Working for the pump

[bnanton01]

Hey Guys,

So recently every Friday I do a "10x10" routine or more like 15x15 or what ever. Chest and back. For chest it is usually smith machine or seated machine for 15-20 reps and 10 wide grip pullup and then the last 5 sets using narrow grip pullups. The chest portion remains the same. During this push pull back to back routine (minimal rest) I sometimes get amazing pumps and then, like today, not so good.

What are your thoughts on the following - working out for the pump and carbs same day for the pump.

Reason I ask is because I do some level of carb cycling by removing starchy carbs pre-workout on certain days. However I always was lead to believe that it was the carbs the night before for the work out the following day. Noting that carbs give you the pump. I have noticed that when that cup of rice is swapped for a cup of veges the pump is not that great in the pre-workout meal. Strength does not seem to be impacted for the most part but the pump is.

So is this the case your pre-workout meal will indeed affect your workouts and should I be so focused on the pump when training ?

To set the record straight this is just something I noticed however I do follow fasted training and intermittent fasting so if your someone that believes that you need a meal pre-workout and it must contain carbs then you may respond with duh.. but that is not what I am looking for.

Just wondering what your thoughts are. Example is it that my carb from the night before are depleted hence no pump or I really use those couple grams of carbs for the pump during the workout...

[silverlightning]

Over thinking this. Just train.

[gs425e]

sloshing down a pre workout supplement before hitting the gym ....might have the same effect your looking for............

superpump max....does it for me..!!

[Kerplunky]

Over thinking this. Just train.

I agree with this.

So recently every Friday I do a "10x10" routine or more like 15x15 or what ever.

Damn son you must be juiced to the gills to be able to handle volume like that.

[ironwill2008]

Progression is the engine that drives growth, not a "pump."

[bnanton01]

sloshing down a pre workout supplement before hitting the gym ....might have the same effect your looking for............

superpump max....does it for me..!!

Yup I do a pre-workout on every training day.

Progression is the engine that drives growth, not a "pump."

Right so this is what I reading these days. That we should not focus on the pump. Just that I find it is a lot easier to get the mind to muscle connection with the pump. It seems to allow me to isolate the movement and focus a lot better on the muscle.

[OutOfStep]

Progression is the engine that drives growth, not a "pump."

http://journals.lww.com/nsca-scj/Abs...and.99586.aspx

[ironwill2008]

http://journals.lww.com/nsca-scj/Abs...and.99586.aspx

There's some good information in that study; haven't seen that one. I've read some of Schoenfeld's stuff before, and agree with him that a muscle pump can be a positive indicator of good things happening. But working to increase weight/reps lifted with good form over time should still be the prime goal of training IMO.

[OutOfStep]

There's some good information in that study; haven't seen that one. I've read some of Schoenfeld's stuff before, and agree with him that a muscle pump can be a positive indicator of good things happening. But working to increase weight/reps lifted with good form over time should still be the prime goal of training IMO.

No doubt, agree on progression. That said, I'm not as quick to dismiss things that successful bodybuilders have been doing for years like so many on here simply because the research isn't there. "Broscience" is a term that gets thrown around a lot by guys who simply don't have the experience or education to tell the difference. I'm as into research as anybody but IMO science has a lot of catching up to do when it comes to explaining things that the guys in the trenches have been observing for years. Hopefully we will see more research that is relevant to highly trained athletes. Way too much extrapolation of acute research done in sedentary and obese subjects for my liking. Also too many speaking in absolutes and acting like the book is closed on subjects like nutrient timing. We are a long way from having all the answers on these topics as some would have us believe. The more I learn the less I know and my mind is quite open and eager to learn more.

[ironwill2008]

No doubt, agree on progression. That said, I'm not as quick to dismiss things that successful bodybuilders have been doing for years like so many on here simply because the research isn't there. "Broscience" is a term that gets thrown around a lot by guys who simply don't have the experience or education to tell the difference. I'm as into research as anybody but IMO science has a lot of catching up to do when it comes to explaining things that the guys in the trenches have been observing for years. Hopefully we will see more research that is relevant to highly trained athletes. Way too much extrapolation of research done in sedentary and obese subjects for my liking. Also too many speaking in absolutes and acting like the book is closed on subjects like nutrient timing. We are a long way from having all the answers on these topics as some would have us believe. The more I learn the less I know and my mind is quite open and eager to learn more.

I've found value in noting whether or not a usually easily-pumped body part is responding on that day. If it doesn't, it can indicate that nutrition might be off, or that simply the day's training effort is lacking. Current research into determining if there's more to it than that is very interesting.


The problem with science and gym training as I see it is that for one thing, there's no money in it for anyone to pursue it, and for another, there are so many variables involved in individuals' body mechanics as to confuse conventional scientific method. Something as simple as a change in leverage due to slightly different muscle origin/insertions between two trainees can alter the effectiveness of, say, a certain exercise (or set/rep scheme, or a dozen other training factors).

[OutOfStep]

The problem with science and gym training as I see it is that for one thing, there's no money in it for anyone to pursue it, and for another, there are so many variables involved in individuals' body mechanics as to confuse conventional scientific method. Something as simple as a change in leverage due to slightly different muscle origin/insertions between two trainees can alter the effectiveness of, say, a certain exercise (or set/rep scheme, or a dozen other training factors).

Some exciting research in the works from guys like Schoenfeld, Wilson, Loenneke, that will be very relevant to bodybuilders and strength athletes to keep an eye out for in the coming year.

[ironwill2008]

Some exciting research in the works from guys like Schoenfeld, Wilson, Loenneke, that will be very relevant to bodybuilders and strength athletes to keep an eye out for in the coming year.

Thanks, Rob. I'm always on the lookout for something new to read. It's interesting to learn more about the glue that holds the basic building blocks together.

[Kerplunky]

Progression is great, but for my last couple of sets of the day I do high-rep isolations on bis and tris. I walk out of the gym with an incredible pump that feels awesome for a couple of hours. Really makes me look forward to going back and training again next time.

[bnanton01]

I've found value in noting whether or not a usually easily-pumped body part is responding on that day. If it doesn't, it can indicate that nutrition might be off, or that simply the day's training effort is lacking. Current research into determining if there's more to it than that is very interesting.


The problem with science and gym training as I see it is that for one thing, there's no money in it for anyone to pursue it, and for another, there are so many variables involved in individuals' body mechanics as to confuse conventional scientific method. Something as simple as a change in leverage due to slightly different muscle origin/insertions between two trainees can alter the effectiveness of, say, a certain exercise (or set/rep scheme, or a dozen other training factors).

These are exactly what I think as well and which is why I was pointing to nutrition and making the assumption that training was dead on. The fact is that there have been times where there is no pump however the muscle is done.. Simply cannot do one more rep.

[hochspeyer]

If your avi is you, why are you complaining about the pump? If that was me, I'd get a pump just by looking in the mirror.

[ahqaf]

good idea.

[bnanton01]

lol spyer. Thanks for all the responses. I think this sums up my reason for this question and pondering focus on this. Over the last 6 months I have started focusing on the mind to muscle connection and definitely relating it to the pump. So once connected I will "feel the burn and get the pump" so for example my one arm rows when from say 100 to 45 etc just to ensure I engaged the muscle correctly. Granted form was an issues before at well on the heavier weight.

This is all the learning experience.

[bnanton01]

Hey Guy,

So recently I started a full progression 5 x5 routine to change things up. And guess what.... progression even if it is a 5lb increase engages the full muscle and mind to muscle is there. Granted I find this usefully for the larger muscle groups.