Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
Mike Mentzer - His Theories...
- Thread starter JKurz1
- Start date
Svetislav_aka_Waczlaff
New member
by the way - I am a natural lifter....
have use some years ago such HIT Training - no compare to the 5x5 in gaining strenght and/or lean body mass, for me it was not very effective... think beginner could work with it but that was it....
his success come from excessive use of drugs and roids no wonder that he died 'young'....
have use some years ago such HIT Training - no compare to the 5x5 in gaining strenght and/or lean body mass, for me it was not very effective... think beginner could work with it but that was it....
his success come from excessive use of drugs and roids no wonder that he died 'young'....
jpt
New member
i think that once you develop that type of size and muscle maturity that he did...that routine worked for him. i think this type of training should be limited to advanced lifters...i personally have never used any of his training theories but i believe a 5x5 is more sound. would like to hear from people who have tried both though
jkurz- also, wasn't he mentally unstable when he started preaching these 1-2 set tactics?
jkurz- also, wasn't he mentally unstable when he started preaching these 1-2 set tactics?
JKurz1
Banned
Good question......was Dorian?jpt said:i think that once you develop that type of size and muscle maturity that he did...that routine worked for him. i think this type of training should be limited to advanced lifters...i personally have never used any of his training theories but i believe a 5x5 is more sound. would like to hear from people who have tried both though
jkurz- also, wasn't he mentally unstable when he started preaching these 1-2 set tactics?
Svetislav_aka_Waczlaff
New member
don't read any books from Mike, so you are better informed about all than me- I think his HIT-Training is only one workset will done absolutely to failure, or follow by drop sets, I am not sure... - long time ago but nevertheless, the bb-stuff if metzer's or arnolds don't work for people who train on natural basis and also no effetive templates gaining strength....
jpt
New member
did dorian employ those theories to build his frame or did he start using these theories at the end of his career? my point is i think it would work for gentecially gifted people who already have acheieved advanced status...if i started training like this i could guarentee i would see 0 results
Svetislav_aka_Waczlaff
New member
another example....
a few years ago (at my beginning of "fitnesstraining"
bought a book from arnold schwarzenegger from beginning of the 80's I think...
the split for advanced was like this :
Mon morn. Chest, Back
Mon even. Biceps Triceps
Tue morn. Legs, Calves
Tues even. Shoulders, Traps
Wed morn. Chest, Back
ect ect to saturday afternoon......
Sunday = Off
5 Sets : 15/12/10/8/6 reps
for every mucle group appr. 3-4 exercises , always the same....
try it for two weeks and see what happens......
think we should pay more attention not to any bodybuilder but to people like Bill Starr, Glenn Pendlay, Marc Rippetoe....
it is clear that most of the people are impressed from the amazing body of these bodybuilders and unfortunately the Newbies only pay
their attention on that what they tell or what is noted in these bodybuilding magazin, because "damn it works and it seemed that they only
have the good genetics and definitely train 6-8 hours per day, yayayayayaaaa......" look into the forum of t.-nation, a lot of naive people there...
a few years ago (at my beginning of "fitnesstraining"
bought a book from arnold schwarzenegger from beginning of the 80's I think... the split for advanced was like this :
Mon morn. Chest, Back
Mon even. Biceps Triceps
Tue morn. Legs, Calves
Tues even. Shoulders, Traps
Wed morn. Chest, Back
ect ect to saturday afternoon......
Sunday = Off
5 Sets : 15/12/10/8/6 reps
for every mucle group appr. 3-4 exercises , always the same....
try it for two weeks and see what happens......
think we should pay more attention not to any bodybuilder but to people like Bill Starr, Glenn Pendlay, Marc Rippetoe....
it is clear that most of the people are impressed from the amazing body of these bodybuilders and unfortunately the Newbies only pay
their attention on that what they tell or what is noted in these bodybuilding magazin, because "damn it works and it seemed that they only
have the good genetics and definitely train 6-8 hours per day, yayayayayaaaa......" look into the forum of t.-nation, a lot of naive people there...
silver_shadow
New member
here's a discussion on MMs HIT from a few months ago
http://www.elitefitness.com/forum/showthread.php?t=482897&page=1&pp=20
http://www.elitefitness.com/forum/showthread.php?t=482897&page=1&pp=20
BiggT
New member
HIT draws people in because it tells HOWS and WHYS and attempts to teach people how to train. Typical bodybuilding bullcrap relies on 'voodoo' and abstract nonsense. The intellect in all of us would much rather read something Mentzer wrote (the guy was very intelligent, well-spoken, and he did have a knack for writing until he went off on a tirade and sunded certifably mad).
HIT is right in that it teaches organization and progression, however, it is dead wrong in the stuff about 'overtraining', and frequency, and volume.
I can't comment on things I don't really have first-hand knowledge of, but to my understanding, Mentzer never used HIT as he wrote about later in his life while he was competing and had a world-class physique. Dorian's version of HIT, also wasn't the ridiculou 1 set to failure every 8-14 days stuff either. From what I know, Dorian built up over several sets to one all out set, similar to a progression scheme in a 5x5 where you pyramid weight each set.
Again, you need to take from literature what you will and fall back on what you know to evaluate it. Do 20-rep breathing squats once a week build big legs? Absolutely. Is it one all out set? Absolutely. Would you consider it Mentzer-like HIT?? No.....Thats where I think Mentzer went a little schizo at the end. Turning good ideas like progressively using more weight into "Do this and only this and anybody who disagrees with one word of it is a moron". I don't know if he truly didn't understand volume/fatigue management, if he wanted to sell stuff, or if he was truly insane.
HIT is right in that it teaches organization and progression, however, it is dead wrong in the stuff about 'overtraining', and frequency, and volume.
I can't comment on things I don't really have first-hand knowledge of, but to my understanding, Mentzer never used HIT as he wrote about later in his life while he was competing and had a world-class physique. Dorian's version of HIT, also wasn't the ridiculou 1 set to failure every 8-14 days stuff either. From what I know, Dorian built up over several sets to one all out set, similar to a progression scheme in a 5x5 where you pyramid weight each set.
Again, you need to take from literature what you will and fall back on what you know to evaluate it. Do 20-rep breathing squats once a week build big legs? Absolutely. Is it one all out set? Absolutely. Would you consider it Mentzer-like HIT?? No.....Thats where I think Mentzer went a little schizo at the end. Turning good ideas like progressively using more weight into "Do this and only this and anybody who disagrees with one word of it is a moron". I don't know if he truly didn't understand volume/fatigue management, if he wanted to sell stuff, or if he was truly insane.
ProtienFiend
New member
Topside said:
I did this when I was coming back from some time off. Helped me regain what I had lost very quickly.
EDIT: I misread this. I did one exercise per body part (3 sets).
blut wump
New member
Here's part of a piece I wrote a while back...
The idea that bodyparts could be worked effectively just once per week was introduced by a guy name Arthur Jones at about the time he began to tout his Nautilus equipment. This was the advent of the machine age of bodybuilding. Gyms no longer needed to be cluttered with untidy barbells and plates and Jones made a large fortune moving the bodybuilding world away from free weights.
Along with his Nautilus equipment came his theories on High Intensity Training or HIT. No longer need people spend Arnoldesque hours in the gym; they could perform short single sets with maximum weights to absolute muscular failure forcing maximal muscular growth. He was also fortunate enough to have Casey Viator who was an extreme physical specimen often noted for his participation in the Colorado Experiment. Using only Nautilis equipment, Viator gained 45.28 pounds in 28 days while dropping bodyfat. His fatloss was measured at 17.93 pounds and thus his lean gain over the 28 days was 63.21 pounds. This was done allegedly drug-free and Jones had his marketing on a plate.
Thus was ushered in the dark ages of weights training. Barbells disappeared from gyms. Weider began his empire selling supplements to dissatisfied trainees who couldn't hope to emulate the workouts of the adonises gracing the pages of his glossy advertising magazines. Of course, there was nothing wrong with the workouts, after all, they were the workouts of champions. The trainee's failings were down to failing to work hard enough and not buying enough supplements. No-one mentioned the copious amounts of drugs.
Drug dosages were known to increase through this time. With poor training stimulus the only recourse to fuel growth is greater dosages. Bodybuilding inevitably moved away from any real concerns with training and focussed ever more on diet and drugs. The classic flowing lines of Zane, Arnold and Franco honed with frequent workouts, often including AM and PM sessions, centered around free weight compound exercises, stepped aside for the bulky looks we have today. Muscles worked in isolation with little consideration of groups and systems. Underlying it all, though, was the ideology of training your bodyparts once per week. We had pre-exhaustion, drop sets, negatives, super-sets, all to blast a muscle into absolute submission so that it could be left as a quivering jelly for another week.
As a beginner, pretty much anything will fuel growth, including a poor training stimulus. Members would join gyms, marvel at the shiny equipment, get some good progress and inevitably stall. At that stage they turn to supplements or quit the gym for six months. Those that turn to supplements experience a little more progress and then they turn to drugs or quit the gym for six months. A few die-hards will plug away for years on end thinking that they just have one of those physiques that doesn't change much over time but they enjoy working out anyway.
The idea that bodyparts could be worked effectively just once per week was introduced by a guy name Arthur Jones at about the time he began to tout his Nautilus equipment. This was the advent of the machine age of bodybuilding. Gyms no longer needed to be cluttered with untidy barbells and plates and Jones made a large fortune moving the bodybuilding world away from free weights.
Along with his Nautilus equipment came his theories on High Intensity Training or HIT. No longer need people spend Arnoldesque hours in the gym; they could perform short single sets with maximum weights to absolute muscular failure forcing maximal muscular growth. He was also fortunate enough to have Casey Viator who was an extreme physical specimen often noted for his participation in the Colorado Experiment. Using only Nautilis equipment, Viator gained 45.28 pounds in 28 days while dropping bodyfat. His fatloss was measured at 17.93 pounds and thus his lean gain over the 28 days was 63.21 pounds. This was done allegedly drug-free and Jones had his marketing on a plate.
Thus was ushered in the dark ages of weights training. Barbells disappeared from gyms. Weider began his empire selling supplements to dissatisfied trainees who couldn't hope to emulate the workouts of the adonises gracing the pages of his glossy advertising magazines. Of course, there was nothing wrong with the workouts, after all, they were the workouts of champions. The trainee's failings were down to failing to work hard enough and not buying enough supplements. No-one mentioned the copious amounts of drugs.
Drug dosages were known to increase through this time. With poor training stimulus the only recourse to fuel growth is greater dosages. Bodybuilding inevitably moved away from any real concerns with training and focussed ever more on diet and drugs. The classic flowing lines of Zane, Arnold and Franco honed with frequent workouts, often including AM and PM sessions, centered around free weight compound exercises, stepped aside for the bulky looks we have today. Muscles worked in isolation with little consideration of groups and systems. Underlying it all, though, was the ideology of training your bodyparts once per week. We had pre-exhaustion, drop sets, negatives, super-sets, all to blast a muscle into absolute submission so that it could be left as a quivering jelly for another week.
As a beginner, pretty much anything will fuel growth, including a poor training stimulus. Members would join gyms, marvel at the shiny equipment, get some good progress and inevitably stall. At that stage they turn to supplements or quit the gym for six months. Those that turn to supplements experience a little more progress and then they turn to drugs or quit the gym for six months. A few die-hards will plug away for years on end thinking that they just have one of those physiques that doesn't change much over time but they enjoy working out anyway.
Lifting N Tx
New member
Nice historical summary, blut wump.
It all just illustrates that when money is involved there are lots of people who can look you in the face and lie convincingly while appearing very sincere.
[Edited to add the following]
I'll also note that any time someone claims to be the only one with all the truth, they're lying.
It all just illustrates that when money is involved there are lots of people who can look you in the face and lie convincingly while appearing very sincere.
[Edited to add the following]
I'll also note that any time someone claims to be the only one with all the truth, they're lying.
SgtSlaughter
New member
Everyone is the same in that if you eat a caloric surplus you WILL put on weight.nails said:
c3bodybuilding
New member
Mike was a nut in his later years. He was actually put in a mental hospital in the mid-late 80's. Right before his death he was preaching crazy training concepts which were NOTHING like what he did in the 70's.
Mike started with full body workouts three times a week that were *very* similiar to hst. Then after meeting Arthur Jones and Casey Viator he would train everything twice a week and do about 5-10 sets per body part using mostly compound movements. It was nothing like the 1 set, everything once every few weeks/month stuff he was talking about in the late 80's through the 90's.
If you follow his methods be prepared to lose size and quickly. If you want me to, I will type up his old workout schedule tomorrow. That's the one where he did a split similiar to animal's dual factor. It's actually not that bad. But please, stay far, far, far away from the shit Mike taught in his later years.
Mike was a brilliant man but with his health and mental state on the decline, he sort of lost his way. It's truly sad he wasn't able to get over his defeat at the 80 O. Arnold called him to patch things up, but it was too late. Mike was just too far gone.
Mike started with full body workouts three times a week that were *very* similiar to hst. Then after meeting Arthur Jones and Casey Viator he would train everything twice a week and do about 5-10 sets per body part using mostly compound movements. It was nothing like the 1 set, everything once every few weeks/month stuff he was talking about in the late 80's through the 90's.
If you follow his methods be prepared to lose size and quickly. If you want me to, I will type up his old workout schedule tomorrow. That's the one where he did a split similiar to animal's dual factor. It's actually not that bad. But please, stay far, far, far away from the shit Mike taught in his later years.
Mike was a brilliant man but with his health and mental state on the decline, he sort of lost his way. It's truly sad he wasn't able to get over his defeat at the 80 O. Arnold called him to patch things up, but it was too late. Mike was just too far gone.
JKurz1
Banned
Actually diet, I am finding out is far less than I originally thought....prob. half of the overall equation and maybe less.....training, rest and recooperation are much greater success factors.....Granted, if you don't eat anything, your results won't change...but the avg. joe who eat 3-4 good wholesome solid meals can put on mass quite nicelly.
C3 - you are preaching half assed......I have a trainer at my gym who preaches the Mentzer concept and has his clientelle using it with great success.....
C3 - you are preaching half assed......I have a trainer at my gym who preaches the Mentzer concept and has his clientelle using it with great success.....
silver_shadow
New member
the important thing is what kind of gear are his clients on?JKurz1 said:
also, if they are newbies, then i wouldn't bother much.
to be honest, i don't doubt mentzer's HIT wouldn't pack on some amount of mass on someone who is eating a caloric surplus. the problem i have with it would be that it takes away the focus of bodybuilding from training and puts it on diet. in the old days, eating and rest was a given... so much so that i'm guessing that if someone said "you gotta eat big", that would be like stating something so obvious, it didn't even merit a big mention. importance would probably have been given more to training in order to have the best possible symmetry and muscle density. now i really doubt you'd NEED to follow MM HIT to gain some mass while eating. you could just go in to the gym, with just a plan to do x sets for each body part. then you eat whatever's in your refrigerator and hope for the best. you're bound to get stronger over a period of time and hence grow (because of the caloric surplus). throw in some drugs and you grow some more. is it the most efficient way (symmetry & muscle density)? i doubt it.
Protobuilder
New member
All I know is an awful lot of people complain the HIT doesn't do shit but burn the crap out of their nervous systems. And they standard reason given for their failure is that they "aren't hardcore enough."
I think there's a reason why pretty much NO professional teams / olympians train w/ HIT-style training.
I think there's a reason why pretty much NO professional teams / olympians train w/ HIT-style training.
nails
New member
Hey thats funny....Last fall when I was doing the 5x5 both madcow and biggt were very helpfull to me and both questioned my eating.Granted I'm not a huge eater I ate all I could with weight gain drinks in between.I'm no newby to the weights either .I'm 46 and 210lbs.On my last 5x5 I was using 305 for bench.Thats nothing compared to the big boys here but probhably more than some.I know it's blasphemous to say here but isn't it possible that for some there is a better way?ZGzaZ said:
enigma4dub
Active member
Better meaning what?
The thing that people have to realise is that the 5x5 is not the end all answer. It can not be stressed enough that it is a teaching tool. The principles behind it are proven. As long as your program calls for good organization of compound movements, progression over a period of time, with frequency and fatigue management accounted for you, are in good shape. Dont get caught up in 5x5, the rep range is not important as long as it stays constant.
The thing that people have to realise is that the 5x5 is not the end all answer. It can not be stressed enough that it is a teaching tool. The principles behind it are proven. As long as your program calls for good organization of compound movements, progression over a period of time, with frequency and fatigue management accounted for you, are in good shape. Dont get caught up in 5x5, the rep range is not important as long as it stays constant.
JKurz1
Banned
this quote made me laugh.silver_shadow said:
"now i really doubt you'd NEED to follow MM HIT to gain some mass while eating. you could just go in to the gym, with just a plan to do x sets for each body part"
Do you really think training intensity isn't important and there isn't a fine line between working the muscle to failure and overtraining? You gotta be kidding me.
Oh if it were just that easy then nobody would be here asking questions and trying new training routines/diet plans/drugs etc
blut wump
New member
Actually, JK, there's very little of that goes on here.JKurz1 said:
Most fresh names turn up and eventually ask something along the lines of "Do you mean that in order to make gains all I need to do is lift in a progressive fashion?". A dozen voices say "Yes, provided you eat enough" and that's the end of them unless they start a log or have specific questions on some of the lifts or have form issues they want to discuss.
It really is that simple for almost everyone who is ever likely to breeze through here.
nails said:
There might be a better plan for you rather than the 5x5 as it is laid out on madcow's website. But it sure isn't Mentzer's HIT which is based on false assumptions and pseudoscience. Even if the program has a degree of success in certain people, it is not because of the reasons argued by Mentzer.
As enigma4dub and many members here say, it is the principles behind it that are preached because they have both practical results and scientific backing. Mentioning Mentzer's deteriorating mental health is not necessary since this can be viewed as a desperate ad hominem. The science gives you all the proof you need that his theories are unfounded. Just because something "makes sense" doesn't mean it is true.
blut wump
New member
JK, take a good read through BiggT's Peczz and Flyzz thread.
He runs basic, sound 5x5 training. He has no program behind his training other than that which occurs to him day to day or week to week yet he makes solid progress and his workouts are always fresh and evolving. I doubt that he has suffered workout-stagnation in years of running 5x5.
The "secret" to making gains is to keep striving to improve your lifts. Bouncing back and forth between methodologies leads to its own stagnation as you run in circles.
He runs basic, sound 5x5 training. He has no program behind his training other than that which occurs to him day to day or week to week yet he makes solid progress and his workouts are always fresh and evolving. I doubt that he has suffered workout-stagnation in years of running 5x5.
The "secret" to making gains is to keep striving to improve your lifts. Bouncing back and forth between methodologies leads to its own stagnation as you run in circles.
blut wump
New member
Agreed.Mercere said:
Madcow's 5x5, as presented, is nothing more than a cookie-cutter program designed to get trainees making progress in the basic, compound lifts with a simple squat, press pull workout and gain some experience in the 5- and 3-rep ranges. The DF version is more of the same but introduces the idea of taking a breather when the workload starts to grind you down.
Protobuilder
New member
JKurz1 said:
You are a marketer's wet dream.
JKurz1
Banned
BACK:
DeadLifts: First warm-up with a weight light enough to do 20reps but also enough to apply some pressure to the muscle you're about to stress.
1 Work set with your maximum weight for 6-10 reps from the floor.
FORM IS EVERYTHING.
Ex: I warmup with 225 x 10reps
Workset was with 405 x 10reps
Straight arm cable pulldowns -
Preexhaust with 1 set 6-10reps to failure.
No rest and straight to Widegrip Pulldowns -
Postive/negative/static
1st set - positive failure 6-10reps, use a spot with forced reps
1min rest
2nd set -increase weight - negative failure for 6-10 reps until you can no longer do another rep!
1min rest
Static hold - increase weight - 1rep and hold at contraction (spot should help you get weight in position) hold for up to 12 seconds if you can hold for more then up the weight.
Over to Seated Rows:
2 work sets to failure with strict form and a 3second negative.
TRAPS:
DB Shrugs -
Warmup
2sets to failure 6-10reps HEAVY with proper form and a 2second contraction at the top.
Behind the back Shrugs - 2sets 6-10reps.
BICEPS:
BB curls: 2sets to failure Heavy weight proper form no arching or bouncing.
Spider curls - Positive/Neg/Static
Post - 6-10reps one arm at a time, make it hurt.
Negative - 6-10 keep your spotter close and go until utter failure, arm should feel like it's going to explode
Static - hold until your face turns blue and a slow negative.
Done, now go eat and rest.
DeadLifts: First warm-up with a weight light enough to do 20reps but also enough to apply some pressure to the muscle you're about to stress.
1 Work set with your maximum weight for 6-10 reps from the floor.
FORM IS EVERYTHING.
Ex: I warmup with 225 x 10reps
Workset was with 405 x 10reps
Straight arm cable pulldowns -
Preexhaust with 1 set 6-10reps to failure.
No rest and straight to Widegrip Pulldowns -
Postive/negative/static
1st set - positive failure 6-10reps, use a spot with forced reps
1min rest
2nd set -increase weight - negative failure for 6-10 reps until you can no longer do another rep!
1min rest
Static hold - increase weight - 1rep and hold at contraction (spot should help you get weight in position) hold for up to 12 seconds if you can hold for more then up the weight.
Over to Seated Rows:
2 work sets to failure with strict form and a 3second negative.
TRAPS:
DB Shrugs -
Warmup
2sets to failure 6-10reps HEAVY with proper form and a 2second contraction at the top.
Behind the back Shrugs - 2sets 6-10reps.
BICEPS:
BB curls: 2sets to failure Heavy weight proper form no arching or bouncing.
Spider curls - Positive/Neg/Static
Post - 6-10reps one arm at a time, make it hurt.
Negative - 6-10 keep your spotter close and go until utter failure, arm should feel like it's going to explode
Static - hold until your face turns blue and a slow negative.
Done, now go eat and rest.
JKurz1
Banned
Different goals bro...BigT is my boy and stronger than shit, but that's what he wants to be....I want to be strong yet carry a low bf and a BB physqiue....not too many bbers train in the 3-5 rep range as it is for strength...dont get me wrong, strength is awesome, but I want the mass too...I know, you can't have one without the other.....we'll see....blut wump said:
c3bodybuilding
New member
Not preaching half ass advice bro and you don't need to be so damn rude, not cool at all. I'm just giving you my personal experiences with his later programs and with the man himself with his phone consultations. Nothing I wrote was untrue. Those methods from High Intensity Training the Mike Mentzer Way and Heavy Duty 2 are nothing like what he used to do to build his own body in the 70's. I've tried to help you a lot and be encouraging over the months but this is the second time you insult me. First when I gave you a protein shake recipe and you called it crap and now I'm preaching half assed advice. Screw that shit.
blut wump
New member
OK, last post on this lest I seem like I'm nagging.JKurz1 said:
The idea of making progress on your lifts applies to any rep-range. BiggT concentrates more on the 1-3-5 rep range since strength is his priority over hypertrophy; it's what he's come to enjoy and it's better-suited to many of the Olympic lifts he does. He'll also throw in some higher-rep work from time to time, even if it's only by way of a back-off set or two.
The principle would work just as effectively using 6-8-12 or any other minor variation of these numbers. You could use 12 reps for volume, 8 as intermediate and 6 for a good, grunty strength-biased workout. I guess all I'm really saying is not to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Progression-based training works.
JKurz1
Banned
Studies have shown that lower reps (1-5) tend to build strength and higher reps (13 -20) muscular endurance. That does not mean that they cannot build ANY muscle, just that those rep ranges are not optimal when hypertrophy is the main goal. The rep range of 6-12 keeps the muscle fibers under tension for an ideal amount of time, and with enough resistance to affect growth. For your work sets you should shoot to reach momentary muscular failure somewhere between the 6th and 12th rep.
silver_shadow
New member
i'm not sure what you understood from my post - i don't think i made my point too clearly so here goes.JKurz1 said:
the point i was trying to make was that you could beat the crap out of your muscles every time you go into the gym - whether it's supersets, drop sets, to failure, slow negatives, whatever. so you go in with only a plan to do x sets per body part. so week 1 you may bench 200x10 as your max set and do some assortment of other exercises. you come in on monday, week 2 and say you're feeling good so you manage 220x8. now week 3, you don't feel too good and you can only manage a max set of 180x10. and it continues like this for all exercises and each week. basically i'm highlighting a method where there's no plan for progression over time, just a plan to beat the crap out of the muscles each time you work out. that's what 99% of bodybuilding wannabes will be doing. then there's an option like MM's HIT, which correct me if i'm wrong, does not focus much (if at all) on actually getting strong enough - not in a neural range of 1-3 reps, nor in a hypertrophy range of 8-12 reps and not even in the intermediate range (strength + hypertrophy) of 5-8. but using both these methods, you could eat like crazy and become bigger.
what i'm asking is whether throwing progression in a given rep range out of the window a good idea? i don't think so, whether you're a bodybuilder or not. yes biggt trains primarily for strength... but that's not the point. what he's done is to choose his focus rep range which happens to be for strength. so he gets stronger in that range while doing enough of higher rep stuff for hypertrophy, because hypertrophy will also improve his strength. he could just as easily choose to do it the other way around with a greater focus on improving lifts in the higher rep ranges and do enough to stay strong in the lower rep ranges too.
if a change is what you want and you don't want to get on a 5x5, why not try the shadows old school method. or maybe even the WSB for bodybuilders.
PS: i just remembered - needsize is a good example of a bodybuilder (and he is jacked and looks better than at least 99% on this site) who's been working the 5 rep range for years. no he doesn't follow the bill starr method. NS's method is also a 5x5 which he kind of discovered on his own through years of experience in the gym.
silver_shadow
New member
my routine (at the moment) may not be exactly what you're looking for since i'm focussing alot on strength right now:
mon:
squats - 5s, then 3s then singles building up to PR territory. a backoff set of 8
abs (NS crunches 5x5 with a plate behind my head)
tue:
flat bb bench working up to max 5s at the moment and a backoff set of 8. will probably change it up to 3s later and further down to 8s.
pendlay rows - same as bench
wed:
good mornings heavy 5s and maybe some 3s
deads 5s but not too heavy, maybe some 3s too
thur:
push presses (either in front or BTN) heavy 3s then singles and a backoff set of 8, strict pressing.
chins or pullups 3x5
BB curls 3x8, nothing too heavy coz after the chins/pullups my arms can't take too much
fri:
front squats with moderately heavy 5s and some 1-2 3s, then a backoff set of 8
NS ab crunches 5x5
sat:
flat bench work up to a heavy 3x3 which will be my target 5 weight for tue
pendlay rows: same as bench
sun:
off
cardio: very light on upper body days and a few mins of high intensity stuff on leg days (HIIT and/or skipping). i wouldn't recommend as much cardio if you're on a pure bulk though
that is the rough outline at the moment. the rep ranges and/or exercises (deads for squats and decline bench for flat) on monday and tuesday workouts will change after 12 week cycles. deloads whenever i feel it necessary. i'm relying alot on changing things intuitively rather than having a rigid plan.
anyway, i'm not sure this kind of workout would be to your liking.
mon:
squats - 5s, then 3s then singles building up to PR territory. a backoff set of 8
abs (NS crunches 5x5 with a plate behind my head)
tue:
flat bb bench working up to max 5s at the moment and a backoff set of 8. will probably change it up to 3s later and further down to 8s.
pendlay rows - same as bench
wed:
good mornings heavy 5s and maybe some 3s
deads 5s but not too heavy, maybe some 3s too
thur:
push presses (either in front or BTN) heavy 3s then singles and a backoff set of 8, strict pressing.
chins or pullups 3x5
BB curls 3x8, nothing too heavy coz after the chins/pullups my arms can't take too much
fri:
front squats with moderately heavy 5s and some 1-2 3s, then a backoff set of 8
NS ab crunches 5x5
sat:
flat bench work up to a heavy 3x3 which will be my target 5 weight for tue
pendlay rows: same as bench
sun:
off
cardio: very light on upper body days and a few mins of high intensity stuff on leg days (HIIT and/or skipping). i wouldn't recommend as much cardio if you're on a pure bulk though
that is the rough outline at the moment. the rep ranges and/or exercises (deads for squats and decline bench for flat) on monday and tuesday workouts will change after 12 week cycles. deloads whenever i feel it necessary. i'm relying alot on changing things intuitively rather than having a rigid plan.
anyway, i'm not sure this kind of workout would be to your liking.
Protobuilder
New member
JKurz1 said:
If you've got it all figured out, and if you believe Mentzer's program fits the bill, why are you asking questions? You've found the perfect method. Now go to town.
silver_shadow
New member
barx10
135x5
175x5
225x5
265x5
315x3
355x3
395x1
405x1
425x1
445x1
EDIT: forgot the backoff set - 315x8
then it's on to NS crunches, 5x5 with a 20lb plate behind my head.
135x5
175x5
225x5
265x5
315x3
355x3
395x1
405x1
425x1
445x1
EDIT: forgot the backoff set - 315x8
then it's on to NS crunches, 5x5 with a 20lb plate behind my head.
silver_shadow
New member
it is... maybe a bit of cycling/treadmill, nothing too crazy, and maybe a bit of skipping at the end of the workout. with 3 days in the week for legs/abs, monday being a heavy day, i avoid the temptation to do more than that - prevents quick burnout.JKurz1 said:
silver_shadow
New member
what?
silver_shadow
New member
JKurz1 said:
Tweakle
New member
Those workouts seem mighty short to get bodybuilding look so possibly two sessions a day would be in order to get the most bodybuilding bang for your buck. A modified Heavy Duty done for three hours, 6 times a week (with additional workouts on the rest days, just to be sure those muscles are getting good and built up) might be a better idea.
Theres a trainer at my gym likes to get fatties to wobble around on the BOSU with 5lb dumbells in their hands. They are getting great results too, but I'll stick with my 600lb box squats & hope that someday I might build some muscle from it.
Theres a trainer at my gym likes to get fatties to wobble around on the BOSU with 5lb dumbells in their hands. They are getting great results too, but I'll stick with my 600lb box squats & hope that someday I might build some muscle from it.
blut wump
New member
OK, one last post, since the last one obviously wasn't clear.
Lift progressively, eat caloric surplus, get adequate rest and avoid prolonged over-training. Everything else is just details
Tweakle, you're crazy, man. You'll never grow any muscle lifting that heavy; you're just going to get stronger and then it'll be even harder to grow muscle.
Lift progressively, eat caloric surplus, get adequate rest and avoid prolonged over-training. Everything else is just details
Tweakle, you're crazy, man. You'll never grow any muscle lifting that heavy; you're just going to get stronger and then it'll be even harder to grow muscle.
Protobuilder
New member
blut wump said:
It HAS to be more interesting that THAT.
Lifting N Tx
New member
Maybe not. Seemed to work for Dave Gulledge.Protobuilder said:
If you check the link, the first pic is him after years of powerlifting style training. The pic a little down the page is after he cut so you could see what he'd built over those years.
His training method? I'll quote from the third page in the thread:
silver_shadow
New member
yes that and alternated with higher volume training. otherwise, for a routine that combines both all at once, try WSB for BBs
