Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
D
Debaser
Guest
wnt2bBeast said:
Tiny? How many natural trainees do you know are 6'1" 225 lbs in contest shape? Hell, even a lot of juicers don't look that good.
HST is simple, and even obvious
- Thread starter casualbb
- Start date
Tiny? How many natural trainees do you know are 6'1" 225 lbs in contest shape? Hell, even a lot of juicers don't look that good.
wnt2bBeast
New member
i was speaking of pro's and yes there are many on here that use gear and you probably wouldnt be able to tell!!Debaser said:
D
Debaser
Guest
I'd rather look like Reg Park than any pro today anyway, lol...
But we're getting sidetracked, back to HST...
But we're getting sidetracked, back to HST...
InTraining
New member
Debaser, a question for you.sorry if this has been asked before..I know you have done DC training in the past..how did it compare to HST in terms of size gains?
wnt2bBeast
New member
your right we are getting sidetracked but its personal preference..you like reg park fine.. me see my avatar lolDebaser said:
wnt2bBeast
New member
bump for that good questionInTraining said:
Tom Treutlein
New member
I find it funny Debaser called psyched ignorant, when at the bottom of the link he posted, we have this:
"6. HST not necessary for some
Finally, and there are perhaps other reasons, but there are many who have reached their goals without using HST. For various reasons, whether it be low physique requirements, or the use of steroids, or simply having been at it for so long, there are many who don’t see the need to change the way they do things to have what they more or less already have. There is of course nothing wrong with that, and it certainly doesn’t make them ignorant, or stubborn. They simply get by without feeling the need to change their routine for improved results."
"6. HST not necessary for some
Finally, and there are perhaps other reasons, but there are many who have reached their goals without using HST. For various reasons, whether it be low physique requirements, or the use of steroids, or simply having been at it for so long, there are many who don’t see the need to change the way they do things to have what they more or less already have. There is of course nothing wrong with that, and it certainly doesn’t make them ignorant, or stubborn. They simply get by without feeling the need to change their routine for improved results."
wnt2bBeast
New member
Tom Treutlein said:
i know you guys dont post much in the anabolics section but trust me poking yourself for 10 weeks does not make you ronnie coleman..steroids plus a bad training routine/diet may actually produce minimal gains..granted not everyone desires to be ronnie but if hst is the "optimal growth" routine where are all te monsters this routine produces..we know DC has produced some monsters are there any from HST?
Tom Treutlein
New member
I don't think enough people follow HST for us to see "monsters" emerging from the program. Also, a lot of people probably have a lackluster diet, whereas with DC (especially those who pay for his guidance) people pound a ton of food, because they want to do it right and get their money's worth.
I think you can really get to that size no matter what you do. It's not so much the training that's important, but getting proper rest and nutrition. I still believe HST to be the optimal way though, but I'm trying not to be biased. Kinda hard.
I mean, there are studies for everything, you were right in saying that before. I can prove it's the optimal way to mass gains in the lab, then you can show me something that probably says otherwise, but realize that the DC program uses a lot of similar HST principles. First off, when cycling exercises on the DC routine, you take awhile to plateau, so progressive resistance occurs for some time.
Strategic deconditioning comes about during that type of cruising period, or perhaps even a week-long layoff, which most people take (they need it mentally anyway). Then of course the frequency principle, training bodyparts 1.5x a week (two some weeks, one others).
The last principle is just stupid, in my opinion, because it's common knowledge, and that is having the muscle sustain itself under a load its unaccustomed to, which results in adaptation and thus, growth.
So, I think Casual was right in saying a lot of programs mirror HST principles, and they adopt them in their own way. If you had someone training under HST for a year straight, diet dead-on and getting enough rest to recover from the onslaught of three fullbody training bouts a week, I think you'd have a person with a lot of stretch marks.
I think you can really get to that size no matter what you do. It's not so much the training that's important, but getting proper rest and nutrition. I still believe HST to be the optimal way though, but I'm trying not to be biased. Kinda hard.
I mean, there are studies for everything, you were right in saying that before. I can prove it's the optimal way to mass gains in the lab, then you can show me something that probably says otherwise, but realize that the DC program uses a lot of similar HST principles. First off, when cycling exercises on the DC routine, you take awhile to plateau, so progressive resistance occurs for some time.
Strategic deconditioning comes about during that type of cruising period, or perhaps even a week-long layoff, which most people take (they need it mentally anyway). Then of course the frequency principle, training bodyparts 1.5x a week (two some weeks, one others).
The last principle is just stupid, in my opinion, because it's common knowledge, and that is having the muscle sustain itself under a load its unaccustomed to, which results in adaptation and thus, growth.
So, I think Casual was right in saying a lot of programs mirror HST principles, and they adopt them in their own way. If you had someone training under HST for a year straight, diet dead-on and getting enough rest to recover from the onslaught of three fullbody training bouts a week, I think you'd have a person with a lot of stretch marks.
Similar threads
