Rich_S said:
Indeed. And in my opinion, the HIT guys would get more respect if they didn't insult every other training method in every single article they write.
Rich,
I tend to be a bit defensive about Mike because he was a friend. I know a lot of his training recommendations were a bit whacked out, but you're right: he, or other HITers, did sometimes go out of their way to bash other training methods.
Lots of volume guys bashed Mentzer first, just as NC666 did in this thread ("one set guys are pussies," when in fact the OPPOSITE is true: if you can do one death set of 20 w/ your 10 rep squat max, for instance, a pussy you ain't).
But that's no reason for Michael and others to start indiscriminately bashing back...though he wasn't religious, figuratively turning the other cheek might've been better in some circumstances.
I don't think I've ever read a HIT article that didn't waste half the page by talking about how every other training system is worthless, dangerous, and stupid, how there is only one right way to train and that right way is HIT, how everyone who disagrees is an indoctrinated moron, and then go on to talk about Ayn Rand and objectivist philosophy and how it proves that HIT is the only sound way to train.
You have a point there.
Michael's objectivism was okay by me, but I got a bit annoyed when I read the same recycled articles again and again, all talking about the exaltation of man, heroism, and the evils of skeptics, mystics, Kant, et al. I didn't give a shit what the volume guys were doing...if they wanted to think they were so awesome, that's fine by me; I'd let my body set them straight, if for whatever reason it came to that.
I often think his role in "modernizing" training is somewhat underrated. But as I said, Mike's reasoning did start to veer off in odd directions, and I can't help but to confess I knew, from first-hand experience, he was very paranoid when it came to defending his theory.
And I think deep down he knew it was flawed, but he himself was too indoctrinated to see a way out. Perhaps worse, many of his more vocal critics
were rather stupid in the way they went about picking at him; e.g., Dan Duchaine's ad hominemizing.
Still, Michael should've known better. Instead of recognizing all the holes in his take on training, he let himself believe that the extent of his detractors' arguments were strictly limited to his behavior prior to being committed (drinking piss, streaking, talking about Arthur Jones as a god who could turn men into whales). It didn't help that lots of idiots perpetuated this instead of addressing Heavy Duty's actual problems. But those who did were largely ignored...Michael but them in the same category with the retards who couldn't get beyond the piss-drinking jokes.
Anyway, sorry to jump on you; nothing you really said warranted that response. I suppose I lament what Mike represented, what he could've been, and stick up for that almost as much as I do the person, a good man with some rather curious notions about bodybuilding
(try 205 instead of 900; hey I was 150). I can tell you that my biggest obstacle in putting on size was extreme lack of appetite. I hated eating. The only increase in calories I had during that month was not in the form of food but in decrease of expenditure as I didn't have to walk all over the campus to get to classes. Maybe 350-400 calories a day. I can also tell you that I put on 12lbs. of which probably 7-8 were muscle put on 60-70 lbs. on my squat and I finally found out what it feels like to have to squeeze your thighs into the leg of your pants (w/o being a woman
Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
