Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: The Italian Lifter on October 02, 2010, 11:33:09 AM
-
I don't think any pro is using Heavy Duty but how much is used in gyms?
90% of people here (in Italy) trains just using machines and cables or doing aerobics :'(
-
I don't think any pro is using Heavy Duty but how much is used in gyms?
90% of people here (in Italy) trains just using machines and cables or doing aerobics :'(
Well said. This thread will go far.
-
I like the Fuxian concept of 2 or so sets.
-
You can see some Heavy Duty people every now and then........... :-\
-
I tried Heavy Duty and got stronger.
But, I think any change in routine will get some results, just by confusing the muscle.
The following are the hidden secrets to muscle growth...
1) Lift heavy
2) Eat food
3) Be consistent
Please keep this quiet.
-
Dorian Yeates won they Olympia a few times doing heavy duty.
(http://muscle.iuhu.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/Dorian-Yates.jpg)
-
I was a phone student with Mentzer in the late 90's and have used it since. Very few people do it properly. You have to throw out his earlier stuff as it fried out the nervous system. Read "muscles in minutes". I'll answer questions here when free.
-
How many bb use Heavy Duty?
Dorian Yates and Casey Viator used it exclusively. Aaron Baker and Roland Kickinger also used it sporadically but they gave up on it and reversed to multiple set training because, although they were gaining in strength and also hardness, they were losing volume.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Heavy weights, basic exercises and rest the keys to muscular mass, no secret.
-
The above BBs used a modifyed version of the HD that Mike preached in fact Mike never actauly used it himself he used traditional meathods but counted the last set as his first even though he had used normal 4 - 5 sets before hand.
Labrada used his version of it also.
Casey Viator has gone on record and said when he trained under Jones he used to sneak out at night and train at a friends gym because he didnt think he had trained enough also said this was the most amount of drugs he has used in his life.
-
Heavy weights, basic exercises and rest the keys to muscular mass, no secret.
and lots of steroids.
-
Dorian Yates and Casey Viator used it exclusively. Aaron Baker and Roland Kickinger also used it sporadically but they gave up on it and reversed to multiple set training because, although they were gaining in strength and also hardness, they were losing volume.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Yates didn't really do heavy duty in pure form. His reps had no peak contraction, and tons of momentum (speed). He did many more sets then Mike would recommend, many exercises (of course he was on a ton of gear). Mike and Dorian simply made a lot of money marketing it. Casey trained heavy under Jones but again sneaked in many workouts on the side. His volume was much higher.
Heavy Duty in it's latest version is what I used. Unfortunately Mike died soon after and most follow his older training style which is not very result producing .
-
The above BBs used a modifyed version of the HD that Mike preached in fact Mike never actauly used it himself he used traditional meathods but counted the last set as his first even though he had used normal 4 - 5 sets before hand.
Labrada used his version of it also.
Casey Viator has gone on record and said when he trained under Jones he used to sneak out at night and train at a friends gym because he didnt think he had trained enough also said this was the most amount of drugs he has used in his life.
Yeah, I read in Greg Zulak's column years ago that Mike actually did multiple sets but only counted the last "past failure" set as the real set and all previous sets as warm up sets.
Anyway, heavy duty doesen't seem to work for mass. It's great for strength and hardness, but not volume. I had a theory for why this is the case but I don't know if the theory is valid.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
I don't think any pro is using Heavy Duty but how much is used in gyms?
90% of people here (in Italy) trains just using machines and cables or doing aerobics :'(
Go and eat a salami you Italian faggot.
-
Go and eat a salami you Italian faggot.
;D
-
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=350512.0;attach=385350;image)
haha he looks as if he has a mr o body.
-
Yates didn't really do heavy duty in pure form. His reps had no peak contraction, and tons of momentum (speed).
Not This. I'm not saying Dorain's form was perfect on everything, but by top level IFBB Pro standard it was pretty damn good.
-
Go and eat a salami you Italian faggot.
LOL
-
and lots of steroids.
This is key. I don't think training methods are as important as for a natural when using boatloads of gear.
-
This is key. I don't think training methods are as important as for a natural when using boatloads of gear.
Even then, the top natural guys (who are really natural, not Kiyoshi et al, lol) have high natural levels and can get away with more; doesn't matter much what you do with low natural levels. (although volume should be low since your recovery abilities would be awful)
-
You guys have to overlook the craziness of all of this and look at some key factors here:
1. We ALL train to get stronger, and strength ALWAYS leads to size whether it be over 20 sets or just the one.
2. We all have to recover, and recovery will be 50% of your progress, otherwise you could train 24/7 with a perfect diet/supplement schedule and just keep progressing.
3. Stress is cumulative, and the more you workout, the harder it is to induce a homeostasis disruption. What used to take one workout will now take 6 to see some real progress (strength going up 5-10 pounds).
This varies across all sorts of individual factors, but generally, I believe Mike Mentzer stumbled upon what DC trainers call cruising, but he never 'blasted' again per his writings.
Everyone 'blasts' and 'cruises', or more precisely loads and deloads.
So, if you can keep squeezing out rep gains that lead to weight increases on a lift and eat to support the weight gains, voila you will have a big dude eventually.
Or you can go from one Flex workout to the other hoping some magical combination of things will over ride the underlying training problems. I am not trying to preach here at all, but in reality you guys have to understand and accept the way this stuff works in order to keep progressing.
Doggcrapp training works out the kinks in written form for you, and using some common sense will let you sort of make minor adjustments to suit you individually. The same applys with HVT, 5X5, 5-3-1, etc. You do have to do it as written to figure that stuff out, but hey, it is worth it to spend a month and really learn something about training yourself instead of wasting all of this time doing bullshit.
But seriously, look at the above concepts and look at any program template and see where they all follow these basic guidelines.
HD, as a complete 'system' is missing the spoon feeding of these concepts, however it does press on several invaluable concepts that the audience reading it had never considered it before.
-
Dorian Yeates won they Olympia a few times doing heavy duty.
(http://muscle.iuhu.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/Dorian-Yates.jpg)
Dorian Yates did not use Heavy Duty.
-
The above BBs used a modifyed version of the HD that Mike preached in fact Mike never actauly used it himself he used traditional meathods but counted the last set as his first even though he had used normal 4 - 5 sets before hand.
Labrada used his version of it also.
Casey Viator has gone on record and said when he trained under Jones he used to sneak out at night and train at a friends gym because he didnt think he had trained enough also said this was the most amount of drugs he has used in his life.
Quoted for truth.
No bodybuilder has actually trained and succeded with heavy duty/HIT/low volume.
-
I started lifting in 1973 or so. I trained with Ray Mentzer almost everyday for about 6 months or so while I training for the World's in 86'. I don't ever remember him mentioning HIT. He let lift what and how I wanted. We did do a variation of the Russian Strength workout at the time. The one thing we didn't have was a person who would massage our muscles between sets like the original Russian workout called for. It was to help increase blood circulation and break up any lactic acid build-up I think. Now that would have been really nice. We did have some guys volunteer to change the weights for me though
-
I started lifting in 1973 or so. I trained with Ray Mentzer almost everyday for about 6 months or so while I training for the World's in 86'. I don't ever remember him mentioning HIT. He let lift what and how I wanted. We did do a variation of the Russian Strength workout at the time. The one thing we didn't have was a person who would massage our muscles between sets like the original Russian workout called for. It was to help increase blood circulation and break up any lactic acid build-up I think. Now that would have been really nice. We did have some guys volunteer to change the weights for me though
I am so jealous of that opportunity. Mike and Ray were heroes to me, really the only BBers I could relate to. In fact, most low volume/HIT guys seem like that to me-pros that is.
You could have gotten Ray to rub ya down, lol.
Wait, didn't Mike already know about HIT since Jones told him shortly after he got crushed in the Mr. America contest that Viator won? Maybe they did not really apply it yet, but from what I understand Ray always did things differently from Mike.
Fascinating individuals.
-
find an old pro that had a lot of injuries. he was mostly likely a HDer. ;D
-
Quoted for truth.
No bodybuilder has actually trained and succeded with heavy duty/HIT/low volume.
Your not looking at it in perspective. The routines Mike suggested at the end, just disregard those as a 'must' rule. Try em out, but if nothing really happens, you can add back if you want and remember to deload.
I said before that I believe he saw a tapering effect and confused that with a need to recover for 3 days. However the opposite-following the bullshit in the mags, that is a step backward.
Pros like Dugdale and Yates do more volume, but that is in consideration of strength being key. 6 sets for legs 1x a week is a far cry from 20 sets 3x a week.
Warm ups do count to some extent, especially the heavy one, since you only need like 85% to recruit all fibers, thus adding to the workload, but in general the first few warm up sets do not really do anything.
Example, I did 365 pounds in the squat today. I did 135x 5, 225 x 3, 315x2, and 365x10. The 315 did something stimulation wise, but the other 2 did not. In theory I did 4 sets, but in reality it was arguably 2.
-
find an old pro that had a lot of injuries. he was mostly likely a HDer. ;D
LOL. Can't argue here.
Wait, so many guys hurt themselves eventually once they pass certain numbers, enhanced or natty. It just happens.
-
Your not looking at it in perspective. The routines Mike suggested at the end, just disregard those as a 'must' rule. Try em out, but if nothing really happens, you can add back if you want and remember to deload.
I said before that I believe he saw a tapering effect and confused that with a need to recover for 3 days. However the opposite-following the bullshit in the mags, that is a step backward.
Pros like Dugdale and Yates do more volume, but that is in consideration of strength being key. 6 sets for legs 1x a week is a far cry from 20 sets 3x a week.
Warm ups do count to some extent, especially the heavy one, since you only need like 85% to recruit all fibers, thus adding to the workload, but in general the first few warm up sets do not really do anything.
Example, I did 365 pounds in the squat today. I did 135x 5, 225 x 3, 315x2, and 365x10. The 315 did something stimulation wise, but the other 2 did not. In theory I did 4 sets, but in reality it was arguably 2.
exactly,,, intensity being equal, or in other words the concentration on intent when moving the weights...
how does anyone think that 6 set per week will aloow you to look better than someone at 20 set 3x per week...
if this were true then every middle-aged 3 days per week gym jerk would be walkin around looking like mr.o...
however you can always tell the guy thats lives in the gym... he looks the part.
-
Didn't both Mike and his bro die kind of early-ish? Why idolize them?
-
exactly,,, intensity being equal, or in other words the concentration on intent when moving the weights...
how does anyone think that 6 set per week will aloow you to look better than someone at 20 set 3x per week...
if this were true then every middle-aged 3 days per week gym jerk would be walkin around looking like mr.o...
however you can always tell the guy thats lives in the gym... he looks the part.
I don't know man, most people that live in the gym don't really look the part, or like bodybuilders. You will never double take at most of them.
It comes down to matching your recovery ability with the program, causing an overload event whether it be 1 set or 50, and then deloading.
Disregarding steroids of course, notice how the strongest guys are always the biggest in relation to their 10 rep max. You will never see someone squatting 500 pounds with tiny legs for 10 reps. Hell, he won't be tiny at all.
The middle age 3 day a week guys usually train piss poor in conjunction with some crap they pulled from Flex. On and on and so forth. Look at the DCers, well, the experienced ones. They don't look like weekend panty wads at all.
I am saying to take the principles of blasting and cruising, and then apply them to whatever program your using. The blast makes you over reach, the cruise deloads you. Everything else is individual.
-
Didn't both Mike and his bro die kind of early-ish? Why idolize them?
Mike was like 50 when he died. Not sure about Ray. They died within like a week of each other I think.
-
Didn't both Mike and his bro die kind of early-ish? Why idolize them?
It isn't really idolization, more like respect for what Mike did in the bodybuilding community. Without Mike, Jones, Viator, Yates and a slew of others, you would all be doing the same shit you read about without questioning it.
Yes HD is a broken and dead end system per the books out there. Mike left a lot to be desired with his work that in reality does not work. But the either/or situation of doing 'HIT' or 'volume' leaves many scratching their asses and standing in place.
-
Mike was like 50 when he died. Not sure about Ray. They died within like a week of each other I think.
Mike was 49 I believe, and Ray died within a few days. He apparently skipped his dialysis in mourning.
-
I don't know man, most people that live in the gym don't really look the part, or like bodybuilders. You will never double take at most of them.
It comes down to matching your recovery ability with the program, causing an overload event whether it be 1 set or 50, and then deloading.
Disregarding steroids of course, notice how the strongest guys are always the biggest in relation to their 10 rep max. You will never see someone squatting 500 pounds with tiny legs for 10 reps. Hell, he won't be tiny at all.
The middle age 3 day a week guys usually train piss poor in conjunction with some crap they pulled from Flex. On and on and so forth. Look at the DCers, well, the experienced ones. They don't look like weekend panty wads at all.
I am saying to take the principles of blasting and cruising, and then apply them to whatever program your using. The blast makes you over reach, the cruise deloads you. Everything else is individual.
"Disregarding steroids of course, notice how the strongest guys are always the biggest in relation to their 10 rep max. You will never see someone squatting 500 pounds with tiny legs for 10 reps. Hell, he won't be tiny at all. "
thats true, you can get a thin dude with a 1 rep max do it but not for 10 reps etc and not be big/huge so right on with that
"The middle age 3 day a week guys usually train piss poor in conjunction with some crap they pulled from Flex. On and on and so forth. Look at the DCers, well, the experienced ones. They don't look like weekend panty wads at all."
yes roids and intensity are deciding factors, thats why i orig wrote:
intensity being equal, or in other words the concentration on intent when moving the weights...
someone that lolly gags thru lifting will certainly be beat by someone that lifts less but lifts with more intensity.
i still go by the idea of all things equal in regards to quality of training, roids diet etc...
the person that does it more will get better results,,, and yes recovery has something to do but at the same time imo i think the recovery limit outta be pushed to force the body to adapt... injury is really th danger to overtraining....
look at that study where they took the birds testes (now no test being produced), starved it (no calories, protein etc) and hung the weight on its wing for 30 days.... by all of gymbro logic without calories and test no way should growth occur....
but it did.
so thats why overtraining and recovery i think is overrated,,, i think its a good indicator for injury tho bc cant train then other wise
training more frequent is key,,, im my book anyway,,, only way i know to grow
-
"Disregarding steroids of course, notice how the strongest guys are always the biggest in relation to their 10 rep max. You will never see someone squatting 500 pounds with tiny legs for 10 reps. Hell, he won't be tiny at all. "
thats true, you can get a thin dude with a 1 rep max do it but not for 10 reps etc and not be big/huge so right on with that
"The middle age 3 day a week guys usually train piss poor in conjunction with some crap they pulled from Flex. On and on and so forth. Look at the DCers, well, the experienced ones. They don't look like weekend panty wads at all."
yes roids and intensity are deciding factors, thats why i orig wrote:
intensity being equal, or in other words the concentration on intent when moving the weights...
someone that lolly gags thru lifting will certainly be beat by someone that lifts less but lifts with more intensity.
i still go by the idea of all things equal in regards to quality of training, roids diet etc...
the person that does it more will get better results,,, and yes recovery has something to do but at the same time imo i think the recovery limit outta be pushed to force the body to adapt... injury is really th danger to overtraining....
look at that study where they took the birds testes (now no test being produced), starved it (no calories, protein etc) and hung the weight on its wing for 30 days.... by all of gymbro logic without calories and test no way should growth occur....
but it did.
so thats why overtraining and recovery i think is overrated,,, i think its a good indicator for injury tho bc cant train then other wise
training more frequent is key,,, im my book anyway,,, only way i know to grow
Ah, I see. I actually agree with that for a lot of people. The problem is with the few that it doesn't work for and of course for those that can go intense enough that they sort of stall out after a few sets. You won't really be physically able to repeat a set of squats that leave you on the ground vomiting uncontrollably, lol (not the goal of course).
Frequency is the biggy where HD fails unless you are a hardgainer to the extreme or using ungodly poundage plus intensity/volume extenders. Still though, the frequency issue is the one where the 3 day split sort of drops off for most unless you are making crazy gains of course.
But a lot of these guys OCD about overtraining. I did as well at one point. I took it to the logical conclusion of dips/deadlifts, squats/pulldown 2 weeks apart (add a day when progress stalls). Did not work so well.
But, his original split (more than one set sometimes, A and B workouts alternated 3-4x a week) worked much better for me.
But, I do 2 sets of some things focused on progression, maybe a lil more, and I use DC rest pause a lot combined with negatives and statics, so mine is a little different than most people. I also deload when needed or just go easy for a few workouts.
The rest pausing, I feel, allows you to get out of 1 mega set what you would need 3 to get when fully rested. 10-4-2 sees the 4 and 2 doing the damage as the most productive reps in multi set without causing the unnecessary fatigue IMO.
-
Your not looking at it in perspective. The routines Mike suggested at the end, just disregard those as a 'must' rule. Try em out, but if nothing really happens, you can add back if you want and remember to deload.
I said before that I believe he saw a tapering effect and confused that with a need to recover for 3 days. However the opposite-following the bullshit in the mags, that is a step backward.
Pros like Dugdale and Yates do more volume, but that is in consideration of strength being key. 6 sets for legs 1x a week is a far cry from 20 sets 3x a week.
Warm ups do count to some extent, especially the heavy one, since you only need like 85% to recruit all fibers, thus adding to the workload, but in general the first few warm up sets do not really do anything.
Example, I did 365 pounds in the squat today. I did 135x 5, 225 x 3, 315x2, and 365x10. The 315 did something stimulation wise, but the other 2 did not. In theory I did 4 sets, but in reality it was arguably 2.
The only reason I'm against low volume/HIT/heavy duty routines is because I tried them in the past, but they never worked.
And believe me when I say I tried all of them, arthur jones, Dorian's HIT, heavy duty, max-ot, etc. I did not get results from them.
To each their own.
-
The only reason I'm against low volume/HIT/heavy duty routines is because I tried them in the past, but they never worked.
And believe me when I say I tried all of them, arthur jones, Dorian's HIT, heavy duty, max-ot, etc. I did not get results from them.
To each their own.
Yeah, that does happen, some people do not have the CNS or whatever for tolerating that kind of effort. Some people can not even generate it. Jones and Darden talked about how Arnold just would not go to failure despite trying to, or at least the kind of failure Viator could go through. It sure held Arnie back, lol.
What I am saying is that all of these programs are fundamentally the same. One set to just failure does not work as well for me all the time, and I am not against doing more.
I do find it hard to believe that training for 20 somewhat hard sets with heavy weight is even possible for most unless it is programmed right. 10 sets of 10 sort of overrides the fatigue generated by the one set and rest pause, but it takes longer to get to that point, however the muscles get much more stimulation across the board.
HIT is really a fast twitch predominate's wet dream. Progress is not as forth coming for general and slow fiber types with ultra low volume.
-
HIT is really a fast twitch predominate's wet dream. Progress is not as forth coming for general and slow fiber types with ultra low volume.
Good analysis, you could even break it down further that some bodyparts (ft dominant) would respond better to "HIT" and some to volume, on the same person. I've even found that front delts respond better to heavy shit and side delts volume heh.
-
Good analysis, you could even break it down further that some bodyparts (ft dominant) would respond better to "HIT" and some to volume, on the same person. I've even found that front delts respond better to heavy shit and side delts volume heh.
Milos Sarcev has said this as well about delts and i think that it is right to some extend.
Personally, i change my rep count every two weeks in a 20, 12, 6 progression and have had good results with it. I think that you should train all rep ranges to activate all muscle fibers.
-
Good analysis, you could even break it down further that some bodyparts (ft dominant) would respond better to "HIT" and some to volume, on the same person. I've even found that front delts respond better to heavy shit and side delts volume heh.
The main part it sort of gets away from though is the 'we must do 20 sets or it is a waste' type thing.
Remember that study where they showed 3 sets were better than 1, but 6 and one set were tied? It was a meta analysis. Well, that does not mean they tested 3 sets for flat bench, 3 for incline, flies, dips, decline, etc.
With Mentzer's 'ideal routine', you are doing 2 sets in reality for every part. The frequency is a little too low for most though.
My point is: do whatever you do to make progress. Deload. repeat and change up in accordance to what you know and not what you hope.
Like, you can take the 5x5 template (advanced) and do something like that or along the same idea, even if you are going to failure. Those deload periods along with strength gains are the final arbiter. Doing 3000 reps in a whole session with those little pink dumbells wont do a damn thing, lol.
-
Milos Sarcev has said this as well about delts and i think that it is right to some extend.
Personally, i change my rep count every two weeks in a 20, 12, 6 progression and have had good results with it. I think that you should train all rep ranges to activate all muscle fibers.
Full recruitment actually occurs at like the 5th rep with 80% of your 1rm. Additional sets, even in that range should 'activate' them. (not being a smart ass). The fibers is the question, and it is still up for debate (slow twitch may need tons of volume or higher reps).
More sets equals more fatigue. This is needed, but does it happen at that fifth rep, the second set? the tenth?
You know if you can come back and beat your previous best and gain SOMETHING in that session.
-
Full recruitment actually occurs at like the 5th rep with 80% of your 1rm. Additional sets, even in that range should 'activate' them. (not being a smart ass). The fibers is the question, and it is still up for debate (slow twitch may need tons of volume or higher reps).
More sets equals more fatigue. This is needed, but does it happen at that fifth rep, the second set? the tenth?
You know if you can come back and beat your previous best and gain SOMETHING in that session.
Thanks for the info, thinking about it it sounds like common sense.
But i think on the baseline we can conclude two things: Not every programme is for everybody and what is important is progression.
-
Didn't both Mike and his bro die kind of early-ish? Why idolize them?
Ray Mentzer died at 50 of some congenital health problem. Mike died soon after due to the emotional stress of losing his brother. What has this got to do with the effectiveness of Mike Mentzer's training system?
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
I started lifting in 1973 or so. I trained with Ray Mentzer almost everyday for about 6 months or so while I training for the World's in 86'. I don't ever remember him mentioning HIT. He let lift what and how I wanted. We did do a variation of the Russian Strength workout at the time. The one thing we didn't have was a person who would massage our muscles between sets like the original Russian workout called for. It was to help increase blood circulation and break up any lactic acid build-up I think. Now that would have been really nice. We did have some guys volunteer to change the weights for me though
do share more stories, Keith :)
Ray was a hard-trainer too? in the early 80's he was all over the mags along with Mike, very popular.
What were the brothers like?
-
Thanks for the info, thinking about it it sounds like common sense.
But i think on the baseline we can conclude two things: Not every programme is for everybody and what is important is progression.
Indeed. They all follow the same basic theory sort of (if you grow from high volume and I grow from low volume, the very same thing is taking place muscle wise generally in theory).
Your right though.
-
The main part it sort of gets away from though is the 'we must do 20 sets or it is a waste' type thing.
Remember that study where they showed 3 sets were better than 1, but 6 and one set were tied? It was a meta analysis. Well, that does not mean they tested 3 sets for flat bench, 3 for incline, flies, dips, decline, etc.
With Mentzer's 'ideal routine', you are doing 2 sets in reality for every part. The frequency is a little too low for most though.
My point is: do whatever you do to make progress. Deload. repeat and change up in accordance to what you know and not what you hope.
Like, you can take the 5x5 template (advanced) and do something like that or along the same idea, even if you are going to failure. Those deload periods along with strength gains are the final arbiter. Doing 3000 reps in a whole session with those little pink dumbells wont do a damn thing, lol.
Good post.
-
Good post.
Why thank you.
Mike's original split:
Legs/chest/triceps and Back/Biceps/Shoulders, alternated 4x a week.
Mike himself did like 3 sets of pre exhaust, 2 sets of other things. He also warmed up which to many looked like the working sets everyone else was doing (probably was scientifically past a certain point).
I do the same split, and I use rest pause or a second and maybe a 3rd set at times. Deloading is 2 workouts with only straight sets, 1 each for a week or 2. It seems to work very well, except I do the 3 day a week para dime now, so everything gets worked 6x a month instead of four. I also rotate exercises a la DC.
This is editable as well, and I may sometimes do like a 12-10-8-6 scheme not to failure. But, I stick mainly with the big compound movements now and try to progress on those each time out.
There is nothing wrong with a higher volume approach if it is geared towards strength, but a lot of people seem to just 'pump and pump' without really going anywhere.
I am no expert in the least, but generally you can see that the biggest guys are also the strongest in the 6-15 rep range or lower in direct comparison (hence why they have weight classes in powerlifting).
-
Why thank you.
Mike's original split:
Legs/chest/triceps and Back/Biceps/Shoulders, alternated 4x a week.
Mike himself did like 3 sets of pre exhaust, 2 sets of other things. He also warmed up which to many looked like the working sets everyone else was doing (probably was scientifically past a certain point).
I do the same split, and I use rest pause or a second and maybe a 3rd set at times. Deloading is 2 workouts with only straight sets, 1 each for a week or 2. It seems to work very well, except I do the 3 day a week para dime now, so everything gets worked 6x a month instead of four. I also rotate exercises a la DC.
This is editable as well, and I may sometimes do like a 12-10-8-6 scheme not to failure. But, I stick mainly with the big compound movements now and try to progress on those each time out.
There is nothing wrong with a higher volume approach if it is geared towards strength, but a lot of people seem to just 'pump and pump' without really going anywhere.
I am no expert in the least, but generally you can see that the biggest guys are also the strongest in the 6-15 rep range or lower in direct comparison (hence why they have weight classes in powerlifting).
Don't forget that pure strength is also genetic, things like tendon thickness, tendon length, structure, etc. affect how strong someone can be.
I'm a volume trainer and I agree that every training program should be geared towards getting stronger to some degree, but unfortunately this has been misinterpreted by some that think strength is the only way to overload a muscle, which is not true.
Also, some guys try to get stronger by any means and start lifting sloppily, cheating and using too much momentum.....thus not stimulating the target muscle to its fullest.
As far as the biggest guys being the strongest, that's not always true. Actually I've seen plenty of really strong guys with no muscular development whatsoever, at least not the type they should have for their strength.
-
wow
-
I'm 54. i do my own version of hit dogshit training.
it's what i teach my clients no wait that's goodcums line (http://www.freejunknstuff.com/laf.gif)
for the guy that is all swimmer such as myself and damn near
all of you, volume is dumb as fuck except during so called cruises.
the cruises are for pump, bullshit intensity like all volume training, where the hit is not.
if alot of you did less warmups sets and reps and rethought your
weight progression (and why) used in sets, you would put 5-10
on your bench single in a week 2 max. by doing alot less and
cheating to get thru barriers you
fucking swimmers could seated curl the 60's strict instead of
heaving the 40's on the goddamn floor after your 3rd monumentally intense set.
david henry was doing some sort of hit. only pro i half ass give any respect
-
Don't forget that pure strength is also genetic, things like tendon thickness, tendon length, structure, etc. affect how strong someone can be.
I'm a volume trainer and I agree that every training program should be geared towards getting stronger to some degree, but unfortunately this has been misinterpreted by some that think strength is the only way to overload a muscle, which is not true.
Also, some guys try to get stronger by any means and start lifting sloppily, cheating and using too much momentum.....thus not stimulating the target muscle to its fullest.
As far as the biggest guys being the strongest, that's not always true. Actually I've seen plenty of really strong guys with no muscular development whatsoever, at least not the type they should have for their strength.
That is true to a point, but I am saying someone like Jay Cutler, who uses volume training but is not as strong as someone like Yates on things still uses the weight on a bar to know where he is headed.
What I am saying:
You can not go and buy 225 pounds worth of weight and get very far no matter how much volume you do, your stuck with 225 pounds.
Now yes, the limiting factor with HIT is the sticking point or lack of overload with the one set, especially when those sets are a week or more apart.
But to me HIT is everything under a giant umbrella that is not Weider pumping that goes unprogrammed and expected to just keep you progressing in a linear fashion. I say that because without HIT, us guys that got our information from Arnie's book would still be doing the same stuff without thinking about it.
I am certainly not calling ALL intelligent programs HIT, but I give it credit for teaching outside the box thinking if a muscle mag was your only point of reference before, and that really came from Mentzer since he always said to question everything.
-
I'm 54. i do my own version of hit dogshit training.
it's what i teach my clients no wait that's goodcums line (http://www.freejunknstuff.com/laf.gif)
for the guy that is all swimmer such as myself and damn near
all of you, volume is dumb as fuck except during so called cruises.
the cruises are for pump, bullshit intensity like all volume training, where the hit is not.
if alot of you did less warmups sets and reps and rethought your
weight progression (and why) used in sets, you would put 5-10
on your bench single in a week 2 max. by doing alot less and
cheating to get thru barriers you
fucking swimmers could seated curl the 60's strict instead of
heaving the 40's on the goddamn floor after your 3rd monumentally intense set.
david henry was doing some sort of hit. only pro i half ass give any respect
Great points when you read through the lines. Juiced up guys do need more, IFBB pros for the most part can do whatever the hell they want and grow. The same goes for normal genetics on the sauce.
My only point is that you have to draw a line and avoid the 'I must do' mentality. If your planning 3 sets and the first one feels harder, guess what, your over reaching faster than you thought.
-
That is true to a point, but I am saying someone like Jay Cutler, who uses volume training but is not as strong as someone like Yates on things still uses the weight on a bar to know where he is headed.
What I am saying:
You can not go and buy 225 pounds worth of weight and get very far no matter how much volume you do, your stuck with 225 pounds.
Now yes, the limiting factor with HIT is the sticking point or lack of overload with the one set, especially when those sets are a week or more apart.
But to me HIT is everything under a giant umbrella that is not Weider pumping that goes unprogrammed and expected to just keep you progressing in a linear fashion. I say that because without HIT, us guys that got our information from Arnie's book would still be doing the same stuff without thinking about it.
I am certainly not calling ALL intelligent programs HIT, but I give it credit for teaching outside the box thinking if a muscle mag was your only point of reference before, and that really came from Mentzer since he always said to question everything.
Good points.
I agree that HIT brought some new ideas for training that've helped many, Arthur Jones had some pretty good concepts.
The only apsect of HIT I've never been able to agree with is the low volume of work. Of course 20 sets 3x week is too much, as is 2 sets 1x week to the other extreme, but somewhere in the middle is good.
-
Good points.
I agree that HIT brought some new ideas for training that've helped many, Arthur Jones had some pretty good concepts.
The only apsect of HIT I've never been able to agree with is the low volume of work. Of course 20 sets 3x week is too much, as is 2 sets 1x week to the other extreme, but somewhere in the middle is good.
Right, the 'one valid theory' is correct, there has to be one concept or underlying concept that happens for the most part, otherwise some would need strength in relation to their starting point, and other would grow and get weaker, if that makes sense.
But Mentzer pursued 1 workout program, 1 dogmatic way of doing things. My workout works for all mankind sort of thing, and the answer was never to do more. As a trainer, he had it easy, "Sorry the 1 set of deadlifts ever 14 days is not working, your at your genetic potential" type of thing is easy to tell a 'true believer'.
He himself did so many different things and unfortunately he never really drew the right conclusions. Everyone that came to him was either in a bad over reaching state and thus the 30 minutes a week helped a lot and allowed them to sort of slingshot over their previous best, or they were doing retarded workouts from the get go (give me a fly/curl pumper and I will work miracles with him, you would too).