Mike Mentzer Underground Seminar

[maccer]

I watched this last night, it was interesting and amusing. amusing in the fact that Mentzer is so adamant that he knows the only way and his view on people that do not agree with him.

I did like some of his theories though - the premise is all behind going to failure but surely failure is a pretty difficult thing to measure - various people I train with certainly have different ideas on their failure levels.

The other problem I have is with all this resting business, I understand that you need rest to let the muscels grow, but One workout a week for 16 mins just seems too much.

Whats evrynes thoughts on this training? Has anyone here had success with such low volume?

 

[evolutionoftherevolution]

I watched this last night, it was interesting and amusing. amusing in the fact that Mentzer is so adamant that he knows the only way and his view on people that do not agree with him.

I did like some of his theories though - the premise is all behind going to failure but surely failure is a pretty difficult thing to measure - various people I train with certainly have different ideas on their failure levels.

The other problem I have is with all this resting business, I understand that you need rest to let the muscels grow, but One workout a week for 16 mins just seems too much.

Whats evrynes thoughts on this training? Has anyone here had success with such low volume?

I'd love to know who gets results with this type of training. I'm not saying it's not possible, but I REALLY think he was out of his mind when making these statements. Some of the shit is so ludicrous like letting a body part rest almost 2 weeks before working it again!

I can only speak for myself and my last 4 training partners, but volume has been the way to go. And by volume I mean multiple days (4-6), but workouts limited to an hour at a shot.

 

[Badbart]

I rest each body party for nine days and I’ve got the best results this way. I’ve tried a lot of different things and this seems to work the best for me. I would be what most consider a hard gainer tall and thin. This is why you see so many small people at the gym who work out very hard. I’m natural so maybe steroids might help me train more often.

When ever I took a week long break from high volume lifting I always came back stronger but now I’m stronger every workout because my rest time is so long. It seems to really work for me, the hardest part was making myself wait so long to work out.

 

[ham2]

I train every muscle once a week and my sessions are 1,5-2h of eyeball popping training 3 times a week: the maximum i can do.
The oldtimers ( and Mentzer belongs there as a progeny to the Nautilus-Heavy Duty crowd ) did A L L have a trademark: here comes the one who says carbs are just sugars while fats are good; here comes the one who says you need not to train beyond 26 minutes a week; here comes the one claiming unless you train 3h a day you're going nowhere; here is the one who turned vegetarian after a trip to India & he has never been fitter his lifetime; this other one eats only raw buffalo steaks...
Then disputes over copyright...
Did Vince Gironda popularize "intensity" first...or was it the nautilus crew...by the way, read what Fred Hatfield has to say...?
Unlike what Gironda & other loved to believe, AAS entered the picture since late 50's, hence the picture changed completely.
Diet factor?
Sure but we get the opposite holding true for different schools: Blair thought cream would be an ace up your sleeve; Sears swears he got HIV terminally ill back to play sports with his "zone"; some clown is pimping "the italian zone" ( a rip-off )...
Walking the walk, Clarence Bass, certified at 1,5% bodyfat doesn't show a physique i'd die for, to be honest.
Therefore diet alone is not an answer.

As Montana said, mostly everything works at least for a while.
I do have some belly.
Yet there is consensus at my gym i didn't loose strenght/size during 6 years of no training because i was eating...other people, shredded on a strict diet ( + AAS ), do shrink like prunes as soon as the AAS are over...
Of course i try to skip as much junk as i can: a Mc'meal dripping with mayonnaise is not the best BB treat...

 

[maccer]

Cool reply Ham - I was hoping you would chip in with your views mate. I maintain my size and strength when I dont train as well (limited though it is) when I train but I definitely am no longer after mass I want to be really lean and hard and strong - I think I need to wrok hard to do this not just for 15 mins a week!!. I already work a good days ork and train about this - if however I ever ended up in a job where I worker 7am - 10pm (which could happen one day) then I think I would try less volume and the Menzter approach because I Would have little option!!!

 

[ham2]

on the opposite i have always been attracted to mass A N D strenght, yet not to the extremes of some strongmen & powerlifter (like the Michelin man wrestling giant truck tires Etc ).
Rather like an offseason, non hardcore BB look coupled with as much strenght as possible.
Why?
As Clarence Bass shows, his secret his diet, yet his physique isn't head turning.
At my gym the contest-ripped boys use diet (25%) and AAS (75%).
A local champ started to soften out days after the victory, once off AAS...
I also find diseheartening the heart-pounding questions such as " I did have my skinned chicken with sauce...is that beyond repair? ".
A former IFBB world championship contestant is soft like a big truck driver just months after the event.
I don't mean he has "belly", yet he's very very soft: gone the anatony chart is.
Hence that's not my way as well.
I think the best approach is to smarten out on a progressive way: last (rare) time out i got a whole grain bread sandwhich with shrimps, crab, lettuce & tomato: i learnt to skip all the "triple cheese&triple mayonnaise" treats.

Also, strenght YEAR ROUND is what i'm after.
When the bad negro mofo instructor is there showing a weight to a newbie he can't ever lift, warning about how big that is, and you can SAFELY lift it, then i call it scoring a point and you must be ready YEAR ROUND, not only those 2/3 weeks on-season (usually a year ) when AAS are in for good.

 

[maccer]

Fair play ham - I understand were you are coming from, I must admit one thing that scares me about AS is ih effects when you come offf cycle, many of my friends shrunk so much and lost so much strength it was incredible - admittedly after reading the net and these forums for a few years now I can now see that they did not have a fucking clue as to what they were putting in their bodies how to run PCT etc etc

I guess we all have ideal body images that we wish to be like - good luck in achieving yours mate!! Are you from the UK?

 

[ham2]

No, i'm in Italy.
I'm in no way against drugs/AAS...i may want to try some some day as at 32yo i do go up steadily in strenght but not so in size anymore.
At least that's what pro's tell me.
HOWEVER
Since there are a few nationwide pro's & champs at my gym, i have a fair comparison item.
My understanding is: the quickest&freakiest the AAS/drug gains, the faster they will be to go.
I agree with Montana on this.
One of this local pros met Ronnie himself recently at an event & NO WAY ( beyond the Ronnie person being rather a pulp fiction charachter ) did he look the mr.O' way, he reported.
Many pics of Dorian offseason ( not in the O' shape ) mirror the physique of minor federations' champs...
When they put needles&pills back in the fridge (even part-time), it shows.
As well, the AAS strongman champ at my gym N E V E R gives performances unless when he's "on"...
I'm mr.nobody but i can lift the same year round...
Perhaps minor cycles are the way to go for SUSTAINABLE gains...
An example are yo-yo diets...
Loose 10kg in one month, get 8 back in 3 weeks as soon as you stop it.

 

[maccer]

ham I just checked out that Clarence Bass fella - that is some sick shit!!! You follow his stuff or something?

Oh by the way your command of the English language is excellent

 

[ham2]

**********
You follow his stuff or something?
**********

no.
his physique isn't a role model for me.
HOWEVER
i wouldn't misbrand Clarence Bass as "sick shit".
By far he has talked the talk and walked the walk (1,5% bodyfat university certified ).
He's a very educated & knowledgeable person ( he used to write in magazines too ) and his secret is D I E T.
Sure he has accomplished 1000x what 99% diet gurus have.

I use him as an example to prove onstage freakish physiques come from diet (25%) AND AAS (75%) because if diet were all, Clarence would be mr.O'.
For those who are interested, Bass has published several books.

 

[maccer]

I did not mean that in a derogatory way mate - It was a turn of phrase, can you recommend any of his stuff that I might read?

Just realised that you post on MT as well, I frequently go there, same handle

 

[ham2]

i understand you meant "f@cking unbelievable" by "sick shit" and i addressed it.
Bass has written several books & courses ( which used to be advertised once in magazines. Hence i think you may find them on amazon etc ) & used to be a columnist.
What i mean again is he represents diet to a fanatic state of the art level.
However not the way you get onstage as a winner, if you exclude some pathetic third tier "natural amateur" village competitions.

 

[maccer]

I have no ambition to ever get on stage

 

[Mr.HeavyDuty]

I know that I am a little late in this thread, but I wanted to share my Heavy Duty experience. I have made the best gains in my lifting using his methods. I gained nearly 25 pounds, (all natural from 190 to 215) ofcourse not all of that was muscle but my gains were phenomanal to say the least. I simply did not concern myself with losing size or strength and dedicated myself to his program and was rewarded for that belief.

However, I will say that using his methods will decrease your strength on some movements such as bench and shrugs most notably(they are not an active part of the routine). But, no big deal for me, my goal is to be big not the strongest man ever. My delts, triceps, legs and calves saw the biggest increases on this program. After nearly a year on the program I went to a 3 day a week schedule, much like the one Mentzer prescribes in his first Heavy Duty book, but with more volume to change things up on my body for awhile. My gains slowed down and I actually lost a little strength, but I have been quite active with my cardio as well, so that could be the main reason for this problem.

Now, i have started back on the Heavy Duty method, with some slight modifications to include more direct trap work and chest work during my workouts, and am already seeing changes for the better in my physique again. I would recommend Heavy Duty to anyone serious about making gains. If you like to hang out in the gym all the time and talk and play then this is not you routine. VERY INTENSE, VERY BRIEF, AND VERY EFFECTIVE. I trained several of my clients on this routine and they experienced twice the gains as my more "soft" clients. Mentzer was extemely bright and gifted and I give him credit for much of my success, but you have to read through some of his talk and get straight down to the training philosophy. He had his own set of beliefs for life and tried to incorporate that into his training philosophy, and that sometimes confuses people. In the end for me, I consider him a genius in his principles (as well as Yates, Jones, Viator, Ray Mentzer).

I recommend his books and training principles, but I do not advocate is maintance routine. Too little work and not plausible for the serious bodybuliding athlete. If any one has more direct questions for me I would be happy to answer them and explain his principles in more detail.

 

[maccer]

excellent stuff Mr. H !!!

I would love to know what training split you recommend using in a mass phase and some work-out breakdowns please

 

[Mr.HeavyDuty]

I followed Mentzer's prescribed routine in his Heavy Duty 2 Mind and Body book. One workout every 96 to 120 hours, depending on how my recovery from my previous workout was coming along. Sometimes I took as much as 7 or 8 days to recover from certain workouts, most notably the chest and back workout, I know that most people would balk at this much time off but the proof is in the pudding for me. I grew like a weed from his methods and am looking forward to the new growth that I will attain from my upcoming phase.
Anyways, start your week with chest and back (if you do not have the workout let me know), depending on how you feel in 96 hours you will next proceed to your prescribed Leg workout. After another 96 hours it is on to your shoulder and arm routine, after another 96 hours or so it is back to Legs. After this cycle is complete you will then begin the cycle with chest and back all over again. Different methods such as rest-pause and drop sets and heavy partials can be added once you are accustomed to the workout. They are all very effective methods and you must be careful to not to overtrain in any of them. I always to one moderatly heavy warm up before my one all out set to adjust my body to the heavy weights.
This method is excellent for mass, however, I must caution you to regulate your carb intake on your training days and your days off, back off of the carbs on your days off by 100-150. Up your calories on your training day by 300 calories (extra carbs) or so to accomodate for the extra output of energy. This was a mistake that I made early on and had to quickly adjust so that I did not pack on any unsightly fat deposits.
I have to add that after my first workout back on the routine my body was completely exhausted. I felt as though that my body had beeen through a war, and in a sense I guess that it has!!
Anymore specific questions I would be happy to answer for you Maccer if I was too general here in my post.

 

[maccer]

thanks good stuff

I just don't think I can train like this at the moment but there is the chance that I will not ahve as much gym time in the future!! If this is the case then I think these workout would be perfect

 

[Mr.HeavyDuty]

Understandable, most peole get addicted to the atmosphere and love the feeling that they get being in the gym nearly every day. I am one of those people as well. I love being in the gym grinding out sets, but I love making gains more than I love going through the motions of endless sets. Sometimes I get pretty bored sitting around waiting for my next workout, but the gains that I made from my previous experience have solidified my belief in the Heavy Duty system. I am also a collegiate athlete so this routine allows me plnety of time to focus on my goals outside of the gym. Anyways, good luck when you do try the routine. You can always buy the first Heavy Duty book and follow its 3 day a week routine. It is still highly effective compared to more traditional methods.

 

[csobel]

Some thoughts on HIT, from personal experience and conversations with Frank Zane et al.

HIT definantly works for putting on a lot of mass, there is no question about that. Especially for people with poor recuperative ability, it works wonders compared to the overtraining that volume tends to induce, or as a break from volume when one plateus.

However, it is very poor for the following things:
1) Joint and tendon health--the pre-exhaust sets to failure put loads more stress on joints and tendons than do straight sets. Hence, injuries are very common using HIT.
2) Being in shape--Since you are working out like once to twice a week for not much time at all, you are in terrible shape unless you are doing a lot of extra cardio...
3) Strength. Pre-exhaust is not the way to 1 rep max strength on compound movements.

I think that Mike's zeolousness over his HIT method being the only way is kinda weird but then again he was bipolar and was pretty much in the deep end for about a year after his loss to zane in 79. Since obviously volume is responsable for almost all of the great physiques today and back then, I think that there are important aspects of both that we can use; alternating the two methods for example, works well, but we are all different so whatever works for YOU in the end is right, be it volume or HIT.

 

[Mr.HeavyDuty]

Counterpoint #1-Tendons and ligaments are allowed MUCH more time to recover with 96-120 hours between workouts as opposed to the daily grind of set after set that leads to joint and ligament tissue breakdown. This practice was put to the test by myself, as well as my numerous training clients. Zero injuries incurred from HIT.
Counterpoint #2-If you are sitting around not watching your diet then you will be a fat piece of shit on any routine. This routine is designed for optimum mass, Mentzer stresses the reduction of carbs and calories on off workout days. Too much cardio is the only issue with the Heavy Duty, as it is with ANY mass routine.
Counterpoint #3-Heavy Duty is not based on the premise of a one rep maximum on any compound movement. You should read the book, you are printing misinformation here. Heavy duty is not based on just strength, it is based on size through strength via the Heavy Duty philosophy. Which has nothing to do with ORM, Read the book.

Mike did have his issues, but he deserves credit for helping revolutionize HIT. Ask Zane who helped him reach his "zen" when it comes to developing his calves back in 79. I believe that Mike had the best physique of the late seventies and especially 80 when he clearly crushed the competition and was screwed by the system. Let's not forget that volume has also been responsible for the many great failures as well when it comes to physique development. Remember that the greats of the 70's were drug induced and were able to grow regardless of their sets and reps. Mike, Ray, Viator, Yates were all able to develop their physiques to greatness using this method. Some of the greatest physiques ever!! However, I do agree that both styles offer their benefits in moderation. I myself have found Heavy Duty to be FAR superior to any other training regimen.

 

[csobel]

I should read the book? I have read the book... all of them... and I knew Mike thank you very much which is more than you can say for yourself. I don't know why you feel that I am attacking you, when we really agree on the pricipal point of the argument: that HIT is great for mass gains.

Point 1: I am not printing misinformation... the fact of the matter is, I am not talking about tendinitis type injuries that are incurred from daily repitition, but rather rupture-type injuries that arise on the spot.

Point 2: If you are working out 5 days a week you are in better shape than if you are working out 1-2 days a week. It's that simple.

Point 3: I am making a statement that it would be unwise to use HIT for strength training. If HIT were good for strength powerlifters would train that way, but it is not, so they don't.

 

[csobel]

I agree that volume has also been responsible for many ruined physiques in the past, but I think those cases probably deal with extremes aka 90 sets in a workout.

 

[Mr.HeavyDuty]

I knew Mike as well, was a client of his and remain in touch with his business partner. Thank YOU very much. I do not feel like you are attacking me, just putting volume workouts in a little too good of a light. We do agree on the basic pemise of the conversation here.

point one-rupture type injuries occur more in volume type workouts due to the constant strain of set after set.

point two-dude c'mon, that is a huge myth surrounding Heavy Duty as opposed to high volume. When you say shape, do you mean muscularity wise or cardio wise. They are two seperate things.

point three-Heavy Duty is a philosophy, powerlifters still train with less volume and rest a lot more than your typical bodybuilder. So, in a way they do incorporate themes from a HIT style routine.

 

[csobel]

Point 1: I should have clarified myself better on this one... it is not necessarily HIT in principal and perfect practice that would cause more/less injuries than volume. What I meant to say is that when someone has sub par form and attempts a HIT workeout, it tends to end in injury faster than would with normal volume training. I've seen it with many college atheletes who zelously try HIT and rupture, for example, the exstensor tendon doing a pre-exhaust set of very heavy fly's followed by inc. presses. Or dislocate a shoulder.
So I guess I was wrong to say that HIT causes injuries; this I am not sure of; but rather meant that the poor implementation of HIT can cause injuries, which at least from my experience has proven true.

Point 2: Weightlifting is cardiovascular in nature, especially when you are doing 4 or 5 one hour workeouts a week that involve many sets. Simply put, without having to do extra cardio (thus creating a more catabolic enviornment) I would venture to say (and I really don't know if this is true or not) that the VO2 max of someone doing volume is higher than someone doing just HIT. Granted, the person doing HIT has loads more time to endulge in other activities like martial arts/other sports that would do a much better job of raising that VO2 max than would weightlifting by itself.

Point 3: True, both sports share the same principal of more rest between workeouts. I don't know where I was going with that one...

 

[Mr.HeavyDuty]

Point one: I completely agree with you bro. I don't think I could have said it better myself. Too many people try to jump into a Heavy Duty style workout to quickly with piss poor form and too much weight and find themselves getting more rest than they could ever hope to get due to injury.

Point two: Believe it or not, I agree with you here as well. You are one of very few people that I have ever spoken with that agrees with me that weight training is indeed cardiovascular. If you are looking for muscular endurance than training high volume is the way to go for sure. I train in Heavy Duty style because I am also a collegiate wrestler. I am allowed more time to train outside of the gym and burn fewer calories and still grow larger and stronger because of this. I train a little bit more high volume and shorter duration between workouts in the offseason to conditioin my body differently for a bit.

I have enjuoyed this discussion bro, thanks for keeping it a lively discussion as oppossed to getting all pissy like some of the other people on this board.

 

[ham2]

**************
I agree with you here as well. You are one of very few people that I have ever spoken with that agrees with me that weight training is indeed cardiovascular.
**************

Charles Poliquin ( the world famous olympic coach etc ) thinks that way as well.

 

[csobel]

You're welcome bro--I overreacted at first but I am myself bipolar so I tend to get weird sometimes.

I've learned a lot from this--in fact, I've been considering going back to HIT since I am trying to nurse some elbow tendinitis at the moment. Which was caused by... drumroll... many sets of preacher curl drops.

 

[Mr.HeavyDuty]

I think we are all a "little" bipolar at times, hahahaha..lol.

Dude, seriously, if I can ever help you let me know and I would gladly do so if I can. I have never been healthier(knock on wood)than when I have been training Heavy Duty style.

 

[csobel]

Ok thanks man--I may have a few questions later on, I'll let you!