After reading some sources, including a couple of questions on this site, I've learned that super compensation generally peaks around 2-3 days post workout. I've also tested it myself by altering my routine and found that 3 days works best for me. Prior to learning about supercompensation, most sources I had seen stated that the chest required a lot of recovery around 4-5 days. Using the 2-3 day post workout window for supercompensation, that would mean you're training chest from just over 2x per week to 3.5x per week on average. That is a lot of volume for anyone. When doing this would you need to take extended rest periods, I.e a few days, or a deload week, periodically? If so which would be more beneficial?
1 Answer
I've learned that super compensation generally peaks around 2-3 days post workout.
Not really. Recovery time depends on the individual, their level of training, the level of stress that the workout imposed on them, and other factors. There's no identifiable "peak" to recovery, and it would be a waste of time to attempt to aim for one.
Prior to learning about supercompensation, most sources I had seen stated that the chest required a lot of recovery around 4-5 days.
Ridiculous for the same reasons as the above. What chest workout and for whom? You can't generalise like this.
that would mean you're training chest from just over 2x per week to 3.5x per week on average. That is a lot of volume for anyone.
The number of times per week you're training is called frequency, and it's a separate concept to volume. Training 3.5 times per week might be a lot of volume if you're doing 10+ sets per workout. Or it might be very little volume if you're doing 1 set per workout.
When [scheduling your training to coincide with a predicted supercompensation peak,] would you need to take extended rest periods, I.e a few days, or a deload week, periodically? If so which would be more beneficial?
Maybe, maybe not. Depends on the training program and the individual, but whether or not they appear to be recovering from their training is a far better indicator of this than any generalised prediction could be.
The decision to schedule workouts around a predicted 3 day "optimal" recovery time is every bit as arbitrary as making the decision of what days to work out on the basis of one's employment schedule. It won't factor in to whether you need to take deloads.
-
I agree with the gist of the answer but wanted to add that according to my knowledge, there is a upper boundary of rest days that is around 3-4 days after which the muscular adaptation rapidly goes down due to too low a frequency, given adequate volume. Or am I missing something? I know that the research is shifting towards volume per week instead of given sets and reps as indicator but thought that fairly regular stress (as in training) is still necessary so that you should rather lower intensity if you can't recover in time. Commented Apr 18 at 11:17
-
@PhilipKlöcking Yes, splitting the same training volume for a single muscle group over multiple sessions in a week seems to be superior to doing one high volume body part session per week, but I don't think anything in my answer contradicts that or otherwise recommends low frequency training. Commented Apr 19 at 1:21