, but traditional linear periodization plans pair the highest volume phases with the lowest intensity (percentage of 1RM) phases, so I'll run with that concept.

The 10x10 method is considered one of the more efficacious "high volume" plans in some bodybuilding circles (not mine). To demonstrate my point, I'll use the same bench press example with a person that has the previously defined 1RM of 350 pounds.

For the 10x10 method, a load of approximately 60% of 1RM is often prescribed. The load is relatively low because the design of the system is such that incomplete rest periods are often prescribed (e.g. 60 seconds between straight sets) along with a large amount of total reps. So let's calculate the exercise volume for the 10x10 method with the above example.

210 lbs (60% of 350 lbs) x 100 (Total Reps) = 21,000 lbs

That's a much higher volume than what was yielded by the 5x5 method. But let's take the comparison between the 5x5 and 10x10 methods a little deeper to really understand what's going on. The following example is actually more complicated than I want to make it, but I need to establish my point.

To compare the exercise volume of these two methods, let's say the 5-rep set took 15 seconds to finish. Since 10 reps is twice as much, we'll say each set took 30 seconds. The duration of each bench press session looks like this:

This URL has been removed!

I'm throwing out all these numbers to you to demonstrate the importance of understanding the variables that constitute the exercise volume of a session. Specifically, I want you to notice the calculated volume per minute. This is what really matters in an effective workout. We want to get the most "bang for the buck" per minute since each High Frequency session should be as short as possible.

If we merely compared 10x10 and 5x5 by calculating sets times reps, the 10x10 method is four times higher (100 vs. 25). When we add the loading element, the 10x10 method is 2.8 times higher (21,000 vs. 7500). And when we factor in the volume per minute, the 10x10 method is only 2.2 times higher (1500 vs. 667).

Take a deep breath because I'm about to take this concept a few steps further!


Opposites Attract


I often get asked why I prescribe such short rest periods. Why not longer? First and foremost, shorter rest periods increase your fitness levels due to a higher cardiovascular demand. Second, shorter rest periods train your body to clear lactate more quickly.

Finally, research at the University Blaise Pascal in France demonstrated that three-minute rest periods were just as effective as five-minute rest periods for recovery. So more rest isn't necessarily better for performance recovery – there's a saturation point (something I ascertained years ago).

Furthermore, the importance of Sherrington's observation of reciprocal innervation can't be overlooked. Basically, reciprocal innervation states that when a muscle group is stimulated, the antagonist is inhibited. For example, if you're performing a set of biceps curls, your triceps are being inhibited.

This is a key principle in the organization of your nervous system, and it carries over into the design of many of my programs – especially my High Frequency programs. So even though you're not resting your entire body when you perform a biceps exercise between your triceps exercises, your triceps are being inhibited while you perform the biceps movement.

This inhibition is akin to giving your triceps a quick nap that accelerates recovery. A good example is static stretching after your workouts. The static stretch inhibits or relaxes your stimulated muscles, which allows for faster recovery.

Nevertheless, where most people get confused is when I prescribe, say, 60 seconds rest between sets of exercise pairings. If you're pairing bench press with rows, and if each set lasts 15 seconds, then the actual time between sets for the sameexercise isn't 60 seconds – it's 135.

This URL has been removed!

So when you pair exercises, you can keep the rest periods relatively short, but allow for plenty of recovery. Even though it might seem that this doesn't constitute true recovery
(since you're performing another exercise), don't forget about reciprocal innervation.

Now, let's get back to the comparison between 10x10 and 5x5.



Exercise Pairings: The Great Equalizer

Up to this point, you're probably not overly-impressed with the effectiveness of exercise pairings. Well, I'm about to show you how powerful they really are!

The variables in Table 1 show that the exercise volume of the 10x10 bench press workout with 210 pounds and 60 second rest periods equals 21,000 pounds. Since the 10x10 method is often designed with a body part split, we need to throw in a back exercise: rows.

To keep things simple, let's say you used the same load for the row as you did with the bench press.

So now the total workout volume doubles to 42,000 pounds (21,000 pounds for both the bench press and row). Importantly, the length of the workout must also double sincestraight sets are performed. This protracts the session to 28 minutes (actually, it's even longer when you consider the time to switch exercises, but I'm keeping it simple). The doubling of volume is neutralized by the doubling of the session length. Therefore, the volume per minute remains constant.

Now here's the real kick in the ass: when you throw a row exercise into the 5x5 plan, the duration of the session remains constant since 135-second rest periods were used. So now the volume of the 5x5 session doubles while the session length remains constant. Here's how they match up.

This URL has been removed!

Voila! The magic of exercise pairings! By using exercise pairings, I was able to prey upon the apparently huge volume difference between the 10x10 and 5x5 methods. Not only are the volume per minute levels closely matched with the incorporation of exercise pairings, but the duration of the 5x5 session is 2.5 times shorter!

Also take note of the workout volume: you must perform 2.8 times more volume to get a volume per minute level that's only 167 pounds higher. Considering that the 10x10 method is almost 900 pounds higher/minute without the 5x5 exercise pairings, I think it's safe to say that exercise pairings are indeed powerful.

So I dragged you through this long-winded comparison between what initially appeared to be two drastically different volume methods. For simplicity, I compared 10x10 with 5x5 since they're two of the most popular methods out there, and most importantly, because the volume of 5x5 training appears to be significantly lower than 10x10 – but it doesn't need to be!

Honestly, 5x5 is far better for hypertrophy (in my mind) than 10x10 for many other reasons. Because of the relatively low load, incomplete rest periods, and a high number of repetitions, the amount of high-threshold motor units that you can recruit with 10x10 just isn't up to par.
 
Amigos no se si tuvieron la oportunidad de leer la lectura de hipertrofia sarcomerica y la sarcoplasmica.

ganar-masa-musuclar.gif


"Distintos tipos de hipertrofia y tipo de entrenamiento que puede explicar su aparición El entrenamiento con una intensidad en torno a 10RM, un volumen por grupo muscular no excesivamente elevado (10 series) y una progresión vertical
(pasar de la 1ª serie de un ejercicio a la 1ª serie de otro ejercicio en la ejecución de los ejercicios parece ser el estímulo más adecuado para conseguir una hipertrofia útil o sarcomérica. Por el contrario una intensidad menor 12-15RM, un volumen mayor y una progresión horizontal en la ejecución de los ejercicios (completar todas las series de cada ejercicio) parece ser que al provocar
una fatiga acumulada conduce en mayor grado a la consecución de una hipertrofia sarcoplásmica"

A mi punto de vista las superseries tienen una teoría científica comprobada, aumenta la fuerza y volumen con ejercicios distintos.

This URL has been removed!
 
Última edición:
Se refiere, entiendo, a las superseries en sentido propio, y no a la series compuestas: "(...) pasar de la 1ª serie de un ejercicio a la 1ª serie de otro ejercicio en la ejecución de los ejercicios parece ser el estímulo más adecuado para conseguir una hipertrofia útil (...)".
 
Para gustos los colores, yo hago 4 ejercicios en 2 superseries descendentes 12-12/10-10/8-8/6-6 y 1 ejercicio de 2 series al fallo. tanto en volumen como en definicion.

CUANDO VAIS A ENTENDER QUE EL VOLUMEN Y LA DEFINICION SON CONSECUENCIA DE LA DIETA NO DEL ENTRENAMIENTO. dejando a un lado el cardiovascular que ayuda en la deficnicio.
 
Totalmente deacuerdo Rubencrc, el problema es que se ha creado una confusión que se ha popularizado ene lso gimnasios, es muy frecuente ver a la gente corriendo de un aprato a otro para hacer superseries, con altas repeticiones y un peso mínimo, lo que nos lleva lógicamente a un trabajo aerobico, creo qeu ese es el problema, que mucha gente asocia superseries con poco peso muchas repticiones y además hechas a toda leche.

Respecto a las superseries antagónicas que indica Charontes, son un método excelente, que a mi en concreto me ha ddado unos muy buenos rsultados en el brazo, respeto a ellas hay un libro de Willy Brink, creo que se escribe así porque no lo tengo delante, llamdo "Potenciar el entorno anaboolíco son el empleo de esteroides" muy interesante.
 
Rubencrc dijo:
Para gustos los colores, yo hago 4 ejercicios en 2 superseries descendentes 12-12/10-10/8-8/6-6 y 1 ejercicio de 2 series al fallo. tanto en volumen como en definicion....

Por curiosidad utilizas el 12 10 8 6, igual que yo porque lo haces? te retienes a alguna teoría? bueno yo utilizo el mismo nº de repes , porque me lo recomendaron con una pirámide ascendiente más peso, menos repeticiones. Yo me imagino que este modo de trabajo es efectivo porque se acerca a 10 RM (10x10) de la teoría sarcomérica que es mejor que la sarcoplásmica de (12x15 RM), es solo mi parecer, me gustaría conocer otras opiniones
 
IZM dijo:
Totalmente deacuerdo Rubencrc, el problema es que se ha creado una confusión que se ha popularizado ene lso gimnasios, es muy frecuente ver a la gente corriendo de un aprato a otro para hacer superseries, con altas repeticiones y un peso mínimo, lo que nos lleva lógicamente a un trabajo aerobico, creo qeu ese es el problema, que mucha gente asocia superseries con poco peso muchas repticiones y además hechas a toda leche.

.

exacto IZM;,
la gente se agobia con las supersries, hay que utilizar pesos fuertes y hacer las repeticion "relajados", superserie significa no descansarr entre 2 ejercicios, y no como piensa la gente que es hacer las rep a toda ostia e ir corriendo.
suave, con calma pero sin descanso y cargando todo el peso que seamos capaces de mover haciendo correcto el ejerccio.

saludos IZm
 
La Ultima Cobra dijo:
Por curiosidad utilizas el 12 10 8 6, igual que yo porque lo haces? te retienes a alguna teoría? bueno yo utilizo el mismo nº de repes , porque me lo recomendaron con una pirámide ascendiente más peso, menos repeticiones. Yo me imagino que este modo de trabajo es efectivo porque se acerca a 10 RM (10x10) de la teoría sarcomérica que es mejor que la sarcoplásmica de (12x15 RM), es solo mi parecer, me gustaría conocer otras opiniones


respecto a las rep, mi teoria es que la de 12 y la de 10 me ayuda a tener resistencia muscular y la 8 y 6 para fuerza. aunque como he dicho antes los pesos son fuertes tanto con 12 como 6 rep. evidentemente aunmento el peso en cada serie
 
Realmente uno de los grandes dogmas del culturismo son esos absurdos entrenamientos a base de biseries y triseries para definir, porque es algo que, acompañado de la correspondiente restricción calórica, tiene resultados nefastos.

Cuando se bajan colorías creo que las únicas adaptaciones que habría que hacer al ejercicio con cargas serían las tendentes a preservar la intensidad. Quizá ello requiera reducir algo el volumen o acortar las sesiones, poco más; los descansos cortos entre series, la inclusión de series compuestas, la recarga de accesorios y el alto volumen suelen tener el efecto contrario.

Para sudar ya está la bici. El anaeróbico debe ser intenso en términos de carga, no una sesión de body pump sin música. No perder fuerza es esencial, y el entrenamiento con cargas altas nos permitirá mantener el metabolismo a buen ritmo y un entorno hormonal adecuado.

Definir es dieta y, eventualmente, aeróbico, y las adaptaciones del anaeróbico deberían ser sólo las imprescindibles de acuerdo con el resto de medidas adoptadas.
 
ejem, las triseries usadas ocasionalmente pueden valer para sorprender el musculo. Yo reconozco que uso las triseries habitualmente en gemelo y no me quejo por ahora de los resultados. Que me dices Charontes?
 
bueeeno, veo que pasais del enlace cantidubi. Esto lo escribió recinos, que algo sabe el chaval:


En resumen estas tecnicas aumentan la densidad mitocondrial de las celulas musculares y q significa esto para los culturistas? Pues significa ganarmas musculo y menos grasa o perder mas grasa y menos musculo dependiedo de la etapa en la que uno este. No solo eso tambien ayudan con la capacidad anaerobica de los musculos y lo ma simportante para todos los gorditos del mundo, aumentan el metabolismo basal (duh hay mas mitocondrias)

el beneficio esta en volver a tu cuerpo mucho mas eficiente en usar la energia lo que quiere decri que en una fase de volumen ganarias mas musculo que grasa (siempre dependiente de la dieta)
asi mismo nadie dijo que solo tiene que hacer un estilo de entrenamiento...se puede usar la periodizacion conjugada haciendo un dia fuerza/masa y el otro dia resistencia anaerobica/lactica y obtener los beneficios de los 2 mundos. SIn embargo xq no hacer los 2-3 meses de GVT,GBC,EDT,R.O.B,o el 8x8 de gironda y obtener los beneficios mas rapido y despues preocuparte por la fuerza? la masa se obtiene con cualquiera de estos protocolos y ya despeus te preocupas d eganar tu fuerza/hipertrofia miofibrilar con entrenamientos tipo 5x5,DC etc
 
No creo que haya inconveniente en hacerlo con carácter ocasional, a modo de "shock"; pero no las incorporaría por norma. En todo caso tampoco creo mucho en esa forma de dar "variedad" al entrenamiento, ya que con una periodización bien hecha no es difícil evitar la adaptación.
 
Atrás
Arriba