Is high volume ok?

[karellan]

1. High volume theory lacks specificity. It can not tell you at what exact point growth has been stimulated. Take the typicial 4-5 exercises per body part of 5+ sets of 10 reps. If you don't make progress, should you add or subtract a set? From which exercise? Add or subtract weight? From which exercise?

Does HIT really tell you at "what exact point growth has been stimulated"? Failure after one set? Now some authors may say they know when growth has been stimulated. But simply saying this does not make it so. Any research they point to overlooks one possibility, would they have grown more if they did a few extra sets? Whether the intensity was higher or lower, to failure or not, the researchers cannot say what the results would have been.

I understand what you're saying in the second half. If you're doing 4-5 exercises per bodypart, it is hard to gauge your progress. I like to focus on one exercise per major bodypart. I can go to failure. I can do more sets if I want. And I have a rough estimate of how I'm progressing (either in strength or total workload).

2. Body parts are exposed to more training due to overlap. When you work your chest, you are also using your tri's and shoulders. And working the back works your bi's. Again, when you don't see progress with your tri's (lets say), do you add or subtract a set from your tri routine or chest routine.

Overlap is a problem. Exposing the body parts to more training isn't necessarily bad, but strength levels can be affected.

I don't have a tri routine. I bench and I press overhead.

3. High volume does not give enough time for the body to compensate for growth. How can it? When you work out 5-6 days per week and working some body parts more than once, where is the opprutuniy to grow? Your body does not grow during the workout, it starts to compensate for growth while resting. Where is the rest time if you're working out 5+ times per week? As Arthur Jones pointed out, the more sets you do requires more of your body's resources. The more of the resources that are used up, the longer it will take to replenish them, and thats not even taking into account the time needed for growth.

What is enough time to compensate for growth? Who says? Researchers or Stuart McRobert?

How can it? I guess you've never ate 5,000 calories per day. I don't work the same bodyparts directly more than once a week right now but I definitely think it would be possible to follow a routine training each part twice a week on which you'd grow.

If you work out 5 days per week, you aren't working out 24 hours each time. you are working out for maybe an hour per workout. The other 23 odd hours of the day and while you're sleeping 9 hours your body is continually repairing muscle.

How can you grow? Eat enough and get enough sleep.

I think Arthur Jones is one of the most interesting characters in the iron game, but I don't think much of his training theories. He was trying to sell his nautilus equipment. The American public doesn't want to hear that they need to workout more than once or twice a week. BTW, have any of you guys checked out Arthur Jones 1,000+ page autobiography. It's available in electronic format from Ellington Darden's www.classicx.com

4. I think the term high volume should be renamed over volume. The key to stimulating growth is maximal muscle contraction. You (meaning everbody) can acheive a maximal contraction in as little as 2 sets. Why would you need 15 sets to do what could take 2. When you take an exercise to positive failure, you have acheived a maximal contraction

This last one isn't really a point. I think it can be overtraining, but isn't as often as most people think. I agree that you can stimulate growth in 2 sets. But is it the maximum amount of muscle growth possible?

You can cause more microtrauma with more sets. I think we can agree on that. Our muscular systems are capable of a lot more than we give them credit for. But of course there is a limit. Our immune systems can easily be overwhelmed when we venture higher in sets.

Einstein, I'm enjoying this discussion.


Goahead,

I'm with you. I think it's good to change the volume every once in a while. Like I've said, less sets works well for strength. Although I think it's more mental than anything, knowing you just have to go all out on one or two sets to establish new personal bests.

I'm doing low to moderate volume right now. Around 10 sets 3 times a week. Some of the HIT guys are probably doing double takes right now as I basically described a low volume HIT program. I'm focusing on strength now like I said. Some sets are taken to failure and some aren't. Overhead presses are one exercise I'm really focusing on now and I can't mentally not go to failure. I just want more weight for more reps.

With a proper HIT routine, you will see an increase in either weight used or reps with each exercise of every workout and never hit a plateau

Even if I'm dieting? Just kidding.

But I'm interested in what you said. Listen, I think that sometimes there may be inherent ceilings for some lifts which make it hard to make continual progress every workout. Take overhead presses for example. I'm up to using 175 for a set of 3 and I weigh around 210. How exactly would I make better progress with HIT? How am I not going to hit a plateau before getting to 205 for 3 like I want to? If you have any ideas I really am very open to them.

feel free to correct me but if you can do 25 sets / body part. I think you don't train like an animal or you're on juice. Do you rep until the moment you're feel like you're head is going to explode?

Don't train like an animal? What is your definition of training like an animal? Because most HITters could be felled by one of my high volume workouts

Is training like an animal doing 2 sets to failure for one exercise? What if you do that and then continue doing set after set to muscular failure? What if after the 5th set every rep of every set makes you "feel like your head is going to explode"?

Now, I'm not talking about your typical biceps pumper. I'm talking bent rows. Have you ever tried to 10 sets of rows to failure? Have you ever done more than 2 sets of deadlifts in one workout?

If training like an animal is the issue then HIT loses. You can combine heavy sets to failure with more.

I think the only area where HIT stands at the top of the hill is in terms of recovery. For those who can't tell when they're going over the line, it gives them stricter limits.

If you have tried HIT and wasn't impressed, my guess is you didn't follow the theory through 100%. Maybe you didn't go to + failure, worked out to often, or did to many sets

Einstein, why is it that he must not have followed the program right. What if he did all that and still didn't gain?

High volume literally breaks every physiological rule for muscle growth.

I'm glad the muscle scientists finally figured this out. I think some of the guys who grow off high volume should be informed.

Sarcasm aside, I'm very impressed that you're willing to help out those who you feel need guidance.

you obviously don't train with enough intensity, or have a near perfect diet.

What if he trains with the same intensity you do but does more sets and he has a near perfect diet? Unbelievable I know.

The 'HITer's central philosophy is never at fault' because it works for 999,999 people out of a million.

Oh thank god the training Holy Grail. We'll never have to worry about plateaus again.

What is your definition of "works"? Any program will produce results if you put the work in.

However everybody requires the same workload to stimulate growth.

I find this to be the most unreasonable statement in this entire thread. Even more so than this one ...

Cats fly carrots.

The same workload?

The same workload!?!

What?

Workload is the total amount of weight lifted in a session. Not just intensity.

Individuals can even stimulate growth with different workloads. Yes the same person. Like when you switch from low volume to high volume (if you ever do) you'll find that you stimulate growth even though you're using a different workload.

Is the hardest rep of a set the first rep?the 5th?No it is the last rep, because it is that rep that requires more bodily resources to complete it. The last rep that takes you to + failure is requiring maximal intensity and contraction.

Bodily resources. You mean glycogen. (With a little will power mixed in)

Bodily resources are the most taxed on the last rep of a set.

But why just one final rep?

What if you had two, three or even 10 last reps in a workout?

If you could curl 120lbs for 10 reps but only did 4 do you think you would ever grow? No. If you did 8 reps would you grow? No, you must carry a set to positive failure if you are to stimulate an increase in strength and size.

All right, put down your copy of Heavy Duty 2 and come out with your hands up.

If you can curl 120 lbs for 10 reps, well firstly if it's without body swing, congratulations.

Here's a scenario for you. What if you did 10 sets of 5 with 120 lbs? Only the last set or two would actually be taken to failure.

You don't think you'd grow?

Your second argument is what works for me may not work for you. That is also physiologically incorrect. Using the biecp as an example: Your bicep works the same way as mine. The sole purpose of the bicep is to contract. This is universal in all humans. Likewise, our bicep is composed of the same material, there is no human that is born with a bicep made out of fat, magnesium, or anything else wierd. Since we are similar in physiological structure, we also share the same stimulus needed to produce growth and size (training to + failure).

Sorry but that is incorrect. You're forgetting those who grow off super high volume. If it works for them, why doesn't it work for you?

You share the same physiological makeup....

 

[Tuna Guy]

The whole point of training is progressive reistance/overload. At some stage progress will stop with regards to overload. For example say on the bench you perform 120 for 8 and then 130 for 6 and you workyour way up to 130 for 8 and 135 for 6 without the use of to many forced reps, but then progress dries up. One way of increasing overload would be to up the volume, 130 for 6 and then 135 for 5 x 2. Then concentrate upon working these poundages up. When progress dries up here either concentrate upon a different exercise of revert back to 2sets with an appropriate weight.

This method is also assuming al other things being equal.

 

[einstein1]

"Does HIT really tell you at "what exact point growth has been stimulated"? Failure after one set? "
-yes- going to positive failure stimulates growth because it is the last rep of the set which requires 100% intensity of effort. You can acheive + failure after one set.

"Any research they point to overlooks one possibility, would they have grown more if they did a few extra sets? "
- it's true that the more heavy exercise you do will cause more microtears in the muscle. The problem is high volume routines do not give you the rest require to overcompensate for the workout. HIT looks for the optimum routine, one that is time efficient and stimulates growth.

"What is enough time to compensate for growth? Who says? "
-recovery time depends on a lot of factors (diet, steroids, sleep, and even genetics). Recovery time differs for each individual and HIT does not tell people what thier recovery time is, it does tell you what the stimulus for growth is and how not to overtrain. Mentzer said to start with a 1 day on 2 day off schedule. If you can make progress on your routines after 1 day off then you can switch. Some people need 3-4 days off, it all depends on the variables I mentioned above (and possibly others).

"I definitely think it would be possible to follow a routine training each part twice a week on which you'd grow. "
-yes but you will eventually hit a plateau from the overtraining.

"How can you grow? Eat enough and get enough sleep. "
-I would modify the statement from eat enough to eat a well balanced diet.

"I don't think much of his training theories. He was trying to sell his nautilus equipment. "
-As a scientist, I can see where Jones was interested to find the optimal workout. Yes he was selling a product but so is everyone else trying to sell you their routine.

"I agree that you can stimulate growth in 2 sets. But is it the maximum amount of muscle growth possible? "
-as I said earlier, more sets means more muscle trauma. It's easier for you body to recover and compensate for growth after 1-2 sets vs. 15-20 sets every other day.

"But I'm interested in what you said. Listen, I think that sometimes there may be inherent ceilings for some lifts which make it hard to make continual progress every workout. "
-the more weight you use on mil presses, it becomes harder to stabilize yourself. I understand your dilema because I experienced the same thing. My advice is to start using the machienes, so you don't need to worry about balance. The machienes only go up to a certain weight, but I always stack more weight on top of the macheine stack to get the weight I want.

"How exactly would I make better progress with HIT? How am I not going to hit a plateau before getting to 205 for 3 like I want to? If you have any ideas I really am very open to them. "
-instead of using the BB, use the machiene. Take each set to + failure, and don't overtrain your delts. Also do 2 sets of DB lat raises to + failure for your lat delts.

"Because most HITters could be felled by one of my high volume workouts "
-working out should not be an endurance contest. Yes, if I offered you a million dollars to workout for 3 days straight you probably could, but would that be productive? HIT believes that after you have stimulated growth (by going to + failure), any more sets performed is overtraining.

"Einstein, why is it that he must not have followed the program right. What if he did all that and still didn't gain? "
-the fact is that HIT works for everyone because everyone is physiologically built the same. That person would either need to increase rest days, or look to see if there is any overlap. That is assuming that person is getting a balanced diet and is going to + failure and not overtraining.

"What if he trains with the same intensity you do but does more sets and he has a near perfect diet? Unbelievable I know. "
-I would doubt he is going to positive failure if that person can do more sets with the same or more reps. That or he needs to increase the weight used.

"However everybody requires the same workload to stimulate growth. "
-positive failure is that workload. You will not grow if (say) you can curl 120lbs for a max of 10 reps and only perform 4 reps. Why is this statement unreasonable?

"Bodily resources are the most taxed on the last rep of a set. But why just one final rep? What if you had two, three or even 10 last reps in a workout?"
-As I said earlier, if you can do more reps after supposedly going to + failure, you didn't truely go to + failure. You should be able to do more reps. I know, you're probably now thinking doing negatives. Mentzer said to throw in 1 or 2 negatives on a random basis. Remember, while doing negatives, you usually ahve someone help you with the weight because you can't control it. The more that person helps you, the less amount of that weight you're actually doing, so you are not truely performing a negative at the weight you think you are.

"Here's a scenario for you. What if you did 10 sets of 5 with 120 lbs? Only the last set or two would actually be taken to failure. You don't think you'd grow?"
-Why do 10 sets when you can go to positive failure in 1 or 2? Yes you would grow, but only if you took off more rest days.

"Sorry but that is incorrect. You're forgetting those who grow off super high volume. If it works for them, why doesn't it work for you?"
-those people also have steroids and money for a very good diet. Also, I bet if you were to keep track of the progress between a super high volume vs HIT, the HITer would make more progress with his workout in terms of either adding weight or reps to a set.

 

[Maximum Intensity]

You can argue this until your are blue in the face, it is not going to get resolved -- everybody has their own ideas, likes, and dislikes. Each and everyone one of us here follows different programs -- they may be similar or based upon similar theories, but they are all different in one way or another. Train until you determine what works best for you. Stop trying to convince others that what you do is best -- or are you trying to convince yourself. Focus that energy in the gym. I do not like HIT -- period. I don't like the results I get from it. Does that make all the HIT followers incorrect in there belief -- no. They have found what works for them -- sorry to tell you guys, it does not work everyone. On the other hand, I am not going to try and convince you that my moderate volume approach is best. Why? Because we tailor everything in life to our indvidual needs and desires. We are a society of unique individuals -- our training needs to fit our individual needs.

 

[cAbo]

i think the human body is the most efficient machine that ever would exist, or maybe just more efficient that you may think.
so it is capable to deal with anything, so if you up the volume or up the intensity it would get more efficient to adapt to that.

Just like with intense and long sicknesses you get stronger after the body recuperate

 

[Tuna Guy]

What does everyone think HIT is.

Everyone seems to be argueing about 1 set to failure to promote growth and then recommending 6 sets for chest. ?

 

[Belial]

i think the human body is the most efficient machine that ever would exist, or maybe just more efficient that you may think.
so it is capable to deal with anything, so if you up the volume or up the intensity it would get more efficient to adapt to that.

Just like with intense and long sicknesses you get stronger after the body recuperate

cABo, I'd agree to a certain extent, but there ARE limitations. The body is efficient, but it's not capable of adaptation to ANYTHING. it can only process X amounts of food, repair Y amounts of muscle fibers, increase strength by Z amount, etc. Though some athletes prosper through what many here would consider GROSS overtraining, (some olympic lifters, many speed athletes, team athletes, etc.), they nevertheless adapt and excel. But even they have their limits.

What we're after is OPTIMIZATION of conditions for growth; no sense forcing the body to put up with less-than-ideal conditions, no?

btw, this is an excellent discussion.

 

[HeavyDutyGuy]

I dont buy the argument taht volume trainers train as hard, by definition, they CAN"T .Mentzer said thisyears ago-comparethe spritner ro the distance runner, one trains long- but it isn't very intense, the sprinter on the other hand trains more intensely, but he can't do it as long.... you can't sprint a full speed for a mile.
To bring this fully into the gym, Try doing a BFT set wioth a maxweight for say8 reps, 6-8 forced reps, drop 30-40%, repeat, then drop again. You can do one ortwo sets of this per exercise and 1-3 exercises per body part- I DARE anyone to do 15- 20 sets of this.
On a more day to day level, I rarely see ANY volume trainers going to failure, except maybe on bench presses.

 

[Burning Rage]

HIT or High Volume, that is the ?

Let me start off by saying that I am NOT going to tell anyone what "will" and "won't" work for them. The High Volume method is very popular, because most of the top bodybuilders use it. Some of their routines are printed in magazines or in books and a novice trainee, will often be very impressionable, so they follow it. At first they make great gains off it and then they stop making progress. Eventually they start to lose muscle from overtraining or they get injured from not giving his/hers muscles, tendons enough recovery time. But some people will always continue to make great gains off of the High Volume method. And why? Because they have superior genetics compared to the average Joe. I have exceptionally good genetics, but not to the point where high volume kept on working for me.
Another method of training came out called HIT (High Intensity Training), which was created by Arthur Jones, who trained Casey Viator and Mike Mentzer. The idea behind this training method is not to focus on quanity, but quality of each work set. So instead of doing 8-25+ sets for each body part to stimulate a certain amount of muscle fibers, you try to use a minimal amount of sets 1-3 sets to failure, to make use of the targetted muscle fibers for that specific muscle. It does make sense. Why spend 2-3 hours a day in a gym, while you can spend no more than 2-3 hours a WEEK in the gym and make the same amount or better gains? Mike Mentzer became a huge HIT advocate. But I believe his methods went sour. In his first book Heavy Duty I, he recommends that you do a 3 day split (mon/wed/fri) each week. Here he recommends that you do about 2 sets per body part, focusing on pre-exhaustion techniques for bigger body parts, to stimulate more muscle fibers. Then in Heavy Duty II, he started to recommend training once every 3-5 days. So it may have took 2 weeks to fully train your body, which I believe is ludicrous. I believe that he modified his methods to make more money, but that's just my opinion. If you trained once every 3-5 days, you will become a fat slob, just like Mike Mentzer became after he retired from the sport. If all of you HIT advocates believe that Mike Mentzer, Casey Viator and Dorian Yates got their development from using HIT their entire career, then all I can do is laugh. Mike Mentzer, Casey Viator and Yates, started out doing the high volume training. Why did the high volume methods work for them? 2 reasons, Genetics and Anabolic Steroids. I don't know if any of you heard, but Mike Mentzer and Ray Mentzer just passed away this June. Mike Mentzer died on June 11th, 2001 and Ray died a day later. That was pretty weird. I didn't really hear any specific details about their deaths, but I know that both of them eventually became sick from heart problems, which were probably caused by what? A lot of bodybuilding magazines won't state this in order to protect their reputations, but I believe their heart conditions were caused by steroids. As was Arnold's. Arnold was lucky to be saved from surgery. But I did hear that Ray died of kidney failure, do to Berger's disease. I think that's what it's called. I'd say I got side tracked here. My thoughts about training, I don't believe anyone should do more than 30 sets of overall work in one work out. If you do use a high number of sets, don't plan on training to failure on each work set, because it is impossible to do so, even if you were on a lot of steroids. If someone told me that they did 30 work sets to failure for their chest, I'd laugh and call them a liar. It is impossible because of a waste product called Lactic Acid, which is produced by your body while you're doing a lot resistance training. You know on your final reps, the weight is getting heavier and heavier? And eventually you can't even lift it, that's do to Lactic Acid. Also, you cannot stimulate all of your muscle fibers for a certain muscle group. Your muscles will always keep some in reserve. As for the "Pump", it is caused by a flow of blood into a muscle, often caused by High Volume training. Some people don't even get pumps while doing HIT, but I do for some weird reason. The pump does not produce muscle growth. For those who don't really know which method will work for them, start with a lower volume. I recommend trying HIT first. If it doesn't work then try High Volume training. Start at a lower volume and increase it if you feel you need to. Don't start out doing the same routines as the pros, that was my mistake. It will leave you very frustrated and hopefully you will not get injured from it. I was out of gym for almost 6 years because of doing what I did. I've learned a lot out of the gym. I've trained some of my friends while I was injured. They have made great progress. My method of training is low volume or HIT, call it what you want.

 

[The Dude]

OK, my turn to offend a bunch of people! In my experience, HIT advocates that can't see another way have been either stupid, lazy, and/or lack a high school diploma (immature and lacking real, tested experience). HIT is not the end all, be all of workout philosophies. Anyone who believes so deserves to have their opinion cast aside as irrelevant.