Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply US-PHARMACIES UGL OZ
Raptor Labs UGFREAK OxygenPharm
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplyUS-PHARMACIES UGL OZUGFREAKRaptor LabsOxygenPharm

HST is simple, and even obvious

casualbb

Plat Hero
Platinum
I like that people are doing HST because I have good reason to believe it's the best program for growth that exists. However I feel a lot of people are doing it without understanding it, just as a change of pace. That's quite all right, but HST will be much more effective for anyone if they understand the "why" behind the "how." I posted this in "HST - devil's advocate" thread but I think it deserves its own thread.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Bodybuilding is a "sport" that predates modern medical science. Thus bodybuilding tradition isn't based on what works in a scientific sense, just what has worked for somebody one time who also happened to be famous (arnold, arthur jones, mentzer).

In the past 10-15 years advances in medical science have allowed us to find out how it really actually works. And they found the following:

**NOTE: ALL OF THESE CLAIMS ARE TRUE** By this I mean these results occur reliably, under controlled conditions. Google "scientific method" if you don't know what that means.

-muscle growth is caused by the muscle experiencing "unaccustomed" loads, or higher weights than they are used to
-when these weights are lifted, the muscle will grow, but it will also become resistant to further growth at that given weight
-This resistance to growth can be reversed through a period of inactivity
-muscle growth lasts for 36-48 hours

Those four facts are all you really need to invent HST.

1. Muscle grows for 36-48 hours.
-> workout 3-4x per week for continuous growth
2. Muscles grow in response to unaccustomed weights,
3. They then become resistant to growth from that weight
-> increase the weight a substantial amount every session
4. Time off reverses the resistance
-> once you're accustomed to the highest weight you can lift, take some time off so that lighter ones will work again. Practical experience dictates 9-14 days.

That's it; that's why HST is the way it is. Once a lifter understands these principles he will suddenly understand why every routine he ever did either was or wasn't effective.

For instance, just by virtue of experimenting needsize noticed that if he adds 5-10 pounds to each lift every week on a traditional weekly split, it suddenly became much more effective. Thus needsize's 5x5 routine was born, and many here can vouch as to its quality. All it really does differently is the weight progression, but that makes a world of difference! It also incorporates a sort of deconditioning, which doubtless adds to the program's effect.

But the point is, the better a routine conforms to these known rules of muscle growth the more effective it will be. If one don't like the way HST does things, a creative lifter should be able to design his own routine using the principles listed that will both BE EFFECTIVE and BE FULFILLING.
 
I'll start off by saying I agree with your cause. I'm on my first HST cycle, currently on the 2nd workout in the 5's. I've seen some great gains, pretty much 3-4 pounds of muscle with 0 fat gain (I'm super lean so it would be obvious if I was gaining fat).

I think you should avoid saying HST is simple and obvious. The principles behind HST, while simple, have complex roots in a wide array of scientific studies and journals. Certainly the HST principles aren't obvious or there would never have been any reason to complete the research that backs it up. While it is a great program, it is based on scientific studies that inherently are complex.

Furthermore, while strategic deconditioning and progressive load are the major HST principles, there are many much more subtle ideas behind HST that must be understood to achieve its full benefit.

For instance, what length of time should the concentric and eccentric phases of a lift occupy? What role does increasing or decreasing overall volume have in growth? Does the growth from HST improve the potential for future strength gains (i.e. will westside or 5x5 be even more effective in building strength after a cycle or two of HST?). Why does zigzagging or overlapping seem to yield more growth than a linear progression even though this doesn't seem to meld with progressive load purism?

I honestly don't know the answers to these questions; they were just a few questions that have been bouncing around in my head lately that I haven't had time to research. I think my point here is that keeping an open mind is extremely important. In the end, people who take it upon themselves to do the research and truly understand HST will see the best gains.

And I'm not saying I'm there yet...


BTW, I'm not sure it was casual's intent to turn this thread into a Q&A, but if anyone knows the answer to any of those questions, please send me a PM or post here.
 
I didn't even read anything you posted.

I will share my limited HST experience with you.

It fucking sucks ass. Its the boringest fucking way of training ever, and i'm making great gains training everything every six days right now, so i'm not messing with a good thing.
 
psychedout said:
I didn't even read anything you posted.

I will share my limited HST experience with you.

It fucking sucks ass. Its the boringest fucking way of training ever, and i'm making great gains training everything every six days right now, so i'm not messing with a good thing.

Lol...

I have been considering giving HST a run but it is posts like this that make me think otherwise...I am gaining well training muscles 2x per week and am having FUN in the gym...which, though IMO shouldn't be the #1 reason for training...is definitely in the top 5 for me...

Anyways, I have read the testimonals and talked to people who have used the program and I believe it works...boring as it may be..
 
Ohhh, and not to stir up controversy.

Take all the biggest guys on this board and in real life:

needsize, Bigdho, bigandy69, quadsweep, galaxy... Jay cutler, Dennis James, Markus Ruhl.....etc -- surely they would know that HST is superior and train that way.

I don't think one single pro or very big guy trains that way. Surely if HST was the best way to train, most would follow it, yet I cannot find one single example.

Oh and also -- did you ever stand to think that the guy who invented HST stands to gain a hell of a lot financially by publishing these supposed studies that support things he sells? I seriously question what is behind them.

I'll stick with whats tried and true for me. Hitting everything basically once per week. Three times per week is silly IMO.
 
InTraining said:
I am gaining well training muscles 2x per week and am having FUN in the gym...which, though IMO shouldn't be the #1 reason for training...

Good post.

Fun may not be my #1 reason to train, but without the fun, I simply would not train.
 
Most programs DO encorporate similiar things from HST....I don't know if this really matters but casualbb made a point about 5x5 having somewhat of a deconditioning phase and progressive load phase..

Let's look at 2 other popular programs..DC and AST

DC has one doing a "blast" phase where they are constantly trying to beat previous #'s etc(progressive resistance) then a cruise phase for a number of reasons..but also this could be seen as a deconditioning of sorts...

AST encorporates progressive resistance(though not very clear about it, just move up when you hit all desired reps) and a one week "recovery" phase(deconditioning)

In fact, most programs advise taking one week off every now and then...and it's pretty hard to find a program that doesn't use SOME TYPE of progressive resistance, whether it be moving up the weight or trying to get more reps
 
Last edited:
Good point, many fundamental principles such as progessive resistance (which I feel is the most important factor) are the same.
 
pyshed out you crack me up..first off science mean shit..there is a stiatistic that proves something well i can show you ne that disproves it too..does that mean HST is shit, no..theres a ton of RESULTS behind WSB..box squatting alone has a ton of worth!!..there sre som many ways to skin a cat (grow) that one method cannot be superior for the masses..it can be superior for an individual..i wont put HST down because i have never gone through it..i do agree with you pysched i havent seen many way beyond 200 lbs that use hst im sure they're out there..
 
psychedout said:
Jay cutler, Dennis James, Markus Ruhl.....etc -- surely they would know that HST is superior and train that way.

Hey bro what kind of training splits are these guys on? I'm guessing 1x per week per muscle group?

I know Coleman used to do 2x per week...not sure if he is doing that anymore...haven't seen the new video
 
InTraining said:
Hey bro what kind of training splits are these guys on? I'm guessing 1x per week per muscle group?

I know Coleman used to do 2x per week...not sure if he is doing that anymore...haven't seen the new video
ronnie trains certain things 2X per week but with very different exercises..
as far as i know markus hits everything once per week as does Jay cutler al;though cutler tuned down his volume form 20 sets per bodypart to i think something like 9-12
 
wnt2bBeast said:
ronnie trains certain things 2X per week but with very different exercises..
as far as i know markus hits everything once per week as does Jay cutler al;though cutler tuned down his volume form 20 sets per bodypart to i think something like 9-12

Interesting...I always think it's funny how people say " They just use tons of juice they are able to grow on anything!" maybe to an extent...

Then we see the weights they are training with and the amount of food they are eating...yeh..i'm sure it's just juice :rolleyes:
 
wnt2bBeast said:
pyshed out you crack me up..first off science mean shit..there is a stiatistic that proves something well i can show you ne that disproves it too..does that mean HST is shit, no..theres a ton of RESULTS behind WSB..box squatting alone has a ton of worth!!..there sre som many ways to skin a cat (grow) that one method cannot be superior for the masses..it can be superior for an individual..i wont put HST down because i have never gone through it..i do agree with you pysched i havent seen many way beyond 200 lbs that use hst im sure they're out there..

Science is good, however, not enough to make me a believer. Not yet at least.
 
InTraining said:
Interesting...I always think it's funny how people say " They just use tons of juice they are able to grow on anything!" maybe to an extent...

Then we see the weights they are training with and the amount of food they are eating...yeh..i'm sure it's just juice :rolleyes:
its everything juice, food, crazy weights but these guys would definitely be huge if they stayed natty..theyre not hard gainers!!
 
psychedout said:
I didn't even read anything you posted.

I will share my limited HST experience with you.

It fucking sucks ass. Its the boringest fucking way of training ever, and i'm making great gains training everything every six days right now, so i'm not messing with a good thing.

God you could cut the ignorance of your posting with a fucking knife. I find it quite telling that you responded to a post without even READING ITS CONTENT. I believe he's talking about optimum growth, not optimal enjoyment of the training.

Perhaps if you did read it, you would have also seen the last paragraph:

"But the point is, the better a routine conforms to these known rules of muscle growth the more effective it will be. If one don't like the way HST does things, a creative lifter should be able to design his own routine using the principles listed that will both BE EFFECTIVE and BE FULFILLING."
 
wnt2bBeast said:
its everything juice, food, crazy weights but these guys would definitely be huge if they stayed natty..theyre not hard gainers!!

I saw some old pics of Ruhl...I don't know if they were taken before he started juicing but if not one of the best natty physiques I have ever seen
 
psychedout said:
Ohhh, and not to stir up controversy.

Take all the biggest guys on this board and in real life:

needsize, Bigdho, bigandy69, quadsweep, galaxy... Jay cutler, Dennis James, Markus Ruhl.....etc -- surely they would know that HST is superior and train that way.

I don't think one single pro or very big guy trains that way. Surely if HST was the best way to train, most would follow it, yet I cannot find one single example.

Oh and also -- did you ever stand to think that the guy who invented HST stands to gain a hell of a lot financially by publishing these supposed studies that support things he sells? I seriously question what is behind them.

I'll stick with whats tried and true for me. Hitting everything basically once per week. Three times per week is silly IMO.

Aside from the fact that the logic of your reasoning is nonexistant and even elementary-school level, there is actually an article on this very question. Or will you simply "not read it"? :lmao:

I also might add that before the advent of steroids, where proper training was essential for growth, the pros trained full body, three times a week.
 
InTraining said:
I saw some old pics of Ruhl...I don't know if they were taken before he started juicing but if not one of the best natty physiques I have ever seen
yep he had some thick quads and humongo delts..

I would tend to think growth and enjoyment of a routine go hand in hand..i mean if you look in the mirror and your bigger to me that gives me enjoyment..or if you r setting PR's all the time thats enjoyment..at least to me anyway
 
Debaser said:
God you could cut the ignorance of your posting with a fucking knife. I find it quite telling that you responded to a post without even READING ITS CONTENT. I believe he's talking about optimum growth, not optimal enjoyment of the training.

Perhaps if you did read it, you would have also seen the last paragraph:

"But the point is, the better a routine conforms to these known rules of muscle growth the more effective it will be. If one don't like the way HST does things, a creative lifter should be able to design his own routine using the principles listed that will both BE EFFECTIVE and BE FULFILLING."


Got some roid rage bro?




Just teasing -- well, okay if it said that, its a good post then. Still doesn't change the fact I hate HST.

Ignorant? Maybe, but I don't care.
 
Debaser said:
I also might add that before the advent of steroids, where proper training was essential for growth, the pros trained full body, three times a week.

who cares those guys were tiny lol i love arnie but he really didnt have quads that compare to today..i think upper body side chest pose arnie rules
 
wnt2bBeast said:
who cares those guys were tiny lol i love arnie but he really didnt have quads that compare to today..i think upper body side chest pose arnie rules

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.
 
Debaser 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.
i was speaking of pro's and yes there are many on here that use gear and you probably wouldnt be able to tell!!
 
I'd rather look like Reg Park than any pro today anyway, lol...

But we're getting sidetracked, back to HST...
 
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?
 
Debaser said:
I'd rather look like Reg Park than any pro today anyway, lol...

But we're getting sidetracked, back to HST...
your right we are getting sidetracked but its personal preference..you like reg park fine.. me see my avatar lol
 
InTraining said:
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?
bump for that good question
 
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."
 
Tom Treutlein said:
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."

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?
 
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. :FRlol:
 
psychedout said:
I didn't even read anything you posted.

I will share my limited HST experience with you.

It fucking sucks ass. Its the boringest fucking way of training ever, and i'm making great gains training everything every six days right now, so i'm not messing with a good thing.


In all fairness from what I remember you didn't even make it past the 15's stage. Perhaps you should actually complete the program before you bash it.
 
psilo said:
I think you should avoid saying HST is simple and obvious. The principles behind HST, while simple, have complex roots in a wide array of scientific studies and journals. Certainly the HST principles aren't obvious or there would never have been any reason to complete the research that backs it up. While it is a great program, it is based on scientific studies that inherently are complex.

Furthermore, while strategic deconditioning and progressive load are the major HST principles, there are many much more subtle ideas behind HST that must be understood to achieve its full benefit.

For instance, what length of time should the concentric and eccentric phases of a lift occupy? What role does increasing or decreasing overall volume have in growth? Does the growth from HST improve the potential for future strength gains (i.e. will westside or 5x5 be even more effective in building strength after a cycle or two of HST?). Why does zigzagging or overlapping seem to yield more growth than a linear progression even though this doesn't seem to meld with progressive load purism?

Yes, you are correct. The research behind the principles is immensely complicated, and that's why it took a guy with a masters in physiology to interpret it

That being said the principles are pretty simple. That's part of the elegance of it, that the results of so much research can be summarized so succintly

The other stuff you mentioned: rep tempo, volume, zig-zagging....
these are all program design elements. Keep in mind, HST the program is designed to be easy to follow without having to really know anything. People are used to being told, "do this" and so that's what that is, a formula that anybody can apply and get decent results

I wouldn't say those things tie into the principles that much, those are more concerns over application of the principles
 
crew9 said:
In all fairness from what I remember you didn't even make it past the 15's stage. Perhaps you should actually complete the program before you bash it.

This is correct. Nonetheless it made enough of an impact on me to never do it again.

DC training however is something I read up on quite extensively and think would be a happier alternative to HST.

A medium between HSt and a traditional BBing routine.
 
Tom Treutlein said:
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."

Which I agree with somewhat--but read what he actually posted: "I didn't read any of your post, but HST fucking sucks ass." Way to contribute. I'd call that ignorance, wouldn't you?
 
InTraining said:
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?

I've gained lots of size on both protocols...my diet was more intense when I was doing DC training however. I honestly don't know specifics.

DC is definately a good program, but even I would modify it a bit given what I now know after HST.
 
Debaser, after one achieves their desired size on HST, what program would you personally recommend someone uses to gain strength solely?

And after that, any ideas of power? I know you're involved in some sort of MMA or something of the sort, and by power I mean speed + strength combined to make a strike more effective.

Size - HST
Strength - ?
Power - ?
 
"Pros must know how to train, look at how big they are!"

...hmm...

Hate to say this, but with heavy drug usage and a large surplus of calories, you will put on muscle no matter what you do

Testosterone causes growth REGARDLESS of whether or not you train!
-boys put on 5, 10, 20 pounds of muscle during puberty just from eating
-male hypogonadal men put on HRT typically gain 5-10 pounds of lean mass. From sitting on their ass and injecting 100 mg/week of test.

Just for reference, pros do 2-5 grams test/week, GH, insulin, and some other stuff. If a pro is not making progress, he doesn't ask "how can I change my training" he asks "what else can I take."

I respect pros for their dieting discipline, not their training
 
There's always some talk of HST being boring. Nothing at all wrong with that, considering it's a totally subjective question. However, I find HST to be a shitload of fun. Yes, you're using the same exercises 3 days a week for about 8 weeks, but the rep ranges change every 2 weeks and the weights go up every 48 hours! To me, that's extremely fun and challenging, not to mention effective.

Just my opinion.
 
psychedout said:
Ohhh, and not to stir up controversy.

Take all the biggest guys on this board and in real life:

needsize, Bigdho, bigandy69, quadsweep, galaxy... Jay cutler, Dennis James, Markus Ruhl.....etc -- surely they would know that HST is superior and train that way.

I don't think one single pro or very big guy trains that way. Surely if HST was the best way to train, most would follow it, yet I cannot find one single example.

Oh and also -- did you ever stand to think that the guy who invented HST stands to gain a hell of a lot financially by publishing these supposed studies that support things he sells? I seriously question what is behind them.

I'll stick with whats tried and true for me. Hitting everything basically once per week. Three times per week is silly IMO.

Are you serious?? That is such a weak argument. HST is new in the world of body building and weight lifting. When the first passenger air plane came out people weren't lining up because the trains and boats were tried and true. 50 years from now if no one uses HST then your point is valid but to make that claim now is ridiculous. That is like saying you won't try egg protein because you make good gains from whey....well you might make better gains from egg. Its obvious you do not like it which is fine but make statements like that makes you look foolish.
 
shogun4877 said:
There's always some talk of HST being boring. Nothing at all wrong with that, considering it's a totally subjective question. However, I find HST to be a shitload of fun. Yes, you're using the same exercises 3 days a week for about 8 weeks, but the rep ranges change every 2 weeks and the weights go up every 48 hours! To me, that's extremely fun and challenging, not to mention effective.

Just my opinion.

I totally agree...I don't see how its boring..i'm flying all over the gym cut in on machines for a set here and there..the workouts seem to fly by and I can tell its been an hour more by my fatigue then by using a clock. I haven't seen the results yet but I'm giving it a chance. Also i am 6' and 250 so I can be that "bigger" guy guinea pig.
 
casualbb said:
"Pros must know how to train, look at how big they are!"

...hmm...

Hate to say this, but with heavy drug usage and a large surplus of calories, you will put on muscle no matter what you do

Testosterone causes growth REGARDLESS of whether or not you train!
-boys put on 5, 10, 20 pounds of muscle during puberty just from eating
-male hypogonadal men put on HRT typically gain 5-10 pounds of lean mass. From sitting on their ass and injecting 100 mg/week of test.

Just for reference, pros do 2-5 grams test/week, GH, insulin, and some other stuff. If a pro is not making progress, he doesn't ask "how can I change my training" he asks "what else can I take."

I respect pros for their dieting discipline, not their training

Casuall with all do respect no one knows what pros use yes they use high doses and yes test CAN but NOT always cause muscle growth even in untrained individuals..you should visit the anabolics section there are people on 750 g of test yet you can barel tell they work out..its more than steroids if your natural thats fine stay that way if you want but dont assume because someone is large that its only because of drugs and nothing else..

I beg to differ with your last statement Jay cutler changed from doing 20 sets per bodypart to 9-12 sets for the arnold look at his pics he looked very flat even smaller..yes he won but he did not look his best..look at pics from 2001 and compare them to 2004 especially his right side...lots of pros do use the help of others for their nutrition and training..
 
wnt2bBeast said:
Casuall with all do respect no one knows what pros use yes they use high doses and yes test CAN but NOT always cause muscle growth even in untrained individuals..you should visit the anabolics section there are people on 750 g of test yet you can barel tell they work out..its more than steroids if your natural thats fine stay that way if you want but dont assume because someone is large that its only because of drugs and nothing else..

I beg to differ with your last statement Jay cutler changed from doing 20 sets per bodypart to 9-12 sets for the arnold look at his pics he looked very flat even smaller..yes he won but he did not look his best..look at pics from 2001 and compare them to 2004 especially his right side...lots of pros do use the help of others for their nutrition and training..

My point is that the stuff these guys are taking has a profound effect at doses that are 5% what they take. When you're at grams per week of steroids plus gh and insulin, any changes in your drug regimen will vastly overshadow the slight change from, say, 20 to 9 sets.

Oh, and I didn't say it was just drugs, it's drugs and diet. Those dudes on 750 who don't look like they work out just need to eat more.
 
wnt2bBeast said:
I beg to differ with your last statement Jay cutler changed from doing 20 sets per bodypart to 9-12 sets for the arnold look at his pics he looked very flat even smaller..yes he won but he did not look his best..look at pics from 2001 and compare them to 2004 especially his right side...lots of pros do use the help of others for their nutrition and training..

I think the main reason Cutler looked so small at this year's Arnold is that he severely over-dieted. I think he's still doing his 9-12 set/bodypart regimen, and is supposedly bigger than ever. (He might've gone back to higher volume, though. I don't keep good track of what any pro other than Ronnie and, recently, Dave Henry are doing :) .)
 
Top Bottom