The Method N° 05 · How a block works

The mesocycle

Build for a few weeks, then step back. For muscle, the sets matter more than the shape.

Every study checked against the paper, 12 October 2026. Each section carries its grade. Run the numbers in the app.

What a mesocycle is

Still open

A mesocycle is a block of weeks with one job, usually four to six, that builds and then steps back. It is how coaches commonly plan,¹ and how athletes report training: a lighter week about every five to six weeks.² Common is not the same as tested, and we will say where it has not been.

A plan helps strength a little

Strong

With total volume matched, planned variation gave a small extra gain in maximal strength across 35 studies.³ Part of that may be variety itself: none of the studies behind it compared a plan with unplanned variety.⁴

For muscle, the shape barely matters

Settled

For size, how volume and intensity were arranged made little difference when the total was equal, linear or undulating.^3,5 The 2026 American College of Sports Medicine position found periodization did not consistently change outcomes.⁶

No model wins outright

Strong

Linear and undulating plans came out level for strength across 17 studies;⁷ undulating may edge it for trained lifters.³

Fitness and fatigue, at once

Still open

Every hard week builds fitness and fatigue together, and fatigue fades faster. That is the fitness-fatigue model, a useful frame,⁸ but fitted to real athletes its numbers are too unstable to predict anyone's week.⁹

Ramping volume: thin, but promising

Still open

In trained men, adding sets every two weeks beat flat volume for squat strength, with no clear difference in muscle.¹⁰ The ramping groups also did more work in total, and no trial has yet tested a ramp inside one block against flat volume at the same total.

Start from what you already handle

Still open

In one small trial, volume set at 1.2 times what each lifter already did beat a standard 22 sets.¹¹

How the Vanguard app runs this

Programs with written weeks run them in order: a settling week a rep easier than written, a week as written, a push and a peak that add sets on key work and move a rep closer to failure, then a deload. The rest deload on a counter, after a set number of sessions. In any week, your answers can hold or trim sets.

The research

The 11 sources this chapter stands on, with what each one actually found.

Israetel, Hoffmann, Davis, Feather, 2021 · Renaissance Periodization
Book · Scientific Principles of Hypertrophy Training
Sets out MEV, MAV and MRV, and the block that builds from one toward the other and then steps back, as a coaching framework. Practice, not trial data.
Book · ISBN 9798708998286
Rogerson, Nolan, Androulakis Korakakis et al., 2024 · Sports Med Open
Survey · n = 246 strength and physique athletes
Athletes deloaded for about 6.4 days every 5.6 weeks: fewer sets and reps, lighter loads, more reps left, the same exercises and days.
Read the paper by Rogerson, Nolan, Androulakis Korakakis et al., 2024 (opens in a new tab)
Moesgaard, Beck, Christiansen et al., 2022 · Sports Med
Meta-analysis · 35 studies, volume matched
Max strength favoured planned variation (0.31, interval 0.04 to 0.57); muscle size did not (0.13, −0.10 to 0.36). Undulating edged linear for strength in trained people only.
Read the paper by Moesgaard, Beck, Christiansen et al., 2022 (opens in a new tab)
Afonso, Rocha, Nikolaidis et al., 2019 · Front Physiol
Analysis of the meta-analyses
None of the 21 studies behind the periodization meta-analyses compared a plan with unplanned variety.
Read the paper by Afonso, Rocha, Nikolaidis et al., 2019 (opens in a new tab)
Grgic, Mikulic, Podnar et al., 2017 · PeerJ
Meta-analysis · 13 studies
Linear against daily undulating plans for muscle size: d = −0.02, no difference.
Read the paper by Grgic, Mikulic, Podnar et al., 2017 (opens in a new tab)
Currier, D'Souza, Singh et al., 2026 · Med Sci Sports Exerc
Position stand · 137 systematic reviews · over 30,000 people
Periodization did not consistently change training outcomes; growth was enhanced by 10 or more weekly sets.
Read the paper by Currier, D'Souza, Singh et al., 2026 (opens in a new tab)
Harries, Lubans, Callister, 2015 · J Strength Cond Res
Meta-analysis · 17 studies · 510 people
No difference between linear and undulating plans for upper- or lower-body strength.
Read the paper by Harries, Lubans, Callister, 2015 (opens in a new tab)
Chiu, Barnes, 2003 · Strength Cond J
Review
Applies the fitness-fatigue model to resistance training: each session adds fitness and fatigue, and fatigue fades faster.
Read the paper by Chiu, Barnes, 2003 (opens in a new tab)
Hellard, Avalos, Lacoste et al., 2006 · J Sports Sci
Modelling study · 9 elite swimmers · one season
The model fit the season (R² 0.79), but its key numbers were too uncertain and too intertwined to interpret.
Read the paper by Hellard, Avalos, Lacoste et al., 2006 (opens in a new tab)
Enes, De Souza, Souza-Junior, 2024 · Med Sci Sports Exerc
Randomised trial · n = 31 trained men · 12 weeks
Adding 4 or 6 leg sets every two weeks beat constant sets for squat max; muscle growth did not differ significantly. The ramping groups did more total work.
Read the paper by Enes, De Souza, Souza-Junior, 2024 (opens in a new tab)
Scarpelli, Nóbrega, Santanielo et al., 2022 · J Strength Cond Res
One leg each · n = 16 trained · 8 weeks
The leg trained at 1.2 times its usual weekly sets grew 1.08 cm² more than the leg on a standard 22 sets.
Read the paper by Scarpelli, Nóbrega, Santanielo et al., 2022 (opens in a new tab)

Research describes groups of people. Your coach will tell you how it applies to you.