Okay, I don't think anywhere in my statements I mentioned overTRAINING. Overtraining is a very hard state to get to, the body is too adaptive. And again, I never said it didn't work, I just said for the majority, yep that's right, the majority it won't work for. 24 sets is ridiculous, if you can't get the same stimulation from 10 sets as you can 24 you're doing something wrong. I could ask Arnold, Kai or Jay but you're missing an incredibly important factor that adds into their training and nutrition to help them utilise this style to their advantage. And of course this will work for some, hell I can remember using high volume low frequency when I first started and yes, I did see gains,but. I never did anything above 14-15 sets for my volume because its not needed. It was only when I switched to a lower volume, higher frequency approach that in really made progress. If its works for you then you carry on, but please don't tell me I need to learn something when I clearly dont

The only problem is that you keep relating high volume to low frequency. Nobody ever said go light. I'm on the verge of failure on pretty much every set. No workout should be easy. I still don't understand how you can feasibly say that somebody will get the same stimulation from 10 sets as 24 sets. That statement logically and scientifically holds no truth behind it. Will you stimulate your pecs after 10 secs when doing a good workout? Of course. Will it be stimulated more after 24 sets? Absolutely. That's just science. I can't remember the last time I saw an expert list a 10 set chest workout. I'm really not trying to be a d***. I rather enjoy these "discussions". When it turns into an argument it's not fun for me anymore. Knowledge is the ultimate tool.

Nobody likes an argument, and yet you persist. And yes I advocate high volume with low frequency, you wouldn't do this chest workout twice a week, well not if you has a clue about anything. And not once did I say about "light" weight. But again, you were very wrong about stimulating the chest more with 24 sets compared to 10. If this were true, people would be doing 50 sts thinking they'll get better stimulation. This couldn't be further from the truth. There are many studies that back up, when done correctly, the 10 set workout can be just as if not more beneficial than the 24 set workout, and that's fact. Like I said, if you need that much volume to get anywhere with yore workouts, you're doing something very wrong. I've seen many experts advocate 9-12sts per muscle group per workout, not one have I seen say to do 20 sts for a workout, not even full body because it's ridiculous!

i know im late. i agree with BL17. go heavy with lower reps 4-8 range and do 10 sets. your pecs will be annihilated. when you think about it 10 sets is high volume especially if youre lifting in the 4-8 rep range. i get a better pump that way than i do with lighter weight and higher reps. and also the chest only has 2 muscles no need for flat bb press and flat db press. personally i just hit decline bench some flys and some dips and im done.