Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

My hit training recommendations

H

hitwarrior

New member
Hit -is a disciplined style of training based on overload and progression.
Hit is going all out-not almost all out. It is taking one set to one's absolute limit,not almost to the limit.
Many hit trainers recommend all kinds of different speeds. From 10 up and 10 down to 10 up and 5 down. Larry scott recommends 6 up and 6 down and mentzer recommends at least 3 up and 4 or 5 down.
I recommend all of them depending on your goals . YOu can hit train all year and use them all. I like mentzer's recommendations especially if your wanting more strenght and larry scott's training for healing and growing some with the healing . I recommend the slow lifting for people that have been doing faster rep speeds for awhile and need something new.
After you do one set to failure, A good way to say what happens is to say you dug a hole into the muscle and after each set a deeper and deeper hole is made. After your workout , the first thing the body does is not to grow but replenish, meaning the body's muscle building chemicals, and nutrients are first being used to fill up the hole,& then once the hole is filled, then the body's muscle building nutrients will be used to pack muscle on top of the hole.
Almost everyone reading this can agree that 100 sets is too much. Why? there has to be areason. Well the reason is because the 100 sets dug such a deep hole , the body doesnt have enough resources to even fill the whole back up . If there 100 of you the one doing 99 sets would see better results than the one doing 100 sets because the hole isnt as deep. 11 is better than 10, 5 is better than 6 and so on until you get to one set being better than 2 sets.
YOU DONT WANT TO DIG A DEEP HOLE. YOU HAVE TO BUILD A HOLE THOUGH IN ORDER TO GROW BUT A LITTLE HOLE AS POSSIBLE, THAT WAY THE BODY'S RESERVES OR RESOURCES CAN BE USED FOR GROWTH INSTEAD OF RECOVERY.

So lets say you currently do 80 pounds for 5 reps on the flat dumbell press . To stimulate growth you need to the the 80's for 6 reps or more. But 6 at a minimum. Not 2 sets, or 3 , but one set 80 pounds for 6 reps or use more weight.
After doing one set to failure, if i was to give you a million dollars if you could go back and do a second set with the same weight and do the same number of reps-there should be no way you could do it, even with the motivation of winning a million dollars. If you can do a 2nd set then you didnt lift hard or right on that set.
YOU NEED TO ADAPT TO HIT, THE FIRST TIME YOU DO HIT YOU WILL FEAL LIKE YOU CAN DO A SECOND SET WITH THE SAME WEIGHT AND MATCH IT.
AFTER A COUPLE HIT WORKOUTS IT IS POSSIBLE NOT TO JUST GO UP A LITTLE IN WEIGHT BUT ALOT. i WENT FROM INCLINING 80'S FOR 6 REPS TO 120'S ON ONE MONTH . MY AVERAGE CLIENT WILL GO FROM LETS SAY 185 FOR 6 TO 225 FOR 6 IN JUST A COUPLE WORKOUTS. WHY AND HOW?
Because they no longer have to recover from extra sets and everything is used for growth . This is why hit trainers grow. Its not magic that hit trainers grow. Its not just a workout. BUT A THEORY, THE THEORY OF HIGH INTENISTY TRAINING. '
Very simple you do one set to failure and the next workout you up it. After you have upped it , no second set is needed or even wanted. ISNT THAT PROGRESSIVE RESISTANCE. THERE IS NO PROGESSIVE RESISTANCE WITH DOING A SECOND SET .
mORE COMING IN THE NEXT POST
 
People dont seem to understand what causes growth. The stimulus repsonsible for increasing size and strenght is the last rep of a set carried to failure. If you can do 9 reps you must agree the next you need to do 10 right. You wont grow by doing 1,2,3 or 8 or even reps. if you do 9 reps again all your doing is contracting the same muscle cells you did the previous workout. YOU DONT STIMULATE GROWTH BY DOING A SECOND SET . YOU ONLY GROW ON ANY WORKOUT WHEN THEIR IS PROGRESSIVE RESISTANCE AND TO DO THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO A 10TH REP
example- you do one rep and your body contracts a certain number of muslce cells. After each rep your body has to contract more and more muscle cells and when you get to the 9th rep your body will contract the exact same muscle cells it did the last time you did 9 reps and THE ONLY WAY TO CONTRACT NEW MUSCLE CELLS WHICH IS NEEDED IN ORDER TO GROW YOU NEED TO DO A 10 REP.

IF YOU DID A SECOND SET OF 9 ALL YOU DO IS CONTRACT THE SAME MUSCLE CELLS. SOME SAY YOU CONTRACT NEW MUSCLE CELLS IN ORDER TO DO THE SET AND ITS NOT TRUE.

PEOPLE THAN SAY , WHY DID I GROW DOING MY 4 SETS OF 8
because you did the same thing that people that do one set do. the guy doing 4 by 8 did do one set but 3 unneccesary sets . plus when your brain knows it is going to do more than one set, something deep down inside of you holds back and that is why some can do the same weight again and the same number of reps. Also remember if you did doa second set and you didnt even match the same number of reps you actually contracted less muscle than the previous set and by doing this set you made a deeper hole causing it to take you longer to recover than it does someone doing a second set.

For the guys and gals doing multiple sets and train in consecutive days- if 3 sets is good , then why not a 4th set. if it was sets that cause growth , that would not mean, but have to mean that one more set would be even better.
Remember weightlifiting is anerobic, not aerobic. People are using aerobic energy to do sets and then wander why they dont grow.My workout that i did and what i do now in the next post.
 
If anyone has any questions ask away.
answer this , If you had to choose one. what causes growth. is it how many times a muscle contracts that determines growth or is it how much.

How much is the one you choosed right.
Well wouldnt volume be how many times and hit be how much. Thats right.
I myself see better results than most. People will say that hit if for bad genes and then in my case and dorian they will say hit works for people with great genes. Sounds hipocritical to me.
My first hit workout i did the 80's to failure in the incline dumbell press. I did my one set and since my brain knew i was doing one set and then i would be done i remember that that lift was awesome and all eyes were on me and people said. Wow i wish i could lift that hard. I know knew what a hard lift was. A week later i did the 80's again and stopped short of failure. WHY? because it was too light. I picked up the 90 and it was light. I then did the 100's for 4 reps.
a 40 pound jump in one workout. THE NEXT WORKOUT- i did the 100 and it was too light- i did the 110 to failure- a week later i did the 120's for 6 reps.
So in 3 workouts i went from 80's to 120's . HIT MUST WORK.
this happened on all my lifts. i went from 315 for one to 500 for one rep in one workout in the squat. i went from 25's in the side lateral to an unbelievable 75's for 6 in the lateral.

this was the month i went from 240 to 280 in one month.
this was in 94. in the spring of 94 i went from 225 to 195. I stayed there for 3 months and then started lifting and went from 195 back to 225 the first month, second month 225 to 240 . I then did hit and went from 240 to 280. I DID DO ONE DROP SET WITH A LIGHTER WEIGHT WITH FORCED REPS BECAUSE I DIDNT KNOW THEN WHAT I KNOW NOW.
After i went from 240 to 280 i decided that lifting was going to be a major part of my life. i ran a 4.4 40 at 280 and could only doa 4.9 at 225. i grew and got faster. Faster with no running training.
In 95 i contined to lift and in 98 i weighted 325 and went from 325 to 285 and in competition benched 440 , squatted 700 and deadlifted 700 without doing any training cycle. Just my warmups and one set to failure. then i lifted too much and too often as i would train legs and lift in consecutive days and i could of been even better. I now know i could of done 500,800,800 with even less training even though i was gaining big time. i then went back up to 325 and in 98 went up to 350 and tried out for an arena team and ran a 4.,9 40 without running a real sprint in 5 years. People ask me how can this happen. I say 52 legs workouts a year for 5 years without missing a workout. People keep forgetting how awesome lifting once a week adds up . i wander how many reading this did 52 legs workouts this year and saw results and went up in weight and reps every workout. Not many.,
Last year i developed something new called new exercise , new growth and i would do a new lift everytime i lifted to see if it would work because just from common sense it made sense. i then went from 350 to 400. People think i way around 300, well there 100 pounds off. Im now at 380 and plan on getting cut soon. I take a multi 6 days a week, creatine and glutamine evertime i lift . i used to take zman, and acetabolan. Also when i went from 195 to 280 i did take something called m2 maximum athletic formual wiht 6 grams of L arginine. i even took it twice a day sometimes. I often wander if it was the arginine. through the years arginine wasnt supposed to work and now everyone is taking it again.

Just like mentzer clients . I train almost 500 people and all grow and ive never had one person not be satisfied with my training of them.
ive also been known to do 30 up and down training as i feel it teaches me intensity and boom evertime i go back to normal training i go up again in weight. My favorite lift was doing 150 for 6 in the incline dumbell press with an entire gym of bad asses and fitness pros watching me in shock. i did it like it was nothing.
Everyone in the gym could feel the energy and the intensity i put through in my lifts. Doing one set to failure is an exilerating experience and that is exactly why its so effective. Its the hardness which makes it so good. Mentzer quoted saying one set to failure is 40 times harder than doing 2 sets to failure. Well he is close. id say its about 10 times harder. More coming so i can explain that i didnt walk in pickup the 150 and then do one set. Many warmup sets were done.
 
this post is really pissing me off, I lost 5 minutes of my life reading the most rediculous shit ever...

"YOU DONT STIMULATE GROWTH BY DOING A SECOND SET . YOU ONLY GROW ON ANY WORKOUT WHEN THEIR IS PROGRESSIVE RESISTANCE AND TO DO THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO A 10TH REP"

Man the all important 10th rep.....
 
some of his points make sense to me but to come spouting off all this stuff and claiming you have accomplished all these feats w/o posting pics. Id love to see b4 and after shots of you. 400 pounds? I doubt any 400 pound man could have the agility and ability to play arena football.
 
hitwarrior,

What you are saying is a good argument, and many people have similar beliefs. If you know anything about the writing process though, you know that editing is the absolute most important step. Once I saw the word "choosed" I gave up on your theories.
 
hitwarrior said:
Hit -is a disciplined style of training based on overload and progression.

** What is discipline? WHere do they have it? All training is based on overload and progression to an extent.

Hit is going all out-not almost all out. It is taking one set to one's absolute limit,not almost to the limit.

** Whats the absolute limit? How do we know what our absolute limit is?

Many hit trainers recommend all kinds of different speeds. From 10 up and 10 down to 10 up and 5 down. Larry scott recommends 6 up and 6 down and mentzer recommends at least 3 up and 4 or 5 down.
I recommend all of them depending on your goals . YOu can hit train all year and use them all. I like mentzer's recommendations especially if your wanting more strenght and larry scott's training for healing and growing some with the healing . I recommend the slow lifting for people that have been doing faster rep speeds for awhile and need something new.
After you do one set to failure, A good way to say what happens is to say you dug a hole into the muscle and after each set a deeper and deeper hole is made.

** Your not digging a hole in your muscle your just fatiguing your CNS to the point to where it can supply enough motor neuros to stimulate the realease of the cal. As you see you have propriaceptors in the muscle and joints, during any form of loading they send a impulse to the brain. the brain then sends a signal to the motor cortex to determine the amount of tension that is needed to complete the rep. Once the motor cortex processes all the data it is then carried to the spinal column where the motor neurons are by nerves. Then the neurons trigger the axons to the cells to release a chemical called Acetylchonline. This chemical then stimulates the sarcoplasmic returculem to release the calcium ions into the sarcoplasm. Then the sarcoplasm makes the actin filaments in the fiber pull between the myosin filaments which shortens the sarcomers to produce a contraction of the fiber. The contraction triggers the relase of ATP and ADP which makes a chain reaction which produces all the neighboring fibers to contract making the whole muscle or muscle group contract. As you see by 'digging' this hole you are doing nothing but making the propriaceptors fatigued to the point where they cannot send a strong enough chemical signal to the brain, which then the motor cortex cannot supply the approiate tension. By doing this your doing nothing but breaking down the already existant fibers that are being worked, not a large recruitment of fresh fibers. This is all probably way over your head, as HIT jedi's dont believe in science like this.

After your workout , the first thing the body does is not to grow but replenish, meaning the body's muscle building chemicals, and nutrients are first being used to fill up the hole,& then once the hole is filled, then the body's muscle building nutrients will be used to pack muscle on top of the hole.

** Are you talking about Protein Synthesis?


Almost everyone reading this can agree that 100 sets is too much. Why? there has to be areason. Well the reason is because the 100 sets dug such a deep hole , the body doesnt have enough resources to even fill the whole back up . If there 100 of you the one doing 99 sets would see better results than the one doing 100 sets because the hole isnt as deep. 11 is better than 10, 5 is better than 6 and so on until you get to one set being better than 2 sets.

** read what i posted above, multi sets are more benefical in the fact they allowe for rest, during this resting state the nervous system rest and is able to perform more efficently. More stimulation equals more tension, more tension equals more growth, not nessacialy the time of the tension.

YOU DONT WANT TO DIG A DEEP HOLE. YOU HAVE TO BUILD A HOLE THOUGH IN ORDER TO GROW BUT A LITTLE HOLE AS POSSIBLE, THAT WAY THE BODY'S RESERVES OR RESOURCES CAN BE USED FOR GROWTH INSTEAD OF RECOVERY.

**Again read what i said about your "hole"

So lets say you currently do 80 pounds for 5 reps on the flat dumbell press . To stimulate growth you need to the the 80's for 6 reps or more. But 6 at a minimum. Not 2 sets, or 3 , but one set 80 pounds for 6 reps or use more weight.
After doing one set to failure, if i was to give you a million dollars if you could go back and do a second set with the same weight and do the same number of reps-there should be no way you could do it, even with the motivation of winning a million dollars. If you can do a 2nd set then you didnt lift hard or right on that set.
YOU NEED TO ADAPT TO HIT, THE FIRST TIME YOU DO HIT YOU WILL FEAL LIKE YOU CAN DO A SECOND SET WITH THE SAME WEIGHT AND MATCH IT.
AFTER A COUPLE HIT WORKOUTS IT IS POSSIBLE NOT TO JUST GO UP A LITTLE IN WEIGHT BUT ALOT. i WENT FROM INCLINING 80'S FOR 6 REPS TO 120'S ON ONE MONTH . MY AVERAGE CLIENT WILL GO FROM LETS SAY 185 FOR 6 TO 225 FOR 6 IN JUST A COUPLE WORKOUTS. WHY AND HOW?
Because they no longer have to recover from extra sets and everything is used for growth . This is why hit trainers grow. Its not magic that hit trainers grow. Its not just a workout. BUT A THEORY, THE THEORY OF HIGH INTENISTY TRAINING. '

** your right, a theory with little scientific evidence to back i tup. And what evidence their is to back it up, it has been conducted by a fellow Jedi.

Very simple you do one set to failure and the next workout you up it. After you have upped it , no second set is needed or even wanted. ISNT THAT PROGRESSIVE RESISTANCE. THERE IS NO PROGESSIVE RESISTANCE WITH DOING A SECOND SET .
mORE COMING IN THE NEXT POST
Click to expand...

**You said progressive resistance? There is more then one way to apply the progressive overload principle, which really has its gaps as well. You can add sets, weight, more reps, increase rest time.. etc.. all is a form of overload which is effective and even more effective.
 
Last edited:
hitwarrior said:
People dont seem to understand what causes growth. The stimulus repsonsible for increasing size and strenght is the last rep of a set carried to failure. If you can do 9 reps you must agree the next you need to do 10 right. You wont grow by doing 1,2,3 or 8 or even reps. if you do 9 reps again all your doing is contracting the same muscle cells you did the previous workout. YOU DONT STIMULATE GROWTH BY DOING A SECOND SET . YOU ONLY GROW ON ANY WORKOUT WHEN THEIR IS PROGRESSIVE RESISTANCE AND TO DO THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO A 10TH REP

** Nobody knows the best way or how hypertrophy is produced, it just happens. Are you saying by doing the last rep in the workout you are going to give the proper stimuli to produce growth? Are you doing 9 reps with one weight then 10 reps the next workout with the same weight? Thats a very very small progression! Why not drop weight and do 12 reps? or why not add weight and do 6 reps? or better yet why not do another set or a pyramid set? Again, your theory SUCKS!!

example- you do one rep and your body contracts a certain number of muslce cells. After each rep your body has to contract more and more muscle cells and when you get to the 9th rep your body will contract the exact same muscle cells it did the last time you did 9 reps and THE ONLY WAY TO CONTRACT NEW MUSCLE CELLS WHICH IS NEEDED IN ORDER TO GROW YOU NEED TO DO A 10 REP.

** you saying that by doing one contraction that you arnt contracting the same number of fibers in the next several reps?

IF YOU DID A SECOND SET OF 9 ALL YOU DO IS CONTRACT THE SAME MUSCLE CELLS. SOME SAY YOU CONTRACT NEW MUSCLE CELLS IN ORDER TO DO THE SET AND ITS NOT TRUE.

** Care to show me some EMG studies to back up your comment? According to your theory you do nothing but recruite the same fibers over and over again, and the max number of fibers in the muscle. Which isnt possible, because no single movement will fatigue all fibers. Im sure you know the 3 fibers, Ia, IIA, and IIX. You will never tap into all the Ia fibers due to the fact they are so resistance to faituge and high at ATP. The IIA and IIX on the other hand do get recruited and fired but your not placing enough tension, or load on them to do anything but have them change iso forms and act like a hybrid fiber of Ia. Again i bet you dont know what im talking about because you dont seem to have a understanding of science.

PEOPLE THAN SAY , WHY DID I GROW DOING MY 4 SETS OF 8
because you did the same thing that people that do one set do. the guy doing 4 by 8 did do one set but 3 unneccesary sets . plus when your brain knows it is going to do more than one set, something deep down inside of you holds back and that is why some can do the same weight again and the same number of reps. Also remember if you did doa second set and you didnt even match the same number of reps you actually contracted less muscle than the previous set and by doing this set you made a deeper hole causing it to take you longer to recover than it does someone doing a second set.

** Actually by taking a rest and then adding weight you increase the tension which recruites more fibers to contract to manuoover the load. Again, your theory SUCKS! And shut up already with your HOLE theory, it sucks!

For the guys and gals doing multiple sets and train in consecutive days- if 3 sets is good , then why not a 4th set. if it was sets that cause growth , that would not mean, but have to mean that one more set would be even better.
Remember weightlifiting is anerobic, not aerobic. People are using aerobic energy to do sets and then wander why they dont grow.My workout that i did and what i do now in the next post.
Click to expand...

** Wait a min, by doing 4 or 5 reps with 2-4 sets your training your aerobic energy system? Umm i think now, by training to failure using a multi number of sets your doing nothing much chaning the MHC and making the iso forms turn into hybrids. You dont understand the concept and the chemical breakdown of ATP do you? Nore do you understand anything for that matter!


Kc
 
Last edited:
All I have to say is we have some very educated and dedicated people on this forum, and if you come here talking to us like we're idiots who don't know what we're doing, your ideas aren't going to be well received. Sometimes it's not what you say, but how you say it.
 
xtreme powerlifter i disagree with your post and you didnt even come close to understanding it.
For the reasons given that you say that im wrong then me and noone would of grown. why did we grow more from hit than volume and why do all my cllients that were doing volume not grow and come to me for help and then grow on hit. No i was not owned.
 
I didnt come close to understanding it? You have yet to try and dispute me or give me a counter argument to what i posted. You apply no scientific backing to what you said, and you dont understand my post due to it being above your level of understanding.

Any method of training will work after stagnation, this is due to the progression being to high or inadeuqute. There are two basic forms of stress that are placed on the body as defined by Hans Seley, these forms of stressors are important in having the body Adapt to Imposed Demands. Any individual will benefit and adapt to any form of load placed on it over a given period of time, or till stagnation. Jedi's even say it themselvs.. the goal is to "stagnate" i have that in quote btw.. from a very famous HIT jedi. During stagnation you have a imbalance between stress and adaption, this can lead to bad workouts, no gains, injury and depression.


Kc
 
XtremePowerLifter2000 said:
well, the way its produced can be argued. As for the best way to stimuli hypertrophy is unknown.


Kc
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure HST has most of it figured out. Bump for casualbb to offer more insight into this...
 
Hmmm...someone else who knows everything about weight lifting, powerlifting, and bodybuilding...who also chooses to argue their points with 'absolutes'...

C'mon man...you live less than 2 hours from me. Come on down and train one Sunday.

B True
 
b fold the truth said:
Hmmm...someone else who knows everything about weight lifting, powerlifting, and bodybuilding...who also chooses to argue their points with 'absolutes'...

C'mon man...you live less than 2 hours from me. Come on down and train one Sunday.

B True
Click to expand...

Sounds like a challenge.
 
XtremePowerLifter2000 said:
HST isnt the optimal program, i feel as DFHT gets more popular you will see the dismise of HST.


Kc
Click to expand...

If I understand DFHT correctly and don't get mad if I dont, but don't both DFHT and HST use similar theories? I can also tell you that I have experienced some of my best growth in years on HST, although this doesn't prove that it is optimal.
 
RusPA81 said:


Sounds like a challenge.
Click to expand...

Not a challenge at all. It is just a shame for someone to live THAT close and not come down to train one weekend.

I don't believe in HST 100%, I think that is well known. I don't see where doing anything 'hypertrophy specific' is key to strength athletes either.

I don't know anyone who has similar goals to mine or who has what I want to achieve...who trains that way either.

B True
 
b fold the truth said:


Not a challenge at all. It is just a shame for someone to live THAT close and not come down to train one weekend.

I don't believe in HST 100%, I think that is well known. I don't see where doing anything 'hypertrophy specific' is key to strength athletes either.

I don't know anyone who has similar goals to mine or who has what I want to achieve...who trains that way either.

B True
Click to expand...

Do you not agree in HST because of its theories or as a strength program? If it is a strength program that bothers then I agree, because thats not what it is for, although all my lifts have gone. This probably does not transfer into any functional strength though
 
HST in all honesty isnt a bad program, its next to DFHT IMO. I dont feel either though are the optimal program for hypertrophy. They are both based around similar beliefs yes. There will never be a optimal program for the masses. The reason being we all have different rate, degree, and efficiency of responding to the same training quality or quantity of our specific training. I personally dont like the way HST does their loading.

Speaking of Hypertrophy there should be a really really good article coming out shortly by PowerManDL on hypertrophy. I look forward to it.


Kc
 
Also B Fold, what part of Kentucky? Im in Little Rock, Ark. Id love to come up and work some strongman stuff with you guys sometime. I plan on going out to train with Spatts in Dec.


Kc
 
I own mike metzner's High Intensity Training book, what hitwarrior has to say is remarkably similar to what the book says...almost too remarkable. Maybe you should site some sources.
 
Post up some before and after pics and some workout videos! I want to see what HIT has done to you.

Here's a question for you: If HIT is the best way, why don't powerlifters or olympic lifters use it? Metal Militia style training has created the strongest benchers in history, and they train with a very high volume.
 
UA_Iron said:
I own mike metzner's High Intensity Training book, what hitwarrior has to say is remarkably similar to what the book says...almost too remarkable. Maybe you should site some sources.
Click to expand...

lol, now i know why id never baught his shitty book. Actually I might, so it limits the book by 1 copy and thus saving 1 soul from it. I could always take it on camping trips to incase i run out of TP!!


Kc
 
b fold the truth said:


Not a challenge at all. It is just a shame for someone to live THAT close and not come down to train one weekend.

I don't believe in HST 100%, I think that is well known. I don't see where doing anything 'hypertrophy specific' is key to strength athletes either.

I don't know anyone who has similar goals to mine or who has what I want to achieve...who trains that way either.

B True
Click to expand...

I would agree that HST isn't the best for strength athletes, but then that was never it's goal. It's meant for people who want to have bigger muscles and that's it (though strength will still come to a degree). That's not my goal, but realistically that IS the goal of most guys who work out.
 
delldell2 said:
It probably has to do with the guy saying he's an Arena Football Player.
Click to expand...

Correct...

I'm not sure why Hypertrophy Specific training would be important for an athlete.

I'm not a bodybuilder, so I don't feel comfortable giving GOOD advice about bodybuilding. I am a strength athlete...so that is where I try to advise people.

I live in Murray, Kentucky...42071. Stella to be exact:)

B True
 
b fold the truth said:



I'm not sure why Hypertrophy Specific training would be important for an athlete.

I'm not a bodybuilder, so I don't feel comfortable giving GOOD advice about bodybuilding. I am a strength athlete...so that is where I try to advise people.

B True
Click to expand...

It isn't in a way useful for strength athletes. You can give advice to whomever you want Bfold. You experience and knowledge of weightlifting as whole, by far exceeds that of most people. I know that I would listen to anything advice that you had to offer.
 
RusPA81 said:


It isn't in a way useful for strength athletes. You can give advice to whomever you want Bfold. You experience and knowledge of weightlifting as whole, by far exceeds that of most people. I know that I would listen to anything advice that you had to offer.
Click to expand...

Thanks man...there are just people that I listen to a lot when I have certain questions about certain lifts, sports, or goals. I've had HUGE arguments with both CCJ and bignate at one point...and I finally realized that I knew very little about what they were GREAT at.

B True
 
b fold the truth said:


Thanks man...there are just people that I listen to a lot when I have certain questions about certain lifts, sports, or goals. I've had HUGE arguments with both CCJ and bignate at one point...and I finally realized that I knew very little about what they were GREAT at.

B True
Click to expand...

I totally realize what you are saying. Everyone has the own niche and their knowledge is geared towards that. I was just saying that I would take your overall knowledge or many peoples so called "specialized" knowledge. Also I totally think that are many very smart people on this board so my comment is not geared towards any one person in particular.
 
I don't see how anyone can feel good about saying that their training method is an absolute. Science is always evolving. In time, there is always a better way.

To say there is only 1 way, and it has already been figured out, is to be closed minded.
 
There is one best way to train, but I'm not telling any of you people what it is. Hahahaha.
 
ATF said:
I don't see how anyone can feel good about saying that their training method is an absolute. Science is always evolving. In time, there is always a better way.

To say there is only 1 way, and it has already been figured out, is to be closed minded.
Click to expand...

Not even science will evolve to the point it will tell us the best program, the reason being there is no way to find a universal link between each individual to have it work for each person.


kc
 
ATF said:
I don't see how anyone can feel good about saying that their training method is an absolute. Science is always evolving. In time, there is always a better way.

To say there is only 1 way, and it has already been figured out, is to be closed minded.
Click to expand...

I agree....

AND...science isn't EVER going to figure out the BEST way to train because it is always changing. It changes for every person and even THAT changes quickly. Mine changes weekly, even though I stick with the same basic structure.

EVERYONE has to figure their own body out and that takes time. With that time you must still research what is working for you and maybe even WHY it is working, because it is going to change soon.

I don't believe that a program works if you have to change it after 6 weeks or so. You were either over or under training (somehow shocking your body) if you reach a plateau. A good program should always work and allow for the flexibility to change small things on a weekly basis.

B True
 
you realise this guy claims to be pretty near to 30 stone!
 
Arnold'sApprentice said:
you realise this guy claims to be pretty near to 30 stone!
Click to expand...


How much is a stone? I'm gonna start giving my weight in stone, lol.
 
b fold the truth said:


I agree....

AND...science isn't EVER going to figure out the BEST way to train because it is always changing. It changes for every person and even THAT changes quickly. Mine changes weekly, even though I stick with the same basic structure.

EVERYONE has to figure their own body out and that takes time. With that time you must still research what is working for you and maybe even WHY it is working, because it is going to change soon.

I don't believe that a program works if you have to change it after 6 weeks or so. You were either over or under training (somehow shocking your body) if you reach a plateau. A good program should always work and allow for the flexibility to change small things on a weekly basis.

B True
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly.
 
b fold the truth said:


I agree....

AND...science isn't EVER going to figure out the BEST way to train because it is always changing. It changes for every person and even THAT changes quickly.
Click to expand...

I would have to respectfully disagree here...

I think some things are person-specific. Some guys are more or less capable in the following areas:

1. Robustness of joints and susceptability to injury
2. Rate of muscle gain
3. CNS overtraining threshhold, ie. if someone did 10 sets to failure every single day, how fast he would start to be overtrained relative to another guy.

But in terms of muscle growth, I believe it is far more cut and dry. It's more of a physiology issue. In terms of muscle growth, HST and DFHT, and to a slightly lesser extent DC (since it's concentrates a little more on strength gains) have discovered the fastest way we know of to build muscle tissue. Now as we learn more, these program might evolve slightly, but since it's based on concepts of the human body I don't think they'll change significantly any time soon.

With regards to the best strength gain program, Westside seems to be pretty darn close. The reason this is up in the air more is, IMO, for the following reasons:

1. Although we know that total strength is a resultant of a couple factors (power/speed, pure strength etc.),

2. The best way to develop each of these factors is a little bit harder to figure out. It's easier to figure out in a lab how muscle grows, it's harder to figure out how strength develops.

This is where the person-specific factors come in. Some guy might be able to produce more strength on a certain protocol because of his genetics and structure than another guy. That guy might be better suited towards a different program that takes advantage of HIS attributes. Some guys can handle all the Metal Militia volume, some guys will get overtrained quickly, etc.

Last, some programs might generate more speed but less progressive overload, and vice versa. Since both these factors contribute to strength, it is hard to come up with an absolute "best way" to gaining strength.
 
Last edited:
Come on guys, why are you bashing Hit Warrior? This man walked into the gym one day and weighed 195lbs, he performed 1 set of incline d-bell presses to failure with 80lbs and he woke up the next morning and weighed 400lbs, then he proceeded to run the 40 yard dash in 4 seconds..........Damn, I am gonna go do Hit Warrior's workout right now and I will keep you guys posted, I suggest you all do the same and we can weigh ourselves tomorrow, I am shooting for 30 stone as well.

HitWarrior, you're an asset to this board.

(That was supposed to be sarcastic)
 
Debaser said:


I would have to respectfully disagree here...

But in terms of muscle growth, I believe it is far more cut and dry. It's more of a physiology issue. In terms of muscle growth, HST and DFHT, and to a slightly lesser extent DC (since it's concentrates a little more on strength gains) have discovered the fastest way we know of to build muscle tissue. Now as we learn more, these program might evolve slightly, but since it's based on concepts of the human body I don't think they'll change significantly any time soon.

With regards to the best strength gain program, Westside seems to be pretty darn close. The reason this is up in the air more is, IMO, for the following reasons:

1. Although we know that total strength is a resultant of a couple factors (power/speed, pure strength etc.),

2. The best way to develop each of these factors is a little bit harder to figure out. It's easier to figure out in a lab how muscle grows, it's harder to figure out how strength develops.

This is where the person-specific factors come in. Some guy might be able to produce more strength on a certain protocol because of his genetics and structure than another guy. That guy might be better suited towards a different program that takes advantage of HIS attributes. Some guys can handle all the Metal Militia volume, some guys will get overtrained quickly, etc.

Last, some programs might generate more speed but less progressive overload, and vice versa. Since both these factors contribute to strength, it is hard to come up with an absolute "best way" to gaining strength.
Click to expand...

I'm not a bodybuilder or concerned with muscle growth...just total body performance. I don't know much about bodybuilding.

Also...you used 3 different examples of programs that you say have figured it out the fastest way to muscle gains. If it takes 3 different programs to be the 'fastest way' then that means one isn't the best.

One way ISN'T the best. The body must adapt and change...just as the program should.

B True
 
XtremePowerLifter2000 said:
HST isnt the optimal program, i feel as DFHT gets more popular you will see the dismise of HST.


Kc
Click to expand...

The problem is... DFHT is based upon managing fatigue through volume cycling. Fatigue has nothing to do with hypertrophy. HST is designed around the way muscle actually grows in response to training. Part of the program is designed to manage fatigue, because in any frequent program it's an issue. But it's certainly not the central theme of the program.

Also, why would any strength athlete do HST? HST is actually a very good offseason routine if the athlete needs to gain muscle or change weight classes. Say a wrestler wanted to go up in weight class. That would be best done using HST during the offseason.

A great templete would be to use HST to achieve a good weight and LBM for a given sport and then switch over to WSB or some other strength routine to increase performance.
 
BigBadBootyDaddy29 said:
Come on guys, why are you bashing Hit Warrior? This man walked into the gym one day and weighed 195lbs, he performed 1 set of incline d-bell presses to failure with 80lbs and he woke up the next morning and weighed 400lbs, then he proceeded to run the 40 yard dash in 4 seconds..........Damn, I am gonna go do Hit Warrior's workout right now and I will keep you guys posted, I suggest you all do the same and we can weigh ourselves tomorrow, I am shooting for 30 stone as well.

HitWarrior, you're an asset to this board.

(That was supposed to be sarcastic)
Click to expand...


That gave me a damn good chuckle...thanks bbbd :D
 
no not overnight but i did go from 195 to 280 in 3 months, and then go from 280 to 350 in 3 months and ive been around 350 for the last 5 years , all from mentzer hit. People keep saying all workouts work when there is progressive resistance. Well isnt doing the 80's for 6 rep, next workout 7, next workout 8, next workout progressive resistance. yes it is and after 3 months i inclined the 120's for 6 reps. I dont think people know how to properly do hit training from what i see on here. If you want me to explain it to you the way i do it i will. I go into my recovery on one set and everything else goes for growth. Always made sense to me.
 
hitwarrior said:
no not overnight but i did go from 195 to 280 in 3 months, and then go from 280 to 350 in 3 months and ive been around 350 for the last 5 years , all from mentzer hit.
Click to expand...

pppffffffffffttttttt!!!!!!! 155 lbs in 6 months? You must eat 25 meals a day!

I'd love to see your stretch marks! Got pics?
 
hitwarrior said:
no not overnight but i did go from 195 to 280 in 3 months, and then go from 280 to 350 in 3 months and ive been around 350 for the last 5 years , all from mentzer hit. People keep saying all workouts work when there is progressive resistance. Well isnt doing the 80's for 6 rep, next workout 7, next workout 8, next workout progressive resistance. yes it is and after 3 months i inclined the 120's for 6 reps. I dont think people know how to properly do hit training from what i see on here. If you want me to explain it to you the way i do it i will. I go into my recovery on one set and everything else goes for growth. Always made sense to me.
Click to expand...

The huma body can only gain musscle at a certain rate due to trascription limiting factors. Maybe you did gain but not even half of it would be muscle. Also to be honest I just don't believ you... Post a progress thread to squash all uncertanty, picture before and after
 
Jeezus.

Is anyone on this board actually dumb enough to give this guy the benefit of the doubt on such obvious BULLSHIT?

Let's see.........

155 pounds in 6 months=25.83lbs per month=1.16lbs per day, roughly of supposed solid bodyweight. If even 50% of that was lean muscle mass that would still be 77.5lbs in 6 MONTHS, let alone 155lbs! Um, sorry, I don't think so, even on massive doses of roids and GH and whatever else.

I recall a guy gaining approximately 63lbs of lean muscle mass in under a month. Oh ya, that guy was CAsey Viator. Also, he was regaining muscle mass to previous levels, not building entirely new muscle mass. AND, he was probably on anabolics. In fact, I'd guess that's kind of a duh, even though he has awesome genetics and denies it, BUT COME ON. The so called style of hit he performed was much different then what this guy suposedly does. He did 3 fullbody workouts per week. This guy would probably call that gross overtraining.

I love these HIT Jedi's!

I used to be one back in the day, but I saw the light.

There is NO best way!

There are good ways, ok ways, and bad ways and many more shades of gray ways.

No one program is gonna be best for anyone.

1 set to true momentary muscular failure with a hard static and negative on that last impossible rep for even 4-5 exercises=CNS debilitation for at least a week for me. Very little muscle gain. Good strength gain, but not necessarily better than what can be done with other methods. And I feel like crap afterwards for several days and my strength is nill.

But, I can do 10x3 on bench and 1-2 sets of 3-4 exercises after that just shy of failure for one bodypart, and train 4 days a week doing a different bodypart each day(2 on 1 day) and gain muscle mass and strength at a very fast rate, without once ever having gone to failure. Plus I feel great from it.

These hit Jedi's have 3 MAJOR and fundamental flaws with their beliefs.

1. We are all different. What works for you, MAY not work for me, or not as well or even better than it works for you. There's no guarantee's. You have to learn how to train yourself for optimal results from lots of experimentation. Experiment all the time.

2. You have taken the concept of intensity and taken it from a scientific fact(% of 1RM equals actual intensity level, where your 1RM max is 100% and every thing less is a lower % or intensity level because lets face it, if you can't lift it, you can't lift it) to some psuedo-scientific theory that frankly just isn't true, and a healthy dose of common sense and training experience proves it.

3. Everyone has different muscle shapes, attachments, tendons and attachments and ratios and distributions of fiber types. Waht HIT fails to realize is that the CNS is just as important in the total muscle building equation. If you're pounding your CNS either TOO hard, TOO much, TOO long, or TOO often, then good luck trying to gain strength or muscle. Keep it up and have fun being overtrained and losing muscle and strength. Oh, but you forgot to add an extra rest day each time you can't lift a new poundage. What a load of crap. Doing it the Mentzer way would have most guys just doing 1 set per exercise once every 2-3 weeks eventually! Now muscle may not atrophy in 1 week, but it's seem pretty damn likely it will to some extent in 2-3 weeks, and even if it doesn't, training that infrequently isn't exactly the best way to build up strength or muscle mass, or your CNS for that matter. That's a MEGA DUH!

If I hit failure on an exercise which is fairly rare, it's because I didn't quite get the cutoff point right, which is a rep shy of failure ie., the last rep in good form you can actually complete, or if I'm feeling lazy or real strong and get all my required reps, leave a rep in the tank.

It's better to finish a workout feeling strong and worked, rather then wasted, exhausted, drained or utterly spent. Where else in life do you do this? Probably can't think of 1. Even when you're boning your girlfriend you cut yourself off at some point. You don't go until you're dried up like some prune, and if you do, well that can't be healthy for Mr. Willy and his marbles. You leave just a little left in you because you know if you don't you'll be exhausted.

Now I'm not saying HIT is a bad thing. But, to call it the best way, or the only way is dumb. Find what works for you. If HIT fits the bill and floats your boat, then roll with it, if not like me, try something else.

IMO, and this is just my opinion, HIT SUCKS.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it HIT zealots.
 
GhettoStudMuffin said:
Jeezus.


I love these HIT Jedi's!

I used to be one back in the day, but I saw the light.

There is NO best way!

There are good ways, ok ways, and bad ways and many more shades of gray ways.

No one program is gonna be best for anyone.


HIT SUCKS.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it HIT zealots.
Click to expand...


You know, your whole post is 100% correct. The reason people become "HIT Jedis" though makes sense. Mike Mentzer is the first guy to preach HIT, and like him or not, he was well-read, educated, highly intelligent, and had a knack for persuasive writing, and writing in general. All HIT articles to this day preach logic, and explain the theory inside and out, attack all other types of training, and try to appeal to people's intelligence and common sense.

Strength training is different, but as far as bodybuilding goes, most articles appeal to someone with a zero IQ...They will say they are written by a BB, but it looks to me like Joe Weider writes most of this stuff.....they will essentially say blast away, and have titles like "bowling ball biceps" or "cannon ball delts" or spething ridiculous and they provide no logic or science as to why they work. People get frustrated with this crap and become HIT junkies because at the very least it appeals to their logical side and makes an attempt to explain why it works.

I am no fan of HIT, mostly because I strength train, but I do see why people who take up BB can love it simply because it defies Joe Weider's establishment and mindless articles.
 
people like to type a lot in this post. HIIT is good for fat burtning. next: 1 - 3 sets are good per exercise. enough said
 
HIT type training is supposed to be logical right?

HIT is supposed to have some common sense self-evident truth right?

Mike Mentzer, Arthur Jones and all the other HIT typer guys and their numerous variations on it all seem to have thrown 1 thing to the side.

The theory of intensity and what it is. Not even sure it's theory because it's a fact.

Your 1RM max is you giving all out 100% effort. If you cannot lift the weight, then you cannot lift it. Whatever weight is the most you can lift is the maximum amount of intensity you can generate at 1 time.

AS you get progressively stronger, it goes up.

Anything less than 100% or your 1 rep max is technically and scientifically less intense.

With this method you can know exactly how intense your training is provided you don't go to failure. Go to failure using it and you might as well be pissing in the wind.

I used to be into HIT, but I was never a zealot or Jedi. But I knew something was fundamentally wrong with this method when it takes a week or more to recover form 1 measly set. When you keep getting stronger and stronger largely due to CNS adaptation, but your muscles don't grow for jack and people can't even tell you lift because you don't train the muscles frequently enough and/or with enough volume. Somethings wrong with that picture, no?

I am amazed that these so-called intelligent guys couldn't eventually grasp this concept and realize the fundamental flaw of their theory of training which basically debunks the theory of HIT.

They go more on "well it makes sense" than whether or not it is scientifically accurate. I could make up some theory on how to fly to the moon and it might make sense to you or seem logical, when in reality it's way off the truth. Get my point. That's what the HIT guys do. Sorry, it's the truth. Take it from a guy that has trained Arthur Jones style HIT and Mentzer style HIT in the past.

I'm 2 months back into training now and I'm already getting comments about my size and strength already. I am getting bigger and bigger, stronger and stronger, and feeling better and better bit by bit, all without having gone to failure 99% of the time. That 1% was accidental and I didn't strain hard on those reps so don't say oh oh, those 1% of your training reps are what stimulated all that growth and strength. Palease....

The theory of that last magical growth stimulating rep first espoused by Arthur Jones is just a theory that isn't true. There may be "some" truth to it, but that doesn't make it entirely true now does it?

You do not need to lift a weight until you reach that last impossible rep and fail on it. Imo, that just overtaxes the CNS and doesn't benefit the muscle anymore than stopping on the last rep you can complete in good form. This is just my opinion.

A muscle can be stimulated to grow by these basic methods and more I haven't listed:

lift a heavier weight
lift more total weight in a workout
lift the weight with a faster or slower speed
half reps
1/4 reps
lockouts
isometrics
reducing rest time between sets and/or reps
explosive lifting
smooth fluid lifting with no pauses
negatives
rest-pause
supersets
drop sets
running the rack
21's
numerous set and reps schemes
and many more I haven't listed. None of these methods needing to be done to failure to stimulate growth and strength increases.

HIT=HOKEY INTERMITENT TRAININGimo. :elephant:
 
Ghetto, im liking you more and more. some serious knowledge in there. sometimes you might come off a little harsh, but on when the other person is stupid! how can a muscle grow if you tax it out every workout? i know for a fact that i wouldnt last on full month on a HIT workout. my body would not be able to drag itself into the gym. thereore, HIT would NOT be the best training method for me. i prefer four or five days in the gym per week, working it hard but not leaving feeling like a bag of shit in skin. amen
 
Btw, read hitwarrior's 4th post in this thread. I just went back and read it AGAIN.

Prolly some of the funniest shit I've read in a long time.

This guy should be in the World's Strongest Man comp. They should add a new event just for him since he is such an amazing specimen of size, strength, power and athleticism.

Call it: THE WORLD'S STRONGEST-FASTes MAN!
 
Last edited:
i grow because mentzer taught me what was required to grow. I dont use up my natural gh , testosterone by doing stupid extra sets. Why would i do extra sets, extra growth, ha ha ha.
 
Ghettostudmuffin- You said something in one of your posts that really interests me..saying that "99% of the time you don't goto failure". I've always gone to failure but I'm rethinking this view as the weights are moving up and it is taking longer and longer for me to recover.

Eventually though must one hit the failure point in order to succeed? For instance let's say you are doing an incline press and complete 6 reps without going to failure at a target weight, and also let's assume that 6 was the target number of reps, next time one might add 5 pounds etc etc.

Basically I'm saying doesn't there HAVE to be a point where failure is acheived in order to continue to progressively increase?

Sorry if this post sounds a little confusing
 
To increase strength you'll want to go to failure. 1 RMs are best suited to this task. Just check out Westside Barbell. ;)

Hypertrophy - failure isn't needed
Strength - probably isn't needed, but is advised
 
if failure is needed for strength gains, then why am i getting stronger? i never go to failure either (ok, almost never) and i consistantly get stronger in at least one lift a week. the problem that i see with saying faliure is needed is that progressive resistance is ALWAYS present whenever you hit failure. whether it be more reps, or more weight, or any of the many other ways, progressive resistance is always there. you just cant seperate the two, and say that failure is the way to get stronger.
 
You DO NOT need to train to failure to stimulate muscular growth or strength.

I avoid training to momentary muscular failure like the plague lol. The only time I may hit real failure is when I am attempting a 1RM in a lift. That is the only time and I only try for max attempts every 6 months or so.

Good questions intraining.

This is the way I see it. If you know yourself well enough then you will know when you have done the last rep you can before the next which you will fail on. The last rep you can actually complete is where I always stop a set at.

If you incline press a weight for 6 reps 1 workout which is your target number of rep then add 2.5lbs-5lbs the next. Do as many reps as you can. You may only get 3 or 4 reps. You don't have to go to failure. The weight is heavier than the previous weight used and will stimulate new strength increases. If you wanted you might fail on teh 5th rep, but why? Just stop on the 4th rep. Next week try to get 5 reps etc. You don;t ahve to train to failure.

I don't EVEN come close to failure when I do squats. I do singles at about 85-90% of my 1RM most of the time for multiple singles and I am far from reaching failure on those single rep sets, but I get constantly stronger.

Seem confusing. I think the problem is many people are so stuck on training to failure they think it is the only way. It's not and imo it's not even the best way.

If you bench 225 for 10 reps 1 workout and that was your goal reps then you add 5lbs the next. Now, since the weight is heavier you will not get 10 full reps. You might be able to only get 6 full reps, where 7th would be the rep you fail on. Just don't do that 7th rep. The 6th rep is hard as it is without having to strain your ass off on that 7th magical rep, blah. You will ahve stimulated growth because you just lifted a heavier weight. You didn't go to failure, but scientifically the intensity level of that set of 230lbs was higher than the set of 225lbs even though you did less reps simply because the weight is heavier. That is as simple a way as I can explain.

Another great way to gain strength is to do lots of sets of low reps without training to failure. Like 10x3, 5x5(you don't have to go to failure on 5x5 either) 8x2, 6x1, 10x1, WHATEVER. Experiment.

I think in a way HIT training has done a big diservice to alot of people that lift because it has confused them on what it takes to stimulate muscular growth and size gains.

Scientifically speaking:Failure is not even a prerequisite for stimulating growth and strength increases.

Look at the majority of powerlifters and olympic weightlifters. They understand the principle of intensity and they rarely train to failure except when attempting 1 rep maxes in their basic lifts!

That's the best I can do as far as explaining this. I know their are guys on this board that can delve into it alot deeper and really show the scientific side of it better than I can.
 
Tom Treutlein said:
Uh, you kind've confused me with the last part of what you said. Wanna reiterate? Or something...
Click to expand...

first, progressive resistance causes muscle growth and strength gain. failure is not neccessary for this to occur.

all i am saying is that progressive resistance is a MUST to hit failure. thus, there is no way to say that failure caused the growth or strength gains- progressive resistance will always be there, lurking in the shadows like an ex that doesnt realize what no means.
 
You know, if you hit that "7th magical rep", ghetto, even if that was momentary muscular failure, I don't think the transition fron the 6th to 7th rep will be an issue. I think the real issue is when people push it beyond failure. That's when recovery is compromised. Something like DC training.
 
I have tried HIT and I have tried many other methods of training. For me HIT didn't work. I like higher volume and more frequent workouts. When I am on a cycle I grow the best by working each muscle group every 48 hours. I know many of you would say it is overtraining but it works well for me. Everyone is different.
 
Tom, what's the point in taking any set to failure when you have found it totally unnecesary?

Failure for me is not needed and is in fact detrimental to optimal training progress for me. I'm not saying 1 set here and there is gonna cash me out recovery wise, but I have found training to failure at all for me is just not needed.

I respond best to heavy weights, low rep sets, lots of rest time between sets and more volume and frequency of workouts, and NO FAILURE.

I have no interest in purposely training to failure now or ever again.

Been there, done that many different ways.
 
Ghetto, I tottaly get what you are saying.
A few questions:

1 rep squats are not for hypertrophy correct? Do you see any substantial growth? Sure the muscle gets harder and stronger and more defined but no real size gains? If you do then that is the opposite of anything I have been taught, that 6 -12 reps is needed to gain size...

If you never hit failure do you work out each body part more than once a week or do you still rest 7 days between each body part?
I personally like the idea of doing a month or two of full body workout with low volume and barely hitting failure three days a week (HST style) and then a month or two of 2-3 day split hitting each body part every 4-6 days. I just think that ok it is great to hit each body part once a week a give it all that time to rest but there is also lots of gains to be made by working out every other day, different type of gains and benefits for the body providing I avoid injury and overtraining.... Whats your opinion on this?

How about volume? Lets say I never hit failure but I do like 10 sets or more per body part, would that be better than doing 5-6 sets and hitting failure just once or twice?
I mean, doesn't volume also count for something here, not only the failure itself....?

I agree with robholmes man, I like your posts and appreciate your feedback and knowledge bro.... :)
 
thanks man, so nice of you :)

ill answer your question towards ghetto concerning volume and growth in my own way. your growth will depend on the fitness of your body. if you are new to working out or have not gotten near a peak, single rep sets will make you grow. if you have been lifting a while ( a year plus ), and normally do five reps or more per set, you might even lose some size but gain density and strength. ghetto still gets some volume, but its in the form of warm up sets.

so, growth depends on how accustomed your body is to working out, and the routine that it is used to. thats the whole theory behind hst, constantly change the reps, weight, and decondition so that your body can never adapt- thus you should always get growth.
 
Thanks for the kind words.

Singles training can lead to hypertrophy. Any low rep training can cause significant hypertrophy if you do enough sets of it and eat a caloric surplus. How much you grow from it is probably entirely up to your body as everyone responds differently. If low rep training doesn't cause much hypertrophy then how do explain heavyweight and higher weight class powerlifters and weightlifters size? The key is overall volume of reps and frequency along with plenty of rest and FOOD.

But, no, my singles squatting is not geared towards size. It's mainly for overall power and strength. I just happen to grow off it too.

When I say I don't train to failure, it's not as if I don't train hard and not that you're implying that either. I stop my sets at the last rep I can complete. Why bother straining on the rep after which you don't get and that hasn't "SCIENTIFICALLY" been proven to stimulate additional growth. All you are doing is straining for nothing imo. The last rep I can complete is a hard rep anyway and requires a certain amount of "strain". I have done every set to failure of every exercise as well as just 1 set to failure on an exercise since I was 14. About 5 years total training time over the course of the last 10 years with 2 years being my longest stretch of steady lifting. During those years I trained to failure ALOT. I DO NOT respond well to it. I get stronger sure, but it really taxes my system too much and eventually I require greater and greater lengths of time between workouts to the point that it becomes ridiculous. I have trained a bodypart every day, every other day, every 3rd or 4th day, whatever. Once a week works best for me generally. I do multiple sets.

Look at a typical training schedule not including warmup sets for chest:

bench 3x10
incline 3x10
flye 3x10

That's 90 total reps.

My chest workout right now:

bench 10x3
DB bench 1x10
Incline 1x10
Flye 1x10

60 total reps. MY volume is still lower than your average Joe's generic chest workout, but there is still a certain amount of volume as you can see.

I believe you need a certain amount of TOTAL REP volume if you want good hypertrophy from low rep training.

I you do 3x3 for an exercise then probably don't expect much hypertrophy, but expect decent strength gains.

So ya, I believe there is a certain amount of total rep volume needed for hypertrophy.

I can train a muscle more than once a week if I setup my routines around it. It's more a matter of how many days a week and how hard I push my training that dictates how often I can train a bodypart.

For example, I have been training on a 4 day split training chest/back/rest/shoulder-arms/legs. Each bodypart geting hit once per week.

But, I am switching to 3 days a week for awhile to hit certain bodyparts more than once a week.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Noah Wixx
Approved Log 20 week Recomp Cycle Log
Replies
14
Views
516
MUSTANG_18
MUSTANG_18
F
training split advice for fast gains
Replies
12
Views
1K
HermQ
HermQ
F
using test suspension pre workout and training style?
Replies
27
Views
3K
the_alcatraz
the_alcatraz
RetroNicSmythe
Approved Log Testosterone Cycle Log
Replies
13
Views
3K
Tiger Salman Khan
Tiger Salman Khan
P
my 3 day split has gotten lame
Replies
7
Views
1K
Arabian
Arabian
Top Bottom