A couple of more HIT question

[Becky]

Thanks so much for the response to my HIT questions last week. I stated do HIT last week also and I can tell you I felt as pumped after it as I do when I do 4 or 5 sets.

I am going to give it a try for about 8 weeks and I want to make sure I am giving it a fare one so please comment on the following:

1) I am doing 1 warm-up set and 1 heavy work set of each exercise. Lifting 2 days a week. Is that what you do? How long should the work out last?

2)What type of Cardio are you doing? How often?

3)What type of results should I realistically expect in 8 weeks?

THANKS!

 

[DaCypher]

1) Personally, I don't do warm up sets at all. I find they fatigue the muscles too much (even with very light weight) before the real set. A lot of guys like warm up sets, so its really up to you. Try a few workouts with warmsup and a few without, see what you prefer. I find a few minutes on the stationary bike before a workout to get the blood flowing works well for me.

2) I do cardio 3 times a week on my off days. Usually do about 30-45 minutes on stationary bike or sometimes some other, somewhat more exotic equipment that my gym has. Also, check out this link on cyberpump.com which talks about cardio and HIT.

3) Your results depend greatly on factors other than just what you do in the gym. For example, your diet will play a large part in what results you get. Therefore, its kind of difficult to say where you will be in 8 weeks. Personally, 8 weeks into using HIT I was seeing large gains in strength as well as size.

Disclaimer: This is what has been working for me. I'm not necessarily advocating that everyone should do this exactly. I also modify my routine somewhat often. For example, sometimes I might do a warmup set for squats, and sometimes I will do more/less cardio in any given week.

Anyways, good luck. Tell me if you want more info...

 

[Blood&Iron]

Okay here's my take(overly verbose as usual):

1)I used to be a 1-set, no warm-up kinda guy. I'd start with 5 minutes of light cardio and then 15-20 minutes of stretching before starting my workout. Provided you're using a sufficiently slow lifting cadence, your first few reps actually serve as your warm-up. In the last few months though I've dropped the cardio and stretching and do several light warm-up sets instead. I'd agree with DaCypher as far as warm-ups detracting from your work-set, but only if you don't rest long enough between sets. Typically I'll rest as long as 3-5 minutes between my final warm-up and my work-set. This is certainly counter to many HIT advocates, who feel rest should be minimal, and you won't get the metabolic effects you get when moving quickly between exercises. But I've found this works better for me, as least in terms of muscle building.

You failed to mention whether you are doing an upper-lower split or two full-body workouts. Anyways, lifting two days a week is probably the average for most HITters. Currently I lift 3 days a week.

A HIT workout can last anywhere from 15 minutes to an hour. But more than an hour is generally a bad idea.

2)Many HITters think cardio is counter-productive to building muscle. I don't do any unless dieting and even then keep it minimal(I walk on a treadmill at a 15 degree angle at about 3mph for 30min.) It probably won't be too much of a problem provided you keep it reasonable, i.e. 20-30 minutes 2-3 times a week, and it is good for your general health.

3)You results depend on a large number of factors: your diet, the intensity you put forth in the gym, your genetics, and whether you were overtraining prior to beginning HIT.

As with everything these are merely my experiences and the opinions of people whom I respect. Experiment and find what works for you. I've, for example, found that the long TULs, e.g. 1 min, suggested by many don't work as well for me as TULs of 15-30 seconds.

Hope this helps.

 

[Grizzly]

Ok, let me preface this by saying that I think that HIT is the most over-hyped, bullshit workout strategy ever employed. Therefore, I am biased. However, let me point you to this month's POWERMAG. Ok, so it has terrible editing and I counted numerous errors, around 30, but it still has good writing and a good knowledge base. Anyway, Fred Hatfield's article was all about debunking Mentzer. He did a GOOD job. Ok, so now ya'll people will argue that it's a simple difference of opinion. I have to admit that I disagree with Hatfield on many points, however, let's look at who's "da man" and who's "a man." Hatfield held the world record in the squat for, what, a decade? What record did Mentzer ever hold? NOTHING! It seems to me that Hatfield should be much more respected than Mentzer any day of the week. Now, I know that PLifting and bodybuilding are completely different, hence my disagreement with good ol' Fred, but, if Freddy were to have lost about 30 pounds he would have had a much better physique than Mentzer's srawny ass any day of the week. Hence, listen to Fred Hatfield Phd. becaus he obviously knows a hell of a lot more than that hack Mike Mentzer. Therefore, HIT is BULLSHIT! And I will stand by that statement for ever and ever and ever. HIT is for people who want to say that they are bodybuilders but don't want to put in the time. What kind of bodybuilder lifts once every 1-2 weeks. That's garbage. There's a reason that all, and I repeat, ALL Olympians train 4-6 days week. It's because it works!

 

[DaCypher]

Grizzly,

First of all, because HIT isn't a very well known workout philosophy, not many people use it or even tried it. Therefore there are less people to compare HIT style to other, more traditional styles which bias the results.

Also, just because HIT style is not for you, does not mean it doesn't work. How can you explain that HIT is working for me along with many others?

I also find it interesting that people that don't use HIT often instigate these arguments. You rarely see a HITer trying to convert a non-HITer.

 

[Milford Jenings]

Grizzly,

Have you ever tried to use HIT principles in your workouts for a sufficient period of time to see actual results? If you have and they did not work for you then quit reading now. If you have not read on.

HIT, while not typical of the masses, is a lifestyle. It needs to be built into everything that you do. Bodybuilding and powerlifting are two very different sports but they both require dedication, diet and hard work to attain their respective goals. Mike Mentzer was not a powerlifter, but a bodybuilder with one of the classic, symmetric shapes that is all too rare in the sport today. Bigger is better according to most, but to me is grotesque and not at all appealing. I read the story that you read and walked away unimpressed. This is one man's opinion, such is yours, and should be taken only as such. I am a social scientist and in our field we have three criteria for evaluating theory.

1) Does the theory make common sense?
--HIT emphasizes working muscles till failure. There is no better way to make your body grow than wearing it out. HIT also emphasizes resting completely before lifting again. There is no better way to help the body recover than while at rest. So does HIT make sense? Yes

2) Do the experts agree?
--HIT is not widely agreed upon, but that is due to an under-representation that DaCypher pointed out. However, most strength coaches, and a lot of the body-builders I have gained entree to do agree that it is a valid set of principles. So do the experts agree? Yes

3) Is there supporting literature?
--There have been several studies to compare and contrast the classic volume and HIT philosophies, and for the most part, HIT participants did better on average in not only strength and size gains, but also in general health. Is there supporting literature? Yes

In society today, people are all too happy to take information on authority, or just because he said so. This is what is wrong with most people wanting to get bigger or stronger. They take the advice of someone that they have given authority to without weighing it out for themselves and end up doing a routine that is designed for that person not him or herself. My challenge to you is to drop what you think and try something new. Who knows it might just work for you. If it doesn't work for you, then so be it. But at least try it before you call is BS.

I have spent a number of years (14) in the quest for bigger muscles, more strength and a more symmetric physique. I have tried many ways of working out. Many styles and principles have crossed my path but only HIT has produced the best results in strength, size and stamina.

So have you?

MJ

 

[Blood&Iron]

Grizzly-

Normally I'm a pretty affable guy, but you've made enough idiotic attacks that I won't reply with the usual civility. No one asked for your opinion. This was a thread from someone using HIT who had specific questions for people who have employed this type of training. As you are NOT such an individual your comments are both rude and undesired. Perhaps you should take some time away from bodybuilding and work on your social skills.

Ok, let me preface this by saying that I think that HIT is the most over-hyped, bullshit workout strategy ever employed. Therefore, I am biased.

Biased? Now why do you say that? Anyways, how did you come to this conclusion? Experience? I doubt it.

However, let me point you to this month's POWERMAG. Ok, so it has terrible editing and I counted numerous errors, around 30, but it still has good writing and a good knowledge base. Anyway, Fred Hatfield's article was all about debunking Mentzer. He did a GOOD job. Ok, so now ya'll people will argue that it's a simple difference of opinion. I have to admit that I disagree with Hatfield on many points, however, let's look at who's "da man" and who's "a man." Hatfield held the world record in the squat for, what, a decade?

And a big, strong guy ALWAYS equals an intelligent trainer. It has nothing to do with genetics. Why then aren't all of Hatfield's disciples record holders in the squat?

What record did Mentzer ever hold? NOTHING!

Wow! He was never Miss America either. Considering the fact he didn't compete as a powerlifter it would be sort of difficult for him to hold any PL records.

It seems to me that Hatfield should be much more respected than Mentzer any day of the week. Now, I know that PLifting and bodybuilding are completely different, hence my disagreement with good ol' Fred, but, if Freddy were to have lost about 30 pounds he would have had a much better physique than Mentzer's srawny ass any day of the week.

Since when is Hatfield more respected than Mentzer? There are many, many people who think Hatfield is an utter fraud. As for him having a better physique than Mentzer, I don't recall him ever placing 2nd in the Mr. Olympia.

Hence, listen to Fred Hatfield Phd. becaus he obviously knows a hell of a lot more than that hack Mike Mentzer.

Yes, a PhD in sociology--which is what Hatfield HAS--will make anyone an expert on exercise.

Therefore, HIT is BULLSHIT! And I will stand by that statement for ever and ever and ever. HIT is for people who want to say that they are bodybuilders but don't want to put in the time. What kind of bodybuilder lifts once every 1-2 weeks. That's garbage. There's a reason that all, and I repeat, ALL Olympians train 4-6 days week. It's because it works!

Yes, and they used to, prior to Mentzer, train each bodypart 2-3x a week, doing 2-hour double splits. Oh, and by the way, Dorian has always labelled himself as a HITter, taking his lead from Mentzer's writing, and even trained under Mike for a brief time. But you knew that already.

 

[Grizzly]

Yes, and they used to, prior to Mentzer, train each bodypart 2-3x a week, doing 2-hour double splits. Oh, and by the way, Dorian has always labelled himself as a HITter, taking his lead from Mentzer's writing, and even trained under Mike for a brief time. But you knew that already.

Ok, I was going to remark about Dorian in a different reply, but I'll do it here as well. Go to T-Mag. Somewhere in there there is an interview with Dorian. In it, he states that the whole "he was trained by Mentzer" thing is hogwash. It was convenient for both of them to let people think that and it helped out Mike's little gimmick. More importantly, Dorian is not a traditional HITer. He may have employed the several sets to failure method, but he trained a good amount more than HIT advocates.

As an aside, apparently we're becoming antagonistic towards eachother, but I have to say that you are my favorite fellow on this board to argue with. You might not like me, but I like you. We're having fun, arent' we? I am anyway.

Shucks, now I have to edit because I forgot something. Yes, I do have some experience with HIT. Not the traditional HIT training style, but the adapted Yates technique. I take every set to failure and many times beyond with forced reps and partials and whatnot. The one thing I do drastically different is up the volume. I do 4 working sets per exercise and about 4-5 exercises for the larger muscle groups (legs, back, chest) and 3 exercises for arms(that's 3 for bis and 3 for tris. Although sometimes it's only 2 exercises). Is that experience with HIT? Not the traditional methodology, but I do incorporate some of it.

 

[Grizzly]

Grizzly,

First of all, because HIT isn't a very well known workout philosophy, not many people use it or even tried it. Therefore there are less people to compare HIT style to other, more traditional styles which bias the results.

Also, just because HIT style is not for you, does not mean it doesn't work. How can you explain that HIT is working for me along with many others?

I also find it interesting that people that don't use HIT often instigate these arguments. You rarely see a HITer trying to convert a non-HITer.

Actually, I see HITers doing this all of the time. Many times I've seen it on this board, but most notably is that Drew fellow over on MESO. He's always trying to convert people.

Also, HIT may not be well known by many gym-bunnies and weekend warriors, but I think most hardcore bodybuilders know about it. Anyone on this board knows about it. And I would say that many have tried it. So, yes, the mainstream doesn't know much about it, but those of us in the know do.

 

[DaCypher]

So you incorporate some of it, but it is still "the most over-hyped, bullshit workout strategy ever employed"?

 

[Grizzly]

See, I just can't help myself. I love to argue with you. I love reading and replying to your posts.


Yes, a PhD in sociology--which is what Hatfield HAS--will make anyone an expert on exercise.

Really? I was under the impression that it was in physiology. My mistake. Thanks for clarifying that. So, you're right and his degree doesn't have much to do with training.


Yes, and they used to, prior to Mentzer, train each bodypart 2-3x a week, doing 2-hour double splits. Oh, and by the way, Dorian has always labelled himself as a HITter, taking his lead from Mentzer's writing, and even trained under Mike for a brief time. But you knew that already.

Is there something wrong with this type of training? Let's look at some of the folks who have employed it. Frank Zane, Franco Columbo, Vince Taylor, Robby Robinson, any 70's era bodybuilder and, the biggest advocate of marathon sessions, Arnold Schwarzenegger. Can you argue with any of their physiques? Personally, I think they all looked better than Mentzer. And, included in that list, is 3 Mr. O's. Mentzer never won, now did he? Perhaps the most impressive out of that list is Vince Taylor. It impresses the shit out of me that a 47-ish year old man can take 12th in the Olympia competing against dudes in their late 20's early 30's. That there, my friend, is impressive!

 

[Grizzly]

So you incorporate some of it, but it is still "the most over-hyped, bullshit workout strategy ever employed"?

Yes, I do. I do some of it, but I do believe that the whole of it is crap. I train to absolute failure(a tenet of HIT) but I don't think that it's exclusively a HIT principle. Arnold always said to train to failure and he sure wasn't a HITer. So, that part I can agree with. It's the rest of it that I don't like.

 

[Milford Jenings]

So, if the whole of it is B/S...but some parts are good. Does that mean since part of you is anus that all of you is?

Just curious?

Seriously though, you have to take into account what is good for you and what is not. One very important thing about bodybuilding is genetics. You may respond differently to the same stimuli than I or anyone else does. Since the question was begged of people using it and if so were they having good experiences, you simply could have said "I have used it and did not like it." But to call it B/S as a whole is out of line.

MJ

 

[DaCypher]

Also, I think everyone has their own derivative of HIT. I don't think many people follow the guildelines outlined by the HIT FAQ on cyberpump.com exactly. Everyone has their own slightly different style. I would consider anyone that trains to failure each set to be doing High Intensity Training. Yet you insist that your own techniques are bullshit...

 

[Grizzly]

Milford and DaCypher-

Ok, I did say that training to failure was a tenet of HIT. So, in a sense, one could say that I use HIT. Hell, I call what I do some high intensity shit, but Joe Weider also says to train to failure. Who's principle is it? Weider put it out first. What I was saying is that I incorporate a training principle that is part of HIT, but it's not exclusive to HIT. Ok, now I'm losing myself. Let me try one more time. I say that the whole "by the book" HIT is bullshit. I'm not saying that there's not some merit to some parts of it, but, as a whole, I think it's garbage. Let's just say that I think "YatesIT" is good, but there's been a mutation in the Yates system that makes it something other than HIT. I don't know, maybe I'm being contradictory and not realizing it, but I maintain that once you've deviated from the established principles you're no longer doing strict HIT. It becomes something else.

 

[Grizzly]

So, if the whole of it is B/S...but some parts are good. Does that mean since part of you is anus that all of you is?

Just curious?

Seriously though, you have to take into account what is good for you and what is not. One very important thing about bodybuilding is genetics. You may respond differently to the same stimuli than I or anyone else does. Since the question was begged of people using it and if so were they having good experiences, you simply could have said "I have used it and did not like it." But to call it B/S as a whole is out of line.

MJ

Ok, apparently, I peeved quite a few people. I appologize. That wasn't my intent. Would I say that I was out of line? No. I was simply offering my opinion, which differs from yours. Do I really care if you people like my opinion or not? No. I'm very good at doing that. I have an opinion on everything and I'm very free with them. I'm what they call outspoken. My mother says that I should become a lawyer because I like to argue so much. But, I digress. My reason for posting was two fold. One, I was feeling semi-ornery last night, so, perhaps, I came off a little too harsh. Sorry. More importantly, I honestly believe HIT(strict HIT) to be a sub-par training methodology and I was outlining that and some of my reasons for that belief for the person who asked the question. Ok, so I didn't answer any of her questions, but that's because I was trying to disuade her from using HIT to begin with. If someone were to post a question like "I've been washing my car with sand for the past few weeks. Have any of you experienced good results with this method?" would you reply with something along the lines of "I tried that once and I didn't think it worked very well" or "What the fuck are you doing? Are you trying to ruin your paint job just like I did to mine when I washed it with sand?" Just my take on things here.

Again, I appologize for peeving you people. That was not my intention.

 

[DaCypher]

I guess I find it hard to understand that the whole thing is bullshit, yet certain parts of it are so good that you use them yourself. I can understand not following the HIT techniques exactly as they're stated because I don't follow them all religiously. However, I don't consider the things that I don't use to be bullshit, nor the whole idea of HIT to be bullshit because I only follow a few of its aspects...

 

[Grizzly]

That's what I thought. That's where we have a misunderstanding. I guess it's partially my fault because I did state it that way, but I don't consider training to failure to be exclusive to HIT. It's a simple part of bodybuilding training. I mean, sets and rep schemes are part of HIT, but you wouldn't say that anyone who uses sets and reps is using HIT, would you? I think I just mis-stated what I wanted to say or stated it in an unclear fashion. Sorry.

 

[Blood&Iron]

Jesus, I don't check the boards for a few hours and return to find enough verbiage to rival War & Peace...

Anyway, I'll try to be brief(Knowing me this is a doomed endeavor...)

Go to T-Mag. Somewhere in there there is an interview with Dorian. In it, he states that the whole "he was trained by Mentzer" thing is hogwash.

I read the article some time ago, and this is the reason I phrased what I wrote as I did. Mentzer did supervise some of Yates' workouts. This is recorded fact. He was not Yates' guru though, as has been implied by some. Both men have freely admitted that Yates' did not follow Heavy Duty to the letter. Mentzer says this is why Yates had so many injuries and was forced into retirement. But the fact remains that Yates' WAS a practitioner of HIT. The problem is that under the rubric of HIT one can list a ton of methodologies. I suppose, in some sense, if a term is not well-defined it becomes meaningless, however, there is a fundamental undercurrent to all schools of HIT, namely that intensity is the key to muscle growth and volume should not be excessive. No school of HIT recommends multiple sub-failure sets as as periodization and volume do. A pumping HIT workout is, for example, an oxymoron.

Arnold always said to train to failure and he sure wasn't a HITer.

Actually, I think he was, at least in his early days. One of my favorite HIT workouts comes from Arnold. He might have become more "refined" looking with 2-hour double splits, but he was definitely bigger when he wasn't excessive with his volume. Watch "Hercules in New York" from 1969. Arnold's mind-bogglingly big. I think he could have given the current pros a run for their money, although he was soft compared to the pharmaceutical monsters of today, and he lacks the necessary distended belly.

Is there something wrong with this type of training? Let's look at some of the folks who have employed it. Frank Zane, Franco Columbo, Vince Taylor, Robby Robinson, any 70's era bodybuilder and, the biggest advocate of marathon sessions, Arnold Schwarzenegger. Can you argue with any of their physiques? Personally, I think they all looked better than Mentzer. And, included in that list, is 3 Mr. O's. Mentzer never won, now did he?

It is nearly universally held that the 1980 Olympia was fixed for Arnold. Mentzer probably should have won by accepted judging criteria, although there were some other strong contenders. Personally, I do prefer Zane and Schwarzenegger's physiques to Mentzer, although Mike was stunning.

Ok, apparently, I peeved quite a few people. I appologize. That wasn't my intent. Would I say that I was out of line? No.
More importantly, I honestly believe HIT(strict HIT) to be a sub-par training methodology

Apology accepted, but...
I would say you WERE out of line. You are completely free to have your own opinion, even to express it. But with a discussion forum such as this comes the expectation that members obey common rules of etiquette which I think you failed to do with your initial post(Although, your subsequent posts have, for the most part, been much better in this regard. The change in tone has been noted and has done much to placate me.) Saying "HIT is a
sub-par training methodology" and "HIT is bullshit" are two entirely different things(Although, in neither case have you backed up your assertions with anything more than anecdote.)

I love reading and replying to your posts

Well, I can't really argue with that one, can I?

 

[DaCypher]

I love to argue with you. I love reading and replying to your posts.

I think he's just trying to post opinions opposite of Blood&Iron, just for argument's sake.

 

[Blood&Iron]

I think he's just trying to post opinions opposite of Blood&Iron, just for argument's sake.

Could be. Maybe I'll have to start endorsing german volume and see if he comes over to our side.

Here I'll try a test:
rabbit season.

 

[DaCypher]

Could be. Maybe I'll have to start endorsing german volume and see if he comes over to our side.

Here I'll try a test:
rabbit season.

LOL!

Maybe you should claim that HIT is bad and he'll argue our side.

 

[Grizzly]

LOL!

Maybe you should claim that HIT is bad and he'll argue our side.

Don't worry about that one. I will never endorse HIT, as I understand it and as I have read it in the various FAQ's. Granted, I do like to argue with Blood&Iron, but, I think, that's more due to the fact that he seems to be an intelligent fellow who always happens to disagree with me. Don't know why, but he does. Thus, as another intelligent fellow, I feel it necessary to engage in a war of wits, brains and training methodologies. Call me crazy, but I think that what I do works best, just as you people think that what you do works best. Will I agree that people's bodies respond differently to different training stimuli? Sure. But, I do think that mine is the best method. Of course, that's just because I have experienced very good results with it. If'n you want, I can outline my personal workouts/training methods. Just to compare/contrast with what you all do. Aside from the fact that I spend 5-6 days and do more sets per bodypart, I think that our training might be very similar. Oops, here I go again giving the impression that I do a HIT style training routine. Dont' think that, you crazy fools! Back to where I was, don't say that I'm trying to force my views on folks(despite the fact that I'm trying to do that, at least slightly) because you guys do it too. Anyway, DaCypher and Blood&Iron, I do have to say that this has been a very good day for me. I like to converse...uh, argue...with you guys. You're both intelligent and bring up good points and even, much to my chagrin, point out when I have mis-stated or even AHHH! committed a fallacy of logic. Love you dudes! We should do this again.

 

[Grizzly]

Blood&Iron-

By the way, I don't endorse German volume training. Of course, I don't know all too much about it, but(I can't believe I'm going to say this) I do believe that there is such a thing as too much volume. Of course, in contrast to that, I do believe that controlled over-training is very beneficial to overall growth.

More importantly, I don't think that rabbit season starts for another few weeks. Even if it has started already, you don't want to shoot a rabbit(unless you're not going to eat it) until there has been a very solid frost or two because you might catch that terrible liver disease that they get. It would be better for you to eat 5 anadrol a day than to eat diseased rabbit. Just a heads up for you. Of course, you probably already knew that.

Hey, and, by the way, how the hell do I bring up the template of various smileys and whatnot? I'm tired of the traditional smiley face that you can creat by typing ""

 

[DaCypher]

Grizzyly,

Ok, your points are well taken. Just out of curiousity, do you train each body part more than once a week with your 5-6 day/week routine? I also believe in controlled overtraining, although I'm sure I have a different definition of it than you do. For example, I might do some drop sets, negatives sets, or pre-exhaustion sets to furthur stimulate the muscles every once in a while.

To get more smilies just click on the get more link in the smilies box to the left.

 

[Grizzly]

I train my bodyparts once per week. Currently anyway. I think I'm going back to 6 day/week and then I'll be training legs twice.

You're right, we definitley have different ideas about controlled overtraining. I consider negatives and drop sets part of a good workout. To me, controlled overtraining is doing 35 sets of squats or spending all day doing chins until you get 300-500 total reps. Also, sometimes, I like to train the same bodypart everyday of the week. Usually I try that with legs. Of course, I've never been able to make it all 6 days of the week. Usually I can only do it for 4 days. But it's the thought that counts, right?


Hmmmm, I don't have a smileys box. Must be something wrong with my options.

 

[Blood&Iron]

More importantly, I don't think that rabbit season starts for another few weeks. Even if it has started already, you don't want to shoot a rabbit(unless you're not going to eat it) until there has been a very solid frost or two because you might catch that terrible liver disease that they get. It would be better for you to eat 5 anadrol a day than to eat diseased rabbit. Just a heads up for you. Of course, you probably already knew that.

Actually, the response I was looking for was "duck season"--you know, from Bugs and Daffy.

You're right in pointing out that many HIT advocates are dogmatic and argumentative, but so are most other schools of lifting. People get attached to "their system" and decide everything else is shit--as is the case with much in life. I would disagree with your assertion that I push my beliefs on anyone. I will critique peoples workouts if asked, but I don't tend to attack periodization or volume fans just for the hell of it. I could care less what other people do. I just offer my own experiences which people can take or leave. In general, I tend to be fairly open. I've tried Poliquin's one day arm-cure, which consists of doing a 10-minute arm workout every 30 minutes for about 9 hours(Really started sucking at hour 5 or 6.) I plan to give german volume a shot at some point and I'll continue to experiment with other methodologies. HIT, however, remains the core of what I do--though I'm sure plenty of HITters would argue that I'm overtraining. It's all relative.

 

[Grizzly]

though I'm sure plenty of HITters would argue that I'm
overtraining. It's all relative.

That's where my biggest problem comes in with HIT. The constant insistance that it's so easy to overtrain and that your body needs 2 months in between workouts to fully recover. Ok, so that was a slight overexaggeration. The body is incredibly resilient and can take huge amounts of punishment. The only times I ever have trouble with overtraining is when I'm dieting, go figure, and when I start with my serious mass/strength gain program which is when I train 6 days per week and keep the reps 4-6. After about 5-6 weeks I'm just dying because I hit it hard! But, then all I do is take a week off and everything is fixed. Simple. No need to spend months in between workouts. I think the reason that I get overtrained ever is because I hit it at full intensity every time I enter the gym. I will get one more rep or lift a heavier weight everytime. I don't believe in spending a week training at a lesser intesity just to "maintain" or whatever. I'd rather just not lift. The only problem I have with that sometimes is that on occasion my body just doesn't want to listen. There's been many times I've walked into the gym and I couldn't lift the same amount of weight so I get pissed and leave. I guess that's bad, but my body will do what I tell it to goddamnit! Praise the lord for coffee and buttloads of ephedrine!

 

[Grizzly]

Actually, the response I was looking for was "duck season"--you know, from Bugs and Daffy.

Well, it is duck season, but I don't care about those things. Me, I'm a pheasant hunter and tomorrow I'm going to kill me some birds! Woohoo!

 

[Blood&Iron]

Well, it is duck season, but I don't care about those things. Me, I'm a pheasant hunter and tomorrow I'm going to kill me some birds! Woohoo!

Not a fan of hunting--at least in the traditional sense. Go figure. Don't have any desire to argue about it though.

.
After about 5-6 weeks I'm just dying because I hit it hard! But, then all I do is take a week off and everything is fixed. Simple. No need to spend months in between workouts. I think the reason that I get overtrained ever is because I hit it at full intensity every time I enter the gym. I will get one more rep or lift a heavier weight everytime. I don't believe in spending a week training at a lesser intesity just to "maintain" or whatever. I'd rather just not lift.

Hate to tell you this, but this is a VERY HIT-like statement. BTW, very few HIT advocates recommend the extremes you say HIT entails. Most HITters do full body workouts 2-3 times a week, an upper-lower split, etc. Mentzer got a little extreme in his anti-volume crusade in later years. I can't say I've tried that low a level of volume so I hesitate to say it doesn't work, only that I couldn't handle it. I like being in the gym.

The only problem I have with that sometimes is that on occasion my body just doesn't want to listen. There's been many times I've walked into the gym and I couldn't lift the same amount of weight so I get pissed and leave.

Sounds like me. But I generally finish up the workout and let the failure fire me up to do better in subsequent sets. Sometimes it works, sometimes not.