Periodization & HIT

[Shark01]

I've been a long time advocate of HIT training. It's great for people with full time jobs and families, you don't do a bunch of mindless suboptimal sets, and it just makes so much sense that the clearest signal you can send to your body to grow is to try but fail to accomplish something.

Now having said that, any program gets stale after a while and there are aspects of periodization that can be really helpful, especially the micro-periodization that Leo Costa at OTS preached about.

Now the question, has anyone explored putting the two together? Going to failure for different weight/rep ranges?

Thanks!

 

[scruples]

HIT is garbage

 

[Lift Chief]

I've been wondering... why do you have the chick from the apple computer commercial as your avatar?

 

[teen1216]

Are you talking about just doing more sets, all to failure? If you mean strict periodization with multiple microcycles, you do not go to failure all the time.

 

[Shark01]

Are you talking about just doing more sets, all to failure? If you mean strict periodization with multiple microcycles, you do not go to failure all the time.

I'm talking about keeping the same volume (# of sets) more or less, just adjusting the weight and rep ranges so you fail at lower or higher reps to simulate a power or strength cycle.

 

[Shark01]

HIT is garbage

Great insight, I'm sure people learn a lot from you

 

[gonelifting]

I don`t know about those principles you talked about Shark01, but I just read Doggcrapp`s routine/thread and it`s pretty interesting. I don`t have a link, Sorry. But then it may be the same thing you`re talking about.

 

[Shark01]

Thanks for the tip, I'll check that thread out.

 

[teen1216]

Well, if you mean simply doing, say, 5x3 to failure with a heavy weight on squats for strength, then that is not true periodization. If you want to do this, then by all means try it, though be careful about going to failure with low rep ranges. You don't want to overtrain your CNS. You can always do something like 3x8 for size on a bodypart and 5x3 for strength. I have never intentionally tried going to failure with low reps (other than max effort work) but it would seem to work. Give it a shot!

 

[Shark01]

Teen,
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the periodization rep ranges I've seen are 6 (power), 8 (strength), and 12 (endurance). So the idea would be to alternate these phases, going to failure in all rep ranges.

 

[louden_swain]

HIT is garbage

I strongly disagree. . .this is your opinion.

 

[zackdarnell]

HIT is garbage

I also have to disagree with this statement. While it may not work for you, it has worked and does work for many others. Just because something doesnt work for you doesnt mean it is garbage.

 

[coolcolj]

I used to do hit, it works for a while, but beats your body and cns up too much. You get sick of having to bring it everytime your at the gym.

 

[teen1216]

Teen,
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the periodization rep ranges I've seen are 6 (power), 8 (strength), and 12 (endurance). So the idea would be to alternate these phases, going to failure in all rep ranges.

Well, I have seen those numbers as well, but remember that they are not set in stone, just general guidelines. For strength I like 5 and below, size between 6 and 10(I just like lower reps ), and endurance, well I have never trained for endurance but it would seem that the rep range would have to be over 12.

 

[Tim_Bass]

I don't find that periodization keeps all gains consistent. If I am training purely for size (which is all the time), then I'll stick to the 'power range' you described. If gains become stagnant for a while then I'll vary my training a bit, and then try the power range again.

If you can bring yourself to train HIT style year round, then I'd reccomend it with periodization, at least until you reach a certain level.

 

[ianmpeebles]

I strongly disagree. . .this is your opinion.

I like HIT Training!