how many of you train HIT

[spatts]

Let's try to bring it back around, please?

 

[ANABOLICK1]

HIT style, heavy duty(Mentzer), DC's routine...is all the same.
Only thing that differs how each of us uses it is up to the individuals recuperative abilities(how long it takes to recover from each workout)
I strongly believe EVERYONE only needs one solid working set per exercise(adding higher intensity methods if you're more advanced or have high recup ability), and no more than 2 exercises for bodypart.

 

[Hannibal]

Let's try to bring it back around, please?

I disagree with HIT (Mike Mentzer style training) on general principle. The basis of the program is to do the LEAST amount of work and see gains. This is BS!! My way of thinking is this...we only have so many training days in a lifetime...why not do the MOST training that our body can handle and get the most gains.

Mike always bragged that when he put someone on his program they always gained size and strength. Well forgive me but....DUH!! You take someone that is on a moderate to high volume training schedule and put him on a "almost no volume" training schedule and he is going to gain like crazy. It's no magic bullet...just common sense.

My question has always been...what happens when you overtrain on this "one set per" training method...the only place to go is "no sets" and that is just wasted time. Miss a training session or two a month...and over the course of a couple years you are going to be a long way behind someone that was doing 4, 5 or even 10 sets...when they felt overtrained they just reduced the sets but didn't stop working.

 

[Hannibal]

Now if your definition of HIT is simply High Intensity Training...then yeah I believe in it.

Let me introduce you to Mr. Scareyface...

 

[ANABOLICK1]

I think there is a big misconception out there on what HIT is.

Even Dorian Yates used to do up to 7 sets (sometimes more) per bodypart. The only difference is he called his sets warm up sets while others called them working sets......just a difference in interpretation, that's all.

I really don't think anyone out there does one set per bodypart.

2 sets per bodypart is optimal (2 diff. exercises, 1 set per)

 

[ANABOLICK1]

I disagree with HIT (Mike Mentzer style training) on general principle. The basis of the program is to do the LEAST amount of work and see gains. This is BS!! My way of thinking is this...we only have so many training days in a lifetime...why not do the MOST training that our body can handle and get the most gains.

Mike always bragged that when he put someone on his program they always gained size and strength. Well forgive me but....DUH!! You take someone that is on a moderate to high volume training schedule and put him on a "almost no volume" training schedule and he is going to gain like crazy. It's no magic bullet...just common sense.

My question has always been...what happens when you overtrain on this "one set per" training method...the only place to go is "no sets" and that is just wasted time. Miss a training session or two a month...and over the course of a couple years you are going to be a long way behind someone that was doing 4, 5 or even 10 sets...when they felt overtrained they just reduced the sets but didn't stop working.

You don't seem to understand the principle at all.
You need to do some serious research.
You CAN'T overtrain on one set, IF you allow enough time to recover from it..

 

[gymrat]

Some great posts guys

 

[Rich_S]

And Mike Mentzer never did one set only per body part, not while he was competing. He would do 2-6 work sets per part. You must remember this was at a time when most were training 6 days a week, sometimes twice a day, with up to 20 sets a body part. Mike's routines were a breath of fresh air.

I've always trained low volume, and Have gone from 144.5lbs at nearly 6'4 to 260lbs at a high point all within 4 years. The most I've done for a bodypart is 4-6 working sets. If anyone wants to call those type of gains, pussy, then so be it.

I'd like some people to tell Dorian Yates that HIT is pussy. Perhaps Casey Viator, or Tom Platz. Those guys along with Mike Mentzer trained with incredible intensity. They were HARD workers. Dante who does no more than one set per body part, a session, and is 300lbs, would laugh at such a statement.

Different strokes for different folks, but don't make such outlandish statements.

There was an interview with Dorian Yates in Ironman a couple of years ago where he said that he was NEVER trained by Mentzer and that he NEVER followed the HD/HIT program. He basically said that he always used lower volume than most bodybuilders but that he didn't belive one set to failure was enough.

And you are correct, Mentzer himself never followed the 1 set protocol while he was competing.


The bottom line is that a lot of what Mentzer said was just plain WRONG. Now, it may be true that for some people at certain times in their training programs, that 1 set to failure is optimal. But to say that it is always optimal for all people during every workout during all phases of the training program is simply incorrect, it's so absurd as to not even be worth debating.

Furthermore, as an example of Mentzer's complete lack of knowledge regarding physiology and exercise science, in a reprint of one of his articles in the current issue of Ironman he states that there's really no difference between fast twitch and slow twitch fibers and that even if there were a difference that it is widely known that individual fibers can change from fast twitch to slow twitch and back and vice versa within hours. He then went on to say that stretching and aerobics should never be part of a serious bodybuilding program because they deplete energy that could be otherwise used for taking sets to failure.

 

[ANABOLICK1]

There was an interview with Dorian Yates in Ironman a couple of years ago where he said that he was NEVER trained by Mentzer and that he NEVER followed the HD/HIT program. He basically said that he always used lower volume than most bodybuilders but that he didn't belive one set to failure was enough.

And you are correct, Mentzer himself never followed the 1 set protocol while he was competing.


The bottom line is that a lot of what Mentzer said was just plain WRONG. Now, it may be true that for some people at certain times in their training programs, that 1 set to failure is optimal. But to say that it is always optimal for all people during every workout during all phases of the training program is simply incorrect, it's so absurd as to not even be worth debating.

Furthermore, as an example of Mentzer's complete lack of knowledge regarding physiology and exercise science, in a reprint of one of his articles in the current issue of Ironman he states that there's really no difference between fast twitch and slow twitch fibers and that even if there were a difference that it is widely known that individual fibers can change from fast twitch to slow twitch and back and vice versa within hours. He then went on to say that stretching and aerobics should never be part of a serious bodybuilding program because they deplete energy that could be otherwise used for taking sets to failure.

Do yourself a favor. Go buy Mike Mentzer's 'Heavy DutyII : Mind and Body' and save your breath. Seriously, you'll learn a lot.
Check out pg. 87. Great pic of Mentzer training Yates !

And do yourself another favor and stop reading bs articles.

Here's where you're wrong. You compare yourself to genetic freaks that the pros are. They will get huge no matter how they train ! because they have super recuperative abilities, and are genetically predisposed. In all likelihood, you are no freak. So don't compare your training to their's.

Reprint in a current issue? The man's been dead for a few years now ! Who's talking for him now? It's no secret that before he died he had a fallout with Ironman magazine, as he use to write columns for them, and the editors did not like him because he was speaking the truth about every facet of BBing...

Mentzer devoted many years to the science of BBing after retiring from the sport, and his training principles apply to EVERYONE. No matter what your genetics are. The only difference between you and everybody else is the time it takes to recover from a workout..

 

[casualbb]

Mentzer really was just wrong on a few fundamental things. Here's one: He believed that the body had some limit of "recuperative abilities" that needed to be regenerated before growth could occur. That's just physiologically wrong. It's been demonstrated time and time again that further training doesn't interrupt the repair process even if performed before repair is complete.

Also, with his "genetically challenged" individuals, those who weren't making strength or size gains on once a week, he would do as infrequently as once a month! That's ridiculous! Since thealready ultra-low frequency isn't working, he decided to try and make it even lower. He never really considered that perhaps the low frequency itself was the reason for lack of progress.

Let me change gears for a sec. Of course HIT and HD work. Everything works to some extent. There isn't a program that won't grow SOME muscle and gain SOME strength. I really think, though, that science can point to a quicker way to achieve both.

-casualbb