Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums

Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Stavios on November 12, 2006, 07:17:33 AM



Title: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Stavios on November 12, 2006, 07:17:33 AM
What do you guys think about overtraining ?
it seems like everybody nowadays is scared of overtraining, ence the popular way of training 1 bodypart once a week.

now, have you ever seen someone with a bodypart who is totally overpowering his body cause he is training it almost everyday ? I think the answer is yes !
For an example:
-JOJ said he got his traps got huge because he did shrugs at the end of every workout to show off his strenght when he was younger.
if he was training them everyday, he was clearly overtraining them. yet, they got fucking huge

-Weightlifters squat everyday and I have heard that in some countries where the sport is really popular, they train 2 or 3 times a day !
their legs and back are very thick too

IMO, overtraining is the biggest lie ever cause if it was so bad to train a bodypart more than twice a week, those guys would be tiny

discuss


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: The Squadfather on November 12, 2006, 07:20:35 AM
What do you guys think about overtraining ?
it seems like everybody nowadays is scared of overtraining, ence the popular way of training 1 bodypart once a week.

now, have you ever seen someone with a bodypart who is totally overpowering his body cause he is training it almost everyday ? I think the answer is yes !
For an example:
-JOJ said he got his traps got huge because he did shrugs at the end of every workout to show off his strenght when he was younger.
if he was training them everyday, he was clearly overtraining them. yet, they got fucking huge

-Weightlifters squat everyday and I have heard that in some countries where the sport is really popular, they train 2 or 3 times a day !
their legs and back are very thick too

IMO, overtraining is the biggest lie ever cause if it was so bad to train a bodypart more than twice a week, those guys would be tiny

discuss
Olympic lifters do train some lifts everyday but they do only singles, doubles or triples so they're not taking the muscle to failure and breaking down the fibers the same way that a bb'er is.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Stavios on November 12, 2006, 07:24:14 AM
Olympic lifters do train some lifts everyday but they do only singles, doubles or triples so they're not taking the muscle to failure and breaking down the fibers the same way that a bb'er is.

very true sarcasm
good point


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Cleanest Natural on November 12, 2006, 07:29:34 AM
there's need for recovery and then eventually growth...that's why we don't train that often...my oppinion.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: BEAST 8692 on November 12, 2006, 07:32:27 AM
for weight lifters, getting the technique, speed and neurological pathways is much more important than mass.

in fact they would be actively trying to avoid excessive mass.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Figo on November 12, 2006, 07:37:35 AM
for weight lifters, getting the technique, speed and neurological pathways is much more important than mass.

in fact they would be actively trying to avoid excessive mass.

As well as their target weightclass bodyweight.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: GoneAway on November 12, 2006, 07:46:42 AM
Depends on what type of training you mean. If it's 2 hour long sessions for a natural more than 4 or 5 times a week, that's probably overtraining.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Stavios on November 12, 2006, 07:47:03 AM
for weight lifters, getting the technique, speed and neurological pathways is much more important than mass.

in fact they would be actively trying to avoid excessive mass.
yeah I know their goal isn't really to gain mass but the point is, they do !
even with training the same bodypart 5 times a week and sometimes more !


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Figo on November 12, 2006, 07:51:36 AM
So, you're saying that training a bodypart every day (5+times a week) will stimulate growth? Or you asking?


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Stavios on November 12, 2006, 07:53:39 AM
So, you're saying that training a bodypart every day (5+times a week) will stimulate growth? Or you asking?
simply asking
I am no expert but it makes me wondering.

if training 5 times a week is so bad, those guys shouldn't be able to gain mass yet they have incredible tighs and back devolopement


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Figo on November 12, 2006, 08:03:53 AM
simply asking
I am no expert but it makes me wondering.

if training 5 times a week is so bad, those guys shouldn't be able to gain mass yet they have incredible tighs and back devolopement

I'm no expert neither, but like Sarcasm said, their type of training is specific to their sport and involves low reps as well as concentraing on speed and form, not hypertrophy, so its not as taxing.
If one was to attempt hypertrophy inducing training at such high frequency, the nervous system would not handle it.
Much like gymnasts and swimmers, their muscles used for their sports-delts and pecs for swimmers, delts arms, pecs for gymnasts- development does take place after a while, but not anywhere near the rate which bbers experience, assisted or not.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: jmt1 on November 12, 2006, 08:33:18 AM
 overtraining is a big problem....the negative aspects of overtraining have been well documented.

its not about training 5 times a week...i think thats fine as long as you break down your bodyparts correctly...its more about giving each bodypart enough time to recover between workouts...of course larger bodyparts take longer to recover than smaller bodyparts.



Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Figo on November 12, 2006, 08:40:35 AM
Sure, but he's talking of training the SAME bodypart 5 times a week.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: canadaphiliac on November 12, 2006, 08:47:22 AM
I'm no expert neither, but like Sarcasm said, their type of training is specific to their sport and involves low reps as well as concentraing on speed and form, not hypertrophy, so its not as taxing.
If one was to attempt hypertrophy inducing training at such high frequency, the nervous system would not handle it.
Much like gymnasts and swimmers, their muscles used for their sports-delts and pecs for swimmers, delts arms, pecs for gymnasts- development does take place after a while, but not anywhere near the rate which bbers experience, assisted or not.
I've noticed the muscles of athletes whose sport of choice focuses more on a continued resistance rather than the repetition of weightlifting seem to take a different shape. Particularly in gymnasts and wrestlers. It could of course be genetic, coincidence, or completely in my head, so *shrugs*.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: DIVISION on November 12, 2006, 09:33:14 AM
I'm no expert neither, but like Sarcasm said, their type of training is specific to their sport and involves low reps as well as concentraing on speed and form, not hypertrophy, so its not as taxing.
If one was to attempt hypertrophy inducing training at such high frequency, the nervous system would not handle it.
Much like gymnasts and swimmers, their muscles used for their sports-delts and pecs for swimmers, delts arms, pecs for gymnasts- development does take place after a while, but not anywhere near the rate which bbers experience, assisted or not.

^Correct.

This why Powerlifters train differently than Bodybuilders.

Different focus and goals.



DIV


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: nukkaready on November 12, 2006, 09:44:24 AM
It largely depends on the amount of drugs you take then there is no overtraining. Using moderate weights with medium-high reps in a good and controlled form allows you to train more often and grow better. Heavy ass weights just mess with your nervous system and create a CNS overtraining syndrome.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: DIVISION on November 12, 2006, 09:48:51 AM
It largely depends on the amount of drugs you take then there is no overtraining. Using moderate weights with medium-high reps in a good and controlled form allows you to train more often and grow better. Heavy ass weights just mess with your nervous system and create a CNS overtraining syndrome.

Well, it depends on the goals of the individual.

Powerlifters need that CNS stimulation....whereas bodybuilders are working through a different mechanism.

Certain bodytypes do better with higher reps and others respond favorably to lower reps......

Fast twitch, slow twitch....



DIV


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: alexxx on November 12, 2006, 09:56:15 AM
Overtraining is just an excuse for not training hard nowadays. Some guys actually overtrain on a 3 days a week program. How can the body give up training three times a week? Well the answer lies in your head and heart!


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: figgs on November 12, 2006, 10:00:07 AM
Here's a different, scientific approach to overtraining.

Volume training is not only a waste of time and effort, but is actually counterproductive. You draw from your energy reserves during training. And it doesn't take 5 minutes after your workout to restore the energy that was used up. It takes days. And It's far more important for your body to restore it's energy reserves than it is to use energy for building new muscle tissue because those energy reserves are necessary for survival, while building a 20 inch arm is not.

Imagine each set performed is like digging a hole into your energy reserves. The more sets performed, the deeper the hole and the longer that hole takes to fill up during rest. The first thing your body must do after the workout is not build a mountain, i.e., the new muscle growth on top, but fill the hole you've made below. That is, it must recover, overcome the deficit, compensate for the exhaustive effects of the workout. And so because it takes several days before that hole is filled up, it takes even longer to start building the mountain.

With that in mind, we're able to see just how and why HIT is as effective as it is. When volume is lowered, and energy reserves are spared, we are able to restore our energy reserves faster and enter the muscle building process sooner. Not only do we enter the muscle process sooner, but we also have a greater amount of energy which can be used to build new muscles.

Then there's the issue of intensity. The relationship of training intensity and duration exist on an inverse ratio. You can either train hard or long, but you can't do both. Honestly, I think people on high volume programs simply can't push themselves to the extent of absolute failure. I really do. If you did that, your body would force you to lower volume. And arguments like this is just for people to falsely reassure themselves that their lack of efforts in the gym is working. HA!

HIT is a workout program that was the result of one man's use of of a specific method of thought. One of logic and reasoning. Mike Mentzer was perhaps the greatest bodybuilder of all time. He dedicated his life to making a science out of bodybuilding. And that he did. It's called HIT. And I strongly suggest it.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: jmt1 on November 12, 2006, 10:07:06 AM

Volume training is not only a waste of time and effort, but is actually counterproductive. You draw from your energy reserves during training. And it doesn't take 5 minutes after your workout to restore the energy that was used up. It takes days. And It's far more important for your body to restore it's energy reserves than it is to use energy for building new muscle tissue because those energy reserves are necessary for survival, while building a 20 inch arm is not.

Imagine each set performed is like digging a hole into your energy reserves. The more sets performed, the deeper the hole and the longer that hole takes to fill up during rest. The first thing your body must do after the workout is not build a mountain, i.e., the new muscle growth on top, but fill the hole you've made below. That is, it must recover, overcome the deficit, compensate for the exhaustive effects of the workout. And so because it takes several days before that hole is filled up, it takes even longer to start building the mountain.

With that in mind, we're able to see just how and why HIT is as effective as it is. When volume is lowered, and energy reserves are spared, we are able to restore our energy reserves faster and enter the muscle building process sooner. Not only do we enter the muscle process sooner, but we also have a greater amount of energy which can be used to build new muscles.

Then there's the issue of intensity. The relationship of training intensity and duration exist on an inverse ratio. You can either train hard or long, but you can't do both. Honestly, I think people on high volume programs simply can't push themselves to the extent of absolute failure. I really do. If you did that, your body would force you to lower volume. And arguments like this is just for people to falsely reassure themselves that their lack of efforts in the gym is working. HA!

HIT is a workout program that was the result of one man's use of of a specific method of thought. One of logic and reasoning. Mike Mentzer was perhaps the greatest bodybuilder of all time. He dedicated his life to making a science out of bodybuilding. And that he did. It's called HIT. And I strongly suggest it.

i totally agree with that.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: El_Spiko on November 12, 2006, 10:12:25 AM
Here's a different, scientific approach to overtraining.

Volume training is not only a waste of time and effort, but is actually counterproductive. You draw from your energy reserves during training. And it doesn't take 5 minutes after your workout to restore the energy that was used up. It takes days. And It's far more important for your body to restore it's energy reserves than it is to use energy for building new muscle tissue because those energy reserves are necessary for survival, while building a 20 inch arm is not.

Imagine each set performed is like digging a hole into your energy reserves. The more sets performed, the deeper the hole and the longer that hole takes to fill up during rest. The first thing your body must do after the workout is not build a mountain, i.e., the new muscle growth on top, but fill the hole you've made below. That is, it must recover, overcome the deficit, compensate for the exhaustive effects of the workout. And so because it takes several days before that hole is filled up, it takes even longer to start building the mountain.

With that in mind, we're able to see just how and why HIT is as effective as it is. When volume is lowered, and energy reserves are spared, we are able to restore our energy reserves faster and enter the muscle building process sooner. Not only do we enter the muscle process sooner, but we also have a greater amount of energy which can be used to build new muscles.

Then there's the issue of intensity. The relationship of training intensity and duration exist on an inverse ratio. You can either train hard or long, but you can't do both. Honestly, I think people on high volume programs simply can't push themselves to the extent of absolute failure. I really do. If you did that, your body would force you to lower volume. And arguments like this is just for people to falsely reassure themselves that their lack of efforts in the gym is working. HA!

HIT is a workout program that was the result of one man's use of of a specific method of thought. One of logic and reasoning. Mike Mentzer was perhaps the greatest bodybuilder of all time. He dedicated his life to making a science out of bodybuilding. And that he did. It's called HIT. And I strongly suggest it.
While i agree to a degree, I think that it is very individual what kind of exercise works best. I resond well to HIT style workouts for most of my bodyparts, but it was something that I had to learn after training with lots of volume and really figuring out how to get more and more intensity out of a set. As i learned to bring more intensity on individual sets I did less sets per workout as I just could not continue an exercise after a high intensity set. On the other hand, my workout partner responds best to volume. He's a tall guy with long limbs, so it's a lot harder for him to use enough weight with good form to be able to generate the intenisty necessary for a hit style workout. But if he uses a lower weight that allows him good form with higher reps he responds much more. I think that it's a combination of genetics and structural differences. Look at Mentzer compared to say Lou Ferrigno. I don't think that Lou, with his long frame would have been able to respond well on a HIT program. Also, in his later years I think Mentzer's ideas moved out of the realm of what could be applied in reality and were purely theoretical.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: jmt1 on November 12, 2006, 10:14:17 AM
Overtraining is just an excuse for not training hard nowadays. Some guys actually overtrain on a 3 days a week program. How can the body give up training three times a week? Well the answer lies in your head and heart!

more like overtraining is an exuse for some wannabe bodybuilders to spend 2 hours a day in the gym lifting light weights for 100s of reps because they dont know what intensity is and have know idea what training to failure means.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: alexxx on November 12, 2006, 10:17:56 AM
more like overtraining is an exuse for some wannabe bodybuilders to spend 2 hours a day in the gym lifting light weights for 100s of reps because they dont know what intensity is and have know idea what training to failure means.

True their are lots of guys that on volume training look like nothing. Just like on HIT training. Same guys that come in day in day out looking the same. A real bodybuilder will succeed
ed with and training protocol and would be wise to experiment with all varieties.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: El_Spiko on November 12, 2006, 10:27:02 AM
True their are lots of guys that on volume training look like nothing. Just like on HIT training. Same guys that come in day in day out looking the same. A real bodybuilder will succeed
ed with and training protocol and would be wise to experiment with all varieties.
Werd


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: younggunz on November 12, 2006, 10:27:37 AM
Their are so many ratios to this equation, basically it comes down to knowing your body. u have to put in diet, if u dont have enough fuel (carbs&fats,etc) u will burn out earlier and recover slower. Then theirs the intensity and duration aspect. If your trying to build muscle whats the point of training to failure every set for an hour or more, your only taxing your own body and immune system. Your body's not going to be able to build rock hard muscle if its having a hard enough time  simply recovering. Drugs are a huge aspect as well, u can throw all this out the window if your juicing through the gills. Its all about balance theirs some days where i simply just go through the motions of a work out because i know if i were to go balls to the wall it would actually do more harm to my goals than help. figure out what works for you not some dude on the internet that says "this is scientifically proven" their are way to many factors that play into building muscle and i can tell you now none of us are the exact same infact far from it, AGE,RACE(genetics), diet,rest,living style, metabolism. i believe in overtraining because i know how it feels and its not healthy.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: shiftedShapes on November 12, 2006, 10:29:21 AM
yes you can overtrain.

the biggest myth in BBing is undereating.  You don't need to eat a lot to gain muscle.  Calorie restricted test subjects are actually more muscular than their full calorie peers.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: davidpaul on November 12, 2006, 10:33:26 AM
Werd

looking cool spiko


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: figgs on November 12, 2006, 10:34:24 AM
I noticed this is becomming an argument over the myth that "what works for me might not work for you".

HIT is a proven formula that produces optimal increases in muscle strength and size for EVERYONE. That is, everyone that can bear to train on such a level of intensity.

Anomtomically and physiologically, every human being is essentially the same. So to say that there is no specific scientific nature or cause of what activates the growth process is to say something devoid of all logic and reasoning. Muscle is muscle. A human being is a human being.

To say that there is not one specific stimulus to activate the growth process is like saying every individual's muscles are not made of the same substances.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: El_Spiko on November 12, 2006, 10:41:07 AM
looking cool spiko
Out of curiosity, why do you feel the need to follow me around and post old pictures of me? Yes, I was bi at one point in my past. I've never denied that and it doesn't bother me, so I don;'t see why it bothers you. I took a stupid looking picture in my kung fu uniform, ok whatever. And the other pic is more than three years old and I've posted it on these boards before as well as an even older pic and a newer one that show the progress I made. So why do you feel the need to hate on me when I've never done anything to you nor denied any of this?


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: davidpaul on November 12, 2006, 10:43:39 AM
Out of curiosity, why do you feel the need to follow me around and post old pictures of me? Yes, I was bi at one point in my past. I've never denied that and it doesn't bother me, so I don;'t see why it bothers you. I took a stupid looking picture in my kung fu uniform, ok whatever. And the other pic is more than three years old and I've posted it on these boards before as well as an even older pic and a newer one that show the progress I made. So why do you feel the need to hate on me when I've never done anything to you nor denied any of this?

whos hating, i said you looked cool.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: younggunz on November 12, 2006, 10:53:39 AM
Does the HIT formula include a diet?


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: figgs on November 12, 2006, 11:22:51 AM
Does the HIT formula include a diet?

Dieting shouldn't be very complicated. Well balanced meals of 60% carbs 25% protein and 15% fats is best.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: jmt1 on November 12, 2006, 11:47:35 AM
there is no question that hit along with proper nutrition is the way to pack on quality muscle.

i think its good to mix in some moderate volume training from time to time but hit should be the basis of any bodybuilders training program.

i really dont think alot of guys have the heart to train hit...they would much rather grab a lighter weight and do countless reps.



Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: bic_staedtler on November 12, 2006, 12:08:22 PM
I noticed this is becomming an argument over the myth that "what works for me might not work for you".

HIT is a proven formula that produces optimal increases in muscle strength and size for EVERYONE. That is, everyone that can bear to train on such a level of intensity.

Anomtomically and physiologically, every human being is essentially the same. So to say that there is no specific scientific nature or cause of what activates the growth process is to say something devoid of all logic and reasoning. Muscle is muscle. A human being is a human being.

To say that there is not one specific stimulus to activate the growth process is like saying every individual's muscles are not made of the same substances.

...dude, no disrespect, but I know most here haven't encountered a true "HIT" fan(atic)...I'm not calling you one, but you certainly sound like every Mentzer Disciple I've ever read on the web.

Your observations about HIT and it's principles are completely lifted from the Heavy Duty volumes written by Mike.  Your "evidence" and proof that HIT is the best is not, and has never been, any more scientific than other training styles.  I say this because the biggest success story with HIT, Casey Viator, in the famed "experiment" that slapped on an absurd 30 pounds of muscle in something like 4 weeks has NEVER been duplicated.  To be truly scientific, you must be able to have an experiment which can be reproduced...and that one has not.

Yet Casey was "just like any other human", since "a human being is like any other human being, physiologically" right?  HIT, as described by Mike in it's later stages, is just silly.

Credit Mike for showing that you don't need to train like Arnold (in excess of 3 hours a day to make gains) and for his great physique, but that's where it should end.  Doing the Mentzer HIT style and expecting it to be the BEST system is foolhardy.

But almost every serious trainer knows that.  Mike was great, no doubt.  But HIT?....it's like a fanatical religion, taken to extremes by it's proponents.  I don't know why, but that's the way it is.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Disgusted on November 12, 2006, 12:14:40 PM
I do 70 sets per bodypart 50 reps 3x per week. I recommend everyone here try it for a month and get back to me.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Stavios on November 12, 2006, 12:17:59 PM
I do 70 sets per bodypart 50 reps 3x per week. I recommend everyone here try it for a month and get back to me.

Hey disgusted, I'd like to hear your real opinion on the subject

why do weightlifters have huge tighs and back if they train everyday and sometimes 2 times per day


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: ToxicAvenger on November 12, 2006, 12:19:07 PM
no such thing as overtraning...

only under juicing


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: ToxicAvenger on November 12, 2006, 12:19:47 PM
Hey disgusted, I'd like to hear your real opinion on the subject

why do weightlifters have huge tighs and back if they train everyday and sometimes 2 times per day


u r confusing frequency and volume...


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: bmacsys on November 12, 2006, 12:27:43 PM
Here's a different, scientific approach to overtraining.

Volume training is not only a waste of time and effort, but is actually counterproductive. You draw from your energy reserves during training. And it doesn't take 5 minutes after your workout to restore the energy that was used up. It takes days. And It's far more important for your body to restore it's energy reserves than it is to use energy for building new muscle tissue because those energy reserves are necessary for survival, while building a 20 inch arm is not.

Imagine each set performed is like digging a hole into your energy reserves. The more sets performed, the deeper the hole and the longer that hole takes to fill up during rest. The first thing your body must do after the workout is not build a mountain, i.e., the new muscle growth on top, but fill the hole you've made below. That is, it must recover, overcome the deficit, compensate for the exhaustive effects of the workout. And so because it takes several days before that hole is filled up, it takes even longer to start building the mountain.

With that in mind, we're able to see just how and why HIT is as effective as it is. When volume is lowered, and energy reserves are spared, we are able to restore our energy reserves faster and enter the muscle building process sooner. Not only do we enter the muscle process sooner, but we also have a greater amount of energy which can be used to build new muscles.

Then there's the issue of intensity. The relationship of training intensity and duration exist on an inverse ratio. You can either train hard or long, but you can't do both. Honestly, I think people on high volume programs simply can't push themselves to the extent of absolute failure. I really do. If you did that, your body would force you to lower volume. And arguments like this is just for people to falsely reassure themselves that their lack of efforts in the gym is working. HA!

HIT is a workout program that was the result of one man's use of of a specific method of thought. One of logic and reasoning. Mike Mentzer was perhaps the greatest bodybuilder of all time. He dedicated his life to making a science out of bodybuilding. And that he did. It's called HIT. And I strongly suggest it.

Ever read Arthur Jones Nautilus Bulletins?


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: figgs on November 12, 2006, 12:33:28 PM
...dude, no disrespect, but I know most here haven't encountered a true "HIT" fan(atic)...I'm not calling you one, but you certainly sound like every Mentzer Disciple I've ever read on the web.

Your observations about HIT and it's principles are completely lifted from the Heavy Duty volumes written by Mike.  Your "evidence" and proof that HIT is the best is not, and has never been, any more scientific than other training styles.  I say this because the biggest success story with HIT, Casey Viator, in the famed "experiment" that slapped on an absurd 30 pounds of muscle in something like 4 weeks has NEVER been duplicated.  To be truly scientific, you must be able to have an experiment which can be reproduced...and that one has not.

Yet Casey was "just like any other human", since "a human being is like any other human being, physiologically" right?  HIT, as described by Mike in it's later stages, is just silly.

Credit Mike for showing that you don't need to train like Arnold (in excess of 3 hours a day to make gains) and for his great physique, but that's where it should end.  Doing the Mentzer HIT style and expecting it to be the BEST system is foolhardy.

But almost every serious trainer knows that.  Mike was great, no doubt.  But HIT?....it's like a fanatical religion, taken to extremes by it's proponents.  I don't know why, but that's the way it is.

I know I'm sounding just like Mike Mentzer himself LOL. It's because I've just read his book High-Intensity Training the Mike Mentzer Way and all the knowledge is still fresh in my mind.

Casey Viator was not the only person to ever be trained by Mentzer. You should know that he was a personal trainer for decades. He trained many people, from average man to pro BB. I know he trained Aaron Baker for a while but Baker returned to his old routine. HIT is not designed for juicers because they need to increase volume and frequency of training because of their recovery advantage.

Mike recalls his trainees as having recieving results which were "phenominal". And I'm not surprised whatsoever after having tasted HIT for the first time. With my first week of HIT completed I feel absolute wonderful. I feel bigger and stronger already and I know I will experience some of the best results I ever have. My HIT log is in the training section. Check it out.

By saying that anotomically and physiologically, every human being is essentially the same, I'm not implying that results will not vary. I'm saying that HIT is the quickest route to reaching your predisposed genetic limit. Whether you have the best genetics or the worst, HIT will ensure you're receiving optimal results.

It might seem like a religion to you only because it's based on scientific research and fact. It's the most logical approach to training there is. And that's what's intimidating to others. The fact that it is WILL WORK!

Bodybuilding is a form of exercise science, which flows directly from medical science. And medical science is a set of absolute principles that must be followed by use of strict discipline. A doctor is not going to use a different set of principles than other doctors because he thinks the medicine books are too "religious" in that they're so absolute in fact. Each certified doctor uses the same set of principles no matter what. And each bodybuilder should use the same approach to increasing the size and strength of their muscles. And there is one sure way to do that. And that's HIT. Other programs work, but not like HIT.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: figgs on November 12, 2006, 12:34:19 PM
Ever read Arthur Jones Nautilus Bulletins?

Nah. Where can I learn more?


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: brianX on November 12, 2006, 12:37:24 PM
I can't help but laugh at the newbies who think they're "intense" and "hardcore" because they do a few sets to failure. That kind of training might work on pussy machine exercises, but it won't fly when you're doing heavy freeweight lifts. I've never known a really big guy who trained to failure on every exercise. There is really no advantage to it at all.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: chris_mason on November 12, 2006, 12:45:57 PM
I know I'm sounding just like Mike Mentzer himself LOL. It's because I've just read his book High-Intensity Training the Mike Mentzer Way and all the knowledge is still fresh in my mind.

Casey Viator was not the only person to ever be trained by Mentzer. You should know that he was a personal trainer for decades. He trained many people, from average man to pro BB. I know he trained Aaron Baker for a while but Baker returned to his old routine. HIT is not designed for juicers because they need to increase volume and frequency of training because of their recovery advantage.

Mike recalls his trainees as having recieving results which were "phenominal". And I'm not surprised whatsoever after having tasted HIT for the first time. With my first week of HIT completed I feel absolute wonderful. I feel bigger and stronger already and I know I will experience some of the best results I ever have. My HIT log is in the training section. Check it out.

By saying that anotomically and physiologically, every human being is essentially the same, I'm not implying that results will not vary. I'm saying that HIT is the quickest route to reaching your predisposed genetic limit. Whether you have the best genetics or the worst, HIT will ensure you're receiving optimal results.

It might seem like a religion to you only because it's based on scientific research and fact. It's the most logical approach to training there is. And that's what's intimidating to others. The fact that it is WILL WORK!

Bodybuilding is a form of exercise science, which flows directly from medical science. And medical science is a set of absolute principles that must be followed by use of strict discipline. A doctor is not going to use a different set of principles than other doctors because he thinks the medicine books are too "religious" in that they're so absolute in fact. Each certified doctor uses the same set of principles no matter what. And each bodybuilder should use the same approach to increasing the size and strength of their muscles. And there is one sure way to do that. And that's HIT. Other programs work, but not like HIT.

I too was once mesmerized by Mentzer, Jones, and Darden.  They have some very good ideas but don't buy 100% into it.

The information they espouse really wasn't scientifically based.  For example, Jones and Mentzer claim that a muscle is strongest in the peak contraction position.  Actually quite the opposite is true. A muscle is strongest in a slightly stretched position.

That is just one example of their "science" being all wrong.

Keep your mind open and don't be blinded to the many other good ideas and trainers out there.



Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Vince G, CSN MFT on November 12, 2006, 12:49:31 PM
Overtraining is bullshit.  The fact is that the only way you can truly achieve your goals is to go balls to the walls and not let up. 

I did a split training routine for my last show consisting of a light weight high rep routine and a heavy weight low rep routine at night.  I never overtrained and recovered easily by taking simple carbs and protein immediately after each workout followed by a solid meal and getting 8 full hours of sleep every night. 


Also, there's too many people skipping vital exercises because they are too hard and try to substitute for crap routines.  When I train legs, I do squats and deadlifts.  When it comes to shoulders, I never forget to do pull-ups.  When I train chest, I always do dips.  There are no substitutes for these vital exercises   


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: bic_staedtler on November 12, 2006, 12:54:06 PM
I know I'm sounding just like Mike Mentzer himself LOL. It's because I've just read his book High-Intensity Training the Mike Mentzer Way and all the knowledge is still fresh in my mind.

Casey Viator was not the only person to ever be trained by Mentzer. You should know that he was a personal trainer for decades. He trained many people, from average man to pro BB. I know he trained Aaron Baker for a while but Baker returned to his old routine. HIT is not designed for juicers because they need to increase volume and frequency of training because of their recovery advantage.

Mike recalls his trainees as having recieving results which were "phenominal". And I'm not surprised whatsoever after having tasted HIT for the first time. With my first week of HIT completed I feel absolute wonderful. I feel bigger and stronger already and I know I will experience some of the best results I ever have. My HIT log is in the training section. Check it out.

By saying that anotomically and physiologically, every human being is essentially the same, I'm not implying that results will not vary. I'm saying that HIT is the quickest route to reaching your predisposed genetic limit. Whether you have the best genetics or the worst, HIT will ensure you're receiving optimal results.

It might seem like a religion to you only because it's based on scientific research and fact. It's the most logical approach to training there is. And that's what's intimidating to others. The fact that it is WILL WORK!

Bodybuilding is a form of exercise science, which flows directly from medical science. And medical science is a set of absolute principles that must be followed by use of strict discipline. A doctor is not going to use a different set of principles than other doctors because he thinks the medicine books are too "religious" in that they're so absolute in fact. Each certified doctor uses the same set of principles no matter what. And each bodybuilder should use the same approach to increasing the size and strength of their muscles. And there is one sure way to do that. And that's HIT. Other programs work, but not like HIT.

...all it took was one read of "HIT training the Mike Mentzer Way"?...man, you do sound like an aged Heavy Duty acolyte, that's for sure.  You make the same points most HIT fans do...

On paper it sounds great.  I'm glad Mike motivated you to train his way, but if you're serious about building muscle eventually you'll catch on that there is no "one way" to train.  Here's a few examples why, even with the limited info you've provided on yourself....

..how long have you trained?  HIT usually "works", by that I mean building noticeable muscle, on intermediate to experienced bodybuilders.  Mike himself built his Mr Universe winning body mainly using tried and true high volume principles.  

Yet you also state the well known fallacy that HIT is NOT designed for juicers...nothing could be further from the truth.  Evidence?...Mike was as big a steroid user as ANY pro of his time...and Aaron Baker?  Well, he did try HIT but didn't stick with it the way Mike prescribed it.  Don't listen to the "Aaron was too weak to handle the intensity"....NOBODY can handle this mythical amount of "intensity" that Mike spoke of!  Not even Dorian!

And finally, yourself.  You've been doing HIT what, a whole WEEK?  Not to sound condescending, but that is in no way or shape even REMOTELY long enough to assess the training pricinples of ANY program.  You do have an enormous amount of faith, though, I presume.  That's admirable.

Experiment with HIT, and learn from the experience.  But I can save you a lot of heartaches, and possible injuries...realize that there is NO "right" way to train.  There is only what you prefer, what you like, and that's subjective to each person.  No amount of Mentzer Magic will change that fact.  

ps....I spoke with a man who trained in Mentzer's gym back in the day...a whole gym full of people training "heavy duty style"...and only ONE person who looked like Mike, and that was Mike himself.  Yet his clients rave about their strength gains...but when it comes to muscle, where was it?  Only ONE Mike, with his genetics, his training style, and his drugs could do what he did.  Nothing scientific about it, but he's to be commended for many more important reasons in the world of bodybuilding.  Don't make the mistake of not seeing the forest for the trees...Mike was revolutionary in that he thought differently, and wouldn't accept things at face value.  You should follow that example as well, not just his training style.

The bare "truth" is that Mike realized, very smartly, that you don't need to spend hours in the gym day in and out to build a great body....ESPECIALLY with anabolics!  But he was also business smart enough to know that in order to make lots of money and build a legend around himself, he needed something different in order to try to chip away at Arnold's legacy.  That was, and became, the HIT style.  And as he got older, and went through the hard times, his eventually let his "logic" cloud the real world and finally arrived at an "ultimate HIT routine" which the person trained ONCE EVERY TWO WEEKS, if need be, using a total of SIX EXERCISES.  Sound strange?...well, it should!  

Early HIT ideas were very useful, and led much (if not MOST) to the way we train today in that volume is no longer "king" of styles.  For that alone he should be remembered for a long time, and his intelligence...but not his final HIT ideas, which bordered on lunacy.  

Your choice though.  Post some pics if you really want to prove to us that HIT is the "best"....I'll almost guarantee you that your results will be no more fantastic or astounding than someone using another well-thought out program.  Not a challenge, but if you REALLY want to convince people, that's a great way to do it.  Good luck.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: SWOLETRAIN on November 12, 2006, 01:02:02 PM
you have to remember... Alot of these powerlifters and strongman guys use pretty hard. At the competitive level, i beleive that drugs have alot to do with the volume and intensity. One can only train according to how fast they recover, therefore what qualifies as overtraining would be different for everybody.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: The True Adonis on November 12, 2006, 01:16:48 PM
No such thing.

Its all a myth and a lie.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: 240 is Back on November 12, 2006, 01:17:53 PM
"No such thing as overtraining, only undereating"

(who gave us this quote?)


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: davidpaul on November 12, 2006, 01:20:15 PM
"No such thing as overtraining, only undereating"

(who gave us this quote?)

that was either Ghandi or Stalin.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: UK Gold on November 12, 2006, 01:26:16 PM
If Mentzer is some kind of super guru than how come he usually looked like shit? He looked okay when he won the universe but other than that he was a waste of Dbol. All of the 'old timers' on here have debunked Mentzers nonsense. He was nothing but a sad, bitter, drug addled fool.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Debussey on November 12, 2006, 01:27:17 PM
If Mentzer is some kind of super guru than how come he usually looked like shit? He looked okay when he won the universe but other than that he was a waste of Dbol. All of the 'old timers' on here have debunked Mentzers nonsense. He was nothing but a sad, bitter, drug addled fool.

How is your anus feeling today? A little sore from last nights rectal pounding by your GF's strapon?


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: The Squadfather on November 12, 2006, 01:27:58 PM
If Mentzer is some kind of super guru than how come he usually looked like shit? He looked okay when he won the universe but other than that he was a waste of Dbol. All of the 'old timers' on here have debunked Mentzers nonsense. He was nothing but a sad, bitter, drug addled fool.
you're a moron, Mentzer is one of the best ever, he's the only bb'er to win the Universe with a perfect score.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: figgs on November 12, 2006, 01:28:31 PM
...all it took was one read of "HIT training the Mike Mentzer Way"?...man, you do sound like an aged Heavy Duty acolyte, that's for sure.  You make the same points most HIT fans do...

On paper it sounds great.  I'm glad Mike motivated you to train his way, but if you're serious about building muscle eventually you'll catch on that there is no "one way" to train.  Here's a few examples why, even with the limited info you've provided on yourself....

..how long have you trained?  HIT usually "works", by that I mean building noticeable muscle, on intermediate to experienced bodybuilders.  Mike himself built his Mr Universe winning body mainly using tried and true high volume principles.  

Yet you also state the well known fallacy that HIT is NOT designed for juicers...nothing could be further from the truth.  Evidence?...Mike was as big a steroid user as ANY pro of his time...and Aaron Baker?  Well, he did try HIT but didn't stick with it the way Mike prescribed it.  Don't listen to the "Aaron was too weak to handle the intensity"....NOBODY can handle this mythical amount of "intensity" that Mike spoke of!  Not even Dorian!

And finally, yourself.  You've been doing HIT what, a whole WEEK?  Not to sound condescending, but that is in no way or shape even REMOTELY long enough to assess the training pricinples of ANY program.  You do have an enormous amount of faith, though, I presume.  That's admirable.

Experiment with HIT, and learn from the experience.  But I can save you a lot of heartaches, and possible injuries...realize that there is NO "right" way to train.  There is only what you prefer, what you like, and that's subjective to each person.  No amount of Mentzer Magic will change that fact.  

ps....I spoke with a man who trained in Mentzer's gym back in the day...a whole gym full of people training "heavy duty style"...and only ONE person who looked like Mike, and that was Mike himself.  Yet his clients rave about their strength gains...but when it comes to muscle, where was it?  Only ONE Mike, with his genetics, his training style, and his drugs could do what he did.  Nothing scientific about it, but he's to be commended for many more important reasons in the world of bodybuilding.  Don't make the mistake of not seeing the forest for the trees...Mike was revolutionary in that he thought differently, and wouldn't accept things at face value.  You should follow that example as well, not just his training style.

The bare "truth" is that Mike realized, very smartly, that you don't need to spend hours in the gym day in and out to build a great body....ESPECIALLY with anabolics!  But he was also business smart enough to know that in order to make lots of money and build a legend around himself, he needed something different in order to try to chip away at Arnold's legacy.  That was, and became, the HIT style.  And as he got older, and went through the hard times, his eventually let his "logic" cloud the real world and finally arrived at an "ultimate HIT routine" which the person trained ONCE EVERY TWO WEEKS, if need be, using a total of SIX EXERCISES.  Sound strange?...well, it should!  

Early HIT ideas were very useful, and led much (if not MOST) to the way we train today in that volume is no longer "king" of styles.  For that alone he should be remembered for a long time, and his intelligence...but not his final HIT ideas, which bordered on lunacy.  

Your choice though.  Post some pics if you really want to prove to us that HIT is the "best"....I'll almost guarantee you that your results will be no more fantastic or astounding than someone using another well-thought out program.  Not a challenge, but if you REALLY want to convince people, that's a great way to do it.  Good luck.

hehehe yeah, I've gotten really into the book. I've never read a bodybuilding book that was so intellectually stimulating.

Mike trained with high volume until he himself fell into the trap of it. When he plateued from that kind of marathon training routine, he naturally assumed that more was better, but when it got to be too much training, and far less results, he decided to switch it up and try low volume. This was during the late 70s. I know he was well into using his HIT routine leading up to the 1980 Olympia, where he showed up in his best shape.

I definetely didn't say Aaron Baker didn't have what it took to push himself to train at such a level of intensity. He went through that training and had great results from it. I believe, however that Mike Mentzer pushed the limits. He had to have. It was his experiment! I'm trying to do the same!

And yes, I am very faithful about this. If I don't get the results I expect, I won't have a meltdown. I'll just be a bit disappointed. From reading Mike Mentzer's books it's clear that this man was a genius. I sense no lunacy whatsoever. He dedicated his life to making a science out of bodybuilding. And with such a great mind comes a desire to leave behind a great legacy. And although that attempt might have been sort of desperate, it's admirable to want that sort of thing.

And I'm very confident about this routine because this is just how I like to train. I'm a bit extreme with my intensity and have always been. It has to do with the way I think. I can NOT end a set and tell myself I could have done another rep if I tried. There's just no way. I will get upset over it.

I go to a very big professional gym and I LOVE knowing that I train harder than anyone else there. I know it and can say it with absolute confidence. Only me and my best friend/training partner seem to have what it takes to push our minds and bodies to the absolute limits of muscular fatigue. And that attitude is applied to almost every aspect of my life. To make the greatest effort or none at all. And the birth of that attitude came directly from bodybuilding.

About his gym being full of unsuccessful bodybuilders, I just don't know. Even if that's true and very few of his clients did actually make improvements, I'm still going to keep this up. At least 6-8 weeks, until I get the full effect. But I just have to doubt that. Mike wouldn't dedicate his life to something that has no proof of success.

And yes, you're right. Even if HIT will not be socially or scientifically accepted, his efforts to challenge the idea that "more is better" has changed the way we train today.

I'm doing just what you suggested. I will post all about my progress including pictures in my HIT log. It's being updated regularly so keep an eye on it.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: figgs on November 12, 2006, 01:33:24 PM
If Mentzer is some kind of super guru than how come he usually looked like shit? He looked okay when he won the universe but other than that he was a waste of Dbol. All of the 'old timers' on here have debunked Mentzers nonsense. He was nothing but a sad, bitter, drug addled fool.

Read his book and admire his physique. Then and only then will you know.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: The True Adonis on November 12, 2006, 01:34:20 PM
"No such thing as overtraining, only undereating"

(who gave us this quote?)

That is part fallacy as well.

The quote should be corrected to say,

"There is no such thing as overtraining.  Overeating is pointless."


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: UK Gold on November 12, 2006, 01:36:47 PM
you're a moron, Mentzer is one of the best ever, he's the only bb'er to win the Universe with a perfect score.
Where are the pics? I've already said he looked ok for the Universe, but where are the pics from the rest of his 'career'? Don't forget that Arnold owned him so viciously he drove him out of professional bodybuilding and into the gutter.
Read his book and admire his physique. Then and only then will you know.
I've tried his HIT bollocks and it made me strong but fat. Dorian took HIT and turned it into a real and practicle bodybuilding regimen.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: jmt1 on November 12, 2006, 02:29:43 PM
I do 70 sets per bodypart 50 reps 3x per week. I recommend everyone here try it for a month and get back to me.

lol...yeah i'll get right on that.

i'll also be taking your insightful advice on pwo nutrtition.

ive been wanting to make that transition from bodybuilding into fitness...that should do the trick.

why cant we get a training guru like dc to post here a little more.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: SWOLETRAIN on November 12, 2006, 02:41:01 PM
My girlfriends mom got hammered out by mike mentzer and she said he smelled like shit. I put that down!


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Ursus on November 12, 2006, 02:44:04 PM
i have bench pressed  5x a week for past month or so. aldo done board pressing and weighted dips and shoulder presses at least 4x a week on bench day for past month. i have gotten much much stronger


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: jmt1 on November 12, 2006, 02:55:42 PM
That is part fallacy as well.

The quote should be corrected to say,

"There is no such thing as overtraining.  Overeating is pointless."

ta, if you wanna see the results of overtraining and undereating protein just take a look in your own mirror.

if you really believe some of the stuff you type here regarding training and nutrtion you are really wasting your time as far as bodybuilding is concerned.

you might wanna focus energy on other areas.

i think you did a great job with your interviews....or if your fight goes off with da and you do well maybe you can get into mma fighting...maybe the ufc.



Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: alexxx on November 12, 2006, 03:00:07 PM
i have bench pressed  5x a week for past month or so. aldo done board pressing and weighted dips and shoulder presses at least 4x a week on bench day for past month. i have gotten much much stronger

Please elaborate. Do you do everything 4-5 times a week or is it a bench press specialization program?


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: nodeal on November 12, 2006, 03:01:17 PM
come on people lets be serious about this. Everybody put your hand on your nut sac, remind yourself youre a man, and train HIT style!!!!!


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Ursus on November 12, 2006, 03:04:39 PM
alexxx here is wat i do per week

bench and board press every day. and i pick a few times a week to throw in 2 squat workout. i dead every day too. and i shoulder press and dip about 4-5 times a week.

i do monday to fri. training for a bench comp. in a month i have added over 10kg to my rep max. probaly closer to 15kg for paused competition reps


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: alexxx on November 12, 2006, 03:12:01 PM
alexxx here is wat i do per week

bench and board press every day. and i pick a few times a week to throw in 2 squat workout. i dead every day too. and i shoulder press and dip about 4-5 times a week.

i do monday to fri. training for a bench comp. in a month i have added over 10kg to my rep max. probaly closer to 15kg for paused competition reps

That is great Goudy. Thanks.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: nodeal on November 12, 2006, 03:24:24 PM
Quote
Is that where I HIT you in the face and you HIT the floor?

youre a pussy...thats based on scientific fact. just like HIT.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: DIVISION on November 12, 2006, 03:46:25 PM
Here's a different, scientific approach to overtraining.

Volume training is not only a waste of time and effort, but is actually counterproductive. You draw from your energy reserves during training. And it doesn't take 5 minutes after your workout to restore the energy that was used up. It takes days. And It's far more important for your body to restore it's energy reserves than it is to use energy for building new muscle tissue because those energy reserves are necessary for survival, while building a 20 inch arm is not.

Imagine each set performed is like digging a hole into your energy reserves. The more sets performed, the deeper the hole and the longer that hole takes to fill up during rest. The first thing your body must do after the workout is not build a mountain, i.e., the new muscle growth on top, but fill the hole you've made below. That is, it must recover, overcome the deficit, compensate for the exhaustive effects of the workout. And so because it takes several days before that hole is filled up, it takes even longer to start building the mountain.

With that in mind, we're able to see just how and why HIT is as effective as it is. When volume is lowered, and energy reserves are spared, we are able to restore our energy reserves faster and enter the muscle building process sooner. Not only do we enter the muscle process sooner, but we also have a greater amount of energy which can be used to build new muscles.

Then there's the issue of intensity. The relationship of training intensity and duration exist on an inverse ratio. You can either train hard or long, but you can't do both. Honestly, I think people on high volume programs simply can't push themselves to the extent of absolute failure. I really do. If you did that, your body would force you to lower volume. And arguments like this is just for people to falsely reassure themselves that their lack of efforts in the gym is working. HA!

HIT is a workout program that was the result of one man's use of of a specific method of thought. One of logic and reasoning. Mike Mentzer was perhaps the greatest bodybuilder of all time. He dedicated his life to making a science out of bodybuilding. And that he did. It's called HIT. And I strongly suggest it.

Volume training works for hardgainers mostly, though it will work for any bodytype who is using enough AAS...

AAS help you recover faster from whatever training you do, thus the more you take, the faster the recovery etc....

Add in GH/Insulin/IGF-1 and you increase that even more.

Hardgainers have it hard when it comes to building mass, but they make up for it with that long endurance sinewy strength.



DIV


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: nodeal on November 12, 2006, 04:04:55 PM
Quote
Show me these studies Einstein.

okok i dont have any you got me. but youre still a pussy and that was the main point i was trying to make.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: chris_mason on November 12, 2006, 04:18:04 PM
For the morons stating that there is no such thing as overtraining I suggest the following:

- Do 20 sets of 10 reps in the squat to failure every day for the next 2 weeks.

When the 2 weeks are up we can then discuss the concept of overtraining and its reality.

 ::)


Training to failure for every body part every workout is self-limiting.  Some body parts (and this can vary individually) can tolerate training to failure every workout quite nicely and even benefit from it.  The balance of body parts require a different approach if we want to maximize our results.

Drugs obviously alter the equation and allow the body to tolerate and benefit from much more volume and intensity of effort.

The self-limiting component of training to failure every workout is probably related to the nervous system.  Complete recovery such that the trainee is able to progress ends up taking a prohibitively long period of time for the advanced trainee (less experienced trainees can get away with more frequent sessions to failure due to the fact they are not strong enough to tax their bodies to the point where recovery demands exceed what the body is capable of).  The recovery period can require upwards of 2 weeks.  This prolonged period of inactivity is not conducive to hypertrophy and quite the opposite can occur.  

There is more but I don't have the time to post it right now.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: alexxx on November 12, 2006, 04:36:50 PM
No. I used to do 20 set squats and those where awesome! You feel great!

Only difference for me with volume training vs DC/HIT type is the soreness I get. I get none with 1 set.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: DIVISION on November 12, 2006, 04:41:19 PM
Is that true in your experience?

I am not a hardgainer....

But a personal trainer friend of mine is and that is the only way he grows......VOLUME TRAINING.




DIV


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Marty Champions on November 12, 2006, 04:43:04 PM
alexxx here is wat i do per week

bench and board press every day. and i pick a few times a week to throw in 2 squat workout. i dead every day too. and i shoulder press and dip about 4-5 times a week.

i do monday to fri. training for a bench comp. in a month i have added over 10kg to my rep max. probaly closer to 15kg for paused competition reps

interesting, this is the way to go. you could do everything 7 days a week but prioritizing certain movments each workout by doing more sets of a particular one


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: chris_mason on November 12, 2006, 04:58:16 PM
What about 20 sets of legs, twice a week.  Is that really so bad?

Not necessarily.  There are many variables. Are those 20 sets taken to failure?  Are those 20 working sets or are you including warm-ups?  Are you switching exercises? 



Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: figgs on November 12, 2006, 05:17:41 PM
For the morons stating that there is no such thing as overtraining I suggest the following:

- Do 20 sets of 10 reps in the squat to failure every day for the next 2 weeks.

When the 2 weeks are up we can then discuss the concept of overtraining and its reality.

 ::)


Training to failure for every body part every workout is self-limiting.  Some body parts (and this can vary individually) can tolerate training to failure every workout quite nicely and even benefit from it.  The balance of body parts require a different approach if we want to maximize our results.

Drugs obviously alter the equation and allow the body to tolerate and benefit from much more volume and intensity of effort.

The self-limiting component of training to failure every workout is probably related to the nervous system.  Complete recovery such that the trainee is able to progress ends up taking a prohibitively long period of time for the advanced trainee (less experienced trainees can get away with more frequent sessions to failure due to the fact they are not strong enough to tax their bodies to the point where recovery demands exceed what the body is capable of).  The recovery period can require upwards of 2 weeks.  This prolonged period of inactivity is not conducive to hypertrophy and quite the opposite can occur.  

There is more but I don't have the time to post it right now.

2-3 sets of squats kills me. Absolute failure with forced reps on squats is insane. I'm not talking about HIT, but just very intensite low volume training.

And HIT is less stressful on the nervous system and overall physical system because of the rest required. I train 30-40 minutes a week. That's juusst fine with my body!


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: nodeal on November 12, 2006, 06:59:58 PM
Quote
So we have to take your word that I'm a pussy. After you claimed to have studies on it?

After claiming such things and not being able to follow through, you word is fairly meaningless. Sorry man. Truth hurts.

ok fine watever man just messing around anyway...but for the record i never claimed to have studies on it


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Army of One on November 12, 2006, 07:03:04 PM
I am not a hardgainer....

But a personal trainer friend of mine is and that is the only way he grows......VOLUME TRAINING.




DIV

A personal trainer friend!!HE sounds LEGIT!!


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: The True Adonis on November 12, 2006, 07:25:32 PM
interesting, this is the way to go. you could do everything 7 days a week but prioritizing certain movments each workout by doing more sets of a particular one

This is what Gravity training is all about.

I train my whole body everyday that I am at the gym subjecting each bodypart to an equal gravitational force.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: what. on November 12, 2006, 07:37:39 PM
Overtraining is bullshit.  The fact is that the only way you can truly achieve your goals is to go balls to the walls and not let up. 

I did a split training routine for my last show consisting of a light weight high rep routine and a heavy weight low rep routine at night.  I never overtrained and recovered easily by taking simple carbs and protein immediately after each workout followed by a solid meal and getting 8 full hours of sleep every night. 


Also, there's too many people skipping vital exercises because they are too hard and try to substitute for crap routines.  When I train legs, I do squats and deadlifts.  When it comes to shoulders, I never forget to do pull-ups.  When I train chest, I always do dips.  There are no substitutes for these vital exercises   

Pull-ups target the back.  Hope this helps dipshit.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: SteelePegasus on November 12, 2006, 08:05:31 PM
Pull-ups target the back.  Hope this helps dipshit.

why confuse Vince with minor details? be happy that he at least pretends to go to the gym....that is a big start for him


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Jr. Yates on November 12, 2006, 08:11:38 PM
Pull-ups target the back.  Hope this helps dipshit.
:-X


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: KTMckay on November 12, 2006, 08:44:24 PM
I believe you can, but the shit aint easy. Its far easier to undereat. Overtraining is a difficult task. i do drop sets, negatives, and all that shit all the damn time and i never fail to grow. pussy flex says you should maybe use these methods oncea month at most. I love drop sets.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: TheEgoCrusher on November 12, 2006, 09:04:29 PM
I think LAZY ASS BASTARDS use the whole "afraid of overtraining" BULLSHIT as an excuse to UNDERTRAIN.

Lazy ass bastards.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Wombat on November 12, 2006, 10:13:49 PM
I think LAZY ASS BASTARDS use the whole "afraid of overtraining" BULLSHIT as an excuse to UNDERTRAIN.

Lazy ass bastards.

I agree with this...


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Wombat on November 12, 2006, 10:20:04 PM
its been written that Tom Platz used to do sets of well over 100repsfor his bodyparts...esp. Quads...Well if im to take a look at Platz's development, i can see that he did not overtrain his legs...If he did, he wouldn't have gotten that much development out of them...But when i look at the rest of his body, to me it looks like he overtrained his upperbody...Why i believe that he get massive up top...

So what works for once muscle group, probably won't work for others....

I don't believe that you can overtrain your legs...The pain barrier will break you down before you could do so IMOP....However with painkillers and what not that the pros of today use, maybe it is possible to overtrain legs..

Olympic sprinters have some very good development training almost everyday...again i believe that the legs can take so much punishment without overtraining them...


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: D-Jay on November 12, 2006, 10:34:01 PM
This is what Gravity training is all about.

I train my whole body everyday that I am at the gym subjecting each bodypart to an equal gravitational force.

You train your whole body each time you work out?  How often do you work out?  Maybe I mis-understood


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: gh15 on November 13, 2006, 03:26:13 AM
What do you guys think about overtraining ?
it seems like everybody nowadays is scared of overtraining, ence the popular way of training 1 bodypart once a week.

now, have you ever seen someone with a bodypart who is totally overpowering his body cause he is training it almost everyday ? I think the answer is yes !
For an example:
-JOJ said he got his traps got huge because he did shrugs at the end of every workout to show off his strenght when he was younger.
if he was training them everyday, he was clearly overtraining them. yet, they got fucking huge

-Weightlifters squat everyday and I have heard that in some countries where the sport is really popular, they train 2 or 3 times a day !
their legs and back are very thick too

IMO, overtraining is the biggest lie ever cause if it was so bad to train a bodypart more than twice a week, those guys would be tiny

discuss


this is the rule of thumb you should go by past the initial 3 year trial and error of natural training:

the less time you spend in the gym the bigger your body and muscles will get.

4-5 times a week 45-60min intense sessions should make  any one grow IF theyre hormonized.

3 times a week 45-60min moderate intensity sessions should make any one grow if they're natural.

*age dependent. 18 year old will grow no matter what he does. 30 year old will not unless follow the rules above.



Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: KTMckay on November 13, 2006, 04:08:28 AM

this is the rule of thumb you should go by past the initial 3 year trial and error of natural training:

the less time you spend in the gym the bigger your body and muscles will get.

4-5 times a week 45-60min intense sessions should make  any one grow IF theyre hormonized.

3 times a week 45-60min moderate intensity sessions should make any one grow if they're natural.

*age dependent. 18 year old will grow no matter what he does. 30 year old will not unless follow the rules above.


i wish my legs would have grown no matter what i did lol...


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: chris_mason on November 13, 2006, 04:44:20 AM
2-3 sets of squats kills me. Absolute failure with forced reps on squats is insane. I'm not talking about HIT, but just very intensite low volume training.

And HIT is less stressful on the nervous system and overall physical system because of the rest required. I train 30-40 minutes a week. That's juusst fine with my body!

HIT is less stressful on the nervous system and overall physical system?  Really?  You base this assertation upon what?

I agree that less work is performed but the intensity of effort required places a huge demand on the body.  Again, this varies with one's overall degree of development. 

Your point about 30-40 minutes is a good one.  One component of training for anyone should be overall fitness and caloric expenditure.  Your heart certainly gets very little work training 30-40 minutes per week.  In addition, you just don't burn many calories with exercise that way. 



Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: BEAST 8692 on November 13, 2006, 05:48:35 AM
HIT is less stressful on the nervous system and overall physical system?  Really?  You base this assertation upon what?

I agree that less work is performed but the intensity of effort required places a huge demand on the body.  Again, this varies with one's overall degree of development. 

Your point about 30-40 minutes is a good one.  One component of training for anyone should be overall fitness and caloric expenditure.  Your heart certainly gets very little work training 30-40 minutes per week.  In addition, you just don't burn many calories with exercise that way. 



i agree with the calorie expenditure part and it is a very good point. i immediately thought of that when uk gold pointed out how he got strong and fat.

most bbers simply eat far too much anyway. it is the first thing a bber is conditioned to do ie gain weight first and foremost. then you read the super calorie, protein, etc diets from the successful guys and that just reinforces the message.

it is a fact that building muscle itself will result in a faster metabolism, but nowhere near fast enough to accomodate the huge caloric intakes these now dedicated consumers of food ingest.

weight trainers eat a lot more than average people. more than we think.

i will relate an experience:

years ago i trained with a skinny guy (friend of mine) who told me he ate shit loads of food and couldn't gain weight.

i was somewhat bewildered because we worked together and witnessed him eating huge feasts whilst i would try to eat fairly clean (try). he was doing weights with me and apparently taking in more calories so what was the problem? faster metabolism? negative.

anyway, life was pretty much partying, girls and sun back then so we ended up renting a house together with some other friends and i then got to witness what this guy ACTUALLY ate throughout the day.

the facts became clear. i ate about 3 TIMES more calories than him and i wasn't trying to gain weight.

yes he would gorge 1 - 3 feasts every day, but he would often miss meals whereas i hadn't gone 4 hrs without a meal since i was 14. unbelievably he would get drunk like everyone else, but HE WOULDN'T BOTHER EATING. hey getting drunk and having fun is one thing, but you're a body builder, EAT SOMETHING!

anyway, y'all should get the point by now.

one of the things i find fascinating about mentzer is that, in spite of being one of the most muscular bbers of his time he ate very average, not even 100 grms of protein when preparing for comp and would contest prep on sometimes 500 calories per day, which would usually just be some cake and fruit and stuff :o where the 500grms of protein.

funny how even when we read this stuff and see the evidence right there we still carry on with the whole 'gotta get my 300grms of protein.'

all that 'eat big to get big' nonsense gets you big all right, big and fat.



a


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: figgs on November 13, 2006, 09:40:06 AM
HIT is less stressful on the nervous system and overall physical system?  Really?  You base this assertation upon what?

I agree that less work is performed but the intensity of effort required places a huge demand on the body.  Again, this varies with one's overall degree of development. 

Your point about 30-40 minutes is a good one.  One component of training for anyone should be overall fitness and caloric expenditure.  Your heart certainly gets very little work training 30-40 minutes per week.  In addition, you just don't burn many calories with exercise that way. 



That's why I do a lot more cardio. With all my time away from the weights, I still go to the gym and swim followed by steam room sessions! I run and bike and keep my diet clean.

HIT is not a fitness routine. It's a muscle size and strength routine. Purely that and nothing else. It's a challenge as well, which is why I love it as much as I do.

i agree with the calorie expenditure part and it is a very good point. i immediately thought of that when uk gold pointed out how he got strong and fat.

most bbers simply eat far too much anyway. it is the first thing a bber is conditioned to do ie gain weight first and foremost. then you read the super calorie, protein, etc diets from the successful guys and that just reinforces the message.

it is a fact that building muscle itself will result in a faster metabolism, but nowhere near fast enough to accomodate the huge caloric intakes these now dedicated consumers of food ingest.

weight trainers eat a lot more than average people. more than we think.

i will relate an experience:

years ago i trained with a skinny guy (friend of mine) who told me he ate shit loads of food and couldn't gain weight.

i was somewhat bewildered because we worked together and witnessed him eating huge feasts whilst i would try to eat fairly clean (try). he was doing weights with me and apparently taking in more calories so what was the problem? faster metabolism? negative.

anyway, life was pretty much partying, girls and sun back then so we ended up renting a house together with some other friends and i then got to witness what this guy ACTUALLY ate throughout the day.

the facts became clear. i ate about 3 TIMES more calories than him and i wasn't trying to gain weight.

yes he would gorge 1 - 3 feasts every day, but he would often miss meals whereas i hadn't gone 4 hrs without a meal since i was 14. unbelievably he would get drunk like everyone else, but HE WOULDN'T BOTHER EATING. hey getting drunk and having fun is one thing, but you're a body builder, EAT SOMETHING!

anyway, y'all should get the point by now.

one of the things i find fascinating about mentzer is that, in spite of being one of the most muscular bbers of his time he ate very average, not even 100 grms of protein when preparing for comp and would contest prep on sometimes 500 calories per day, which would usually just be some cake and fruit and stuff :o where the 500grms of protein.

funny how even when we read this stuff and see the evidence right there we still carry on with the whole 'gotta get my 300grms of protein.'

all that 'eat big to get big' nonsense gets you big all right, big and fat.



a

I learned that Mentzer believed a well balanced diet was all that was required to both function and compensate for the energy depletion following a workout. I believe that to a certain extent. I don't eat over 3,000 clean calories a day. I know bodybuilders who eat 3,500-4,000 so in comparison I'm not a big eater (although I could be!).


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: davie on November 13, 2006, 11:09:27 AM
I have to say i was always a pretty high volume guy, with at least 12-15 sets for big body parts and about 9 for arms/traps.
Im now down to 8 sets for big muscles. I am trying to focus more on the intensity side of things. I think so called hardgainers (guess im kinda one tho i dont like the label and not sure if it 100% exists) need to train very intensely to get their muscles working in order to grow.

One quote i believe from mentzer .... " You can train hard or you can train long. You just cant do both. And it just so happens that it takes hard work to build big muscles."

davie


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: finurface on November 13, 2006, 11:12:13 AM
simply asking
I am no expert but it makes me wondering.

if training 5 times a week is so bad, those guys shouldn't be able to gain mass yet they have incredible tighs and back devolopement
because they are genetically gifted endomorphes or mesomorphes..there s no way a natural ectomorph could build muscles as big training each muscle twice a weak 5 days a week...

do what works better for you.
In my case, Biceps and traps grew like weed, but even if i pound my pectorals, they just doesnt seem to grow as fast as my others muscular groups...genetics...im a pure ectomorph too...


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: The True Adonis on November 13, 2006, 11:14:47 AM
i agree with the calorie expenditure part and it is a very good point. i immediately thought of that when uk gold pointed out how he got strong and fat.

most bbers simply eat far too much anyway. it is the first thing a bber is conditioned to do ie gain weight first and foremost. then you read the super calorie, protein, etc diets from the successful guys and that just reinforces the message.

it is a fact that building muscle itself will result in a faster metabolism, but nowhere near fast enough to accomodate the huge caloric intakes these now dedicated consumers of food ingest.

weight trainers eat a lot more than average people. more than we think.

i will relate an experience:

years ago i trained with a skinny guy (friend of mine) who told me he ate shit loads of food and couldn't gain weight.

i was somewhat bewildered because we worked together and witnessed him eating huge feasts whilst i would try to eat fairly clean (try). he was doing weights with me and apparently taking in more calories so what was the problem? faster metabolism? negative.

anyway, life was pretty much partying, girls and sun back then so we ended up renting a house together with some other friends and i then got to witness what this guy ACTUALLY ate throughout the day.

the facts became clear. i ate about 3 TIMES more calories than him and i wasn't trying to gain weight.

yes he would gorge 1 - 3 feasts every day, but he would often miss meals whereas i hadn't gone 4 hrs without a meal since i was 14. unbelievably he would get drunk like everyone else, but HE WOULDN'T BOTHER EATING. hey getting drunk and having fun is one thing, but you're a body builder, EAT SOMETHING!

anyway, y'all should get the point by now.

one of the things i find fascinating about mentzer is that, in spite of being one of the most muscular bbers of his time he ate very average, not even 100 grms of protein when preparing for comp and would contest prep on sometimes 500 calories per day, which would usually just be some cake and fruit and stuff :o where the 500grms of protein.

funny how even when we read this stuff and see the evidence right there we still carry on with the whole 'gotta get my 300grms of protein.'

all that 'eat big to get big' nonsense gets you big all right, big and fat.



a

Your friend was smart.

Its too easy.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: finurface on November 13, 2006, 11:23:37 AM
its always funny to see skinny ectomorphes who think they re going to get as big as an endomorphe or mesomorphe...they should be realistic..there s a huge gap between their own perception of how they look, what they want to look like, and what mother nature gave em...

Be realistic and be a freak of nature, whatever natures gaves you...If you do your best with what you have, you re going to look great and impressive, even if you re not going to be 300 pounds of sheer muscle mass..

A pure ectomorphe with a ripped and muscular physique, with veins poping from everywhere, is as impressive as an endomorphe who powerlifts and looks like a moutain of muscles.

They re both good at what they re doing, if they do it with passion.

But enough of these ectomorphic skinny 120 lbs idiots who think they re going to weight 300 pounds of pure muscle with bull traps,canon bowls pectorals and shoulders,  25 inches arms and 50 inches thigs...



Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: DIVISION on November 13, 2006, 04:33:44 PM
I switched because I was told I would stop growing that way but when I bulked up from a real skinny weakling to present I used volume so maybe I will go back.  I have to say the gym was more fun in those days too. Back a few years ago I would do 4 sets squat, 4 front squats, 4 leg press, 4 hack squats, 4 leg extensions then go do hamstrings and calves.  Never to failure but I would go pale almost every time.

If you are a hardgainer, and you'd know if you were, volume work is the best way to grow.

Your workout would seem like overtraining to everyone else.

A personal trainer friend!!HE sounds LEGIT!!

He's got four certifications, so he knows what he's doing I'd say.  He's also a hardgainer so he knows what works for him.

I'd hate to be a hardgainer........having to eat non-stop or lose mass.

Those guys have it rough.


DIV


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Bast000 on November 13, 2006, 04:58:00 PM
Certainly there is undereating, but that doesn't mean you should eat a surplus of food.  You will simply add fat.  Eat the right amount to slowly gain weight.  If you gain a pound a week like many try to do, you will gain fat pretty quickly.

For training I simply don't train a muscle if it is still sore.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: sinbad on November 13, 2006, 07:10:37 PM
its always funny to see skinny ectomorphes who think they re going to get as big as an endomorphe or mesomorphe...they should be realistic..there s a huge gap between their own perception of how they look, what they want to look like, and what mother nature gave em...

Be realistic and be a freak of nature, whatever natures gaves you...If you do your best with what you have, you re going to look great and impressive, even if you re not going to be 300 pounds of sheer muscle mass..

A pure ectomorphe with a ripped and muscular physique, with veins poping from everywhere, is as impressive as an endomorphe who powerlifts and looks like a moutain of muscles.

They re both good at what they re doing, if they do it with passion.

But enough of these ectomorphic skinny 120 lbs idiots who think they re going to weight 300 pounds of pure muscle with bull traps,canon bowls pectorals and shoulders,  25 inches arms and 50 inches thigs...



I accepted this all long time ago. I will make the best of what I have.

As for the over training, it is what most somewhat beginners do. I work out 3 days a week for 45 minutes(if I am lucky) and I have the best build of anyone I know. I work out with these fools who come in the gym all hyped up to do something, saying we need to do this and that, work every set to failure, work out 7 days a week. I try and tell them what is up, and they don't listen, I say look at me, and look at yourself, maybe you should listen to me?, they never last gone in a month, then do it again the next year. Consistancy is what gets it done.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: TheGoldenPrince on November 13, 2006, 08:26:45 PM
Actually, overtraining is not a myth, esp as one gets older.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: davie on November 14, 2006, 03:33:02 AM
If you are a hardgainer, and you'd know if you were, volume work is the best way to grow.

Your workout would seem like overtraining to everyone else.

He's got four certifications, so he knows what he's doing I'd say.  He's also a hardgainer so he knows what works for him.

I'd hate to be a hardgainer........having to eat non-stop or lose mass.

Those guys have it rough.


DIV

I think im kinda hardgainer (most of us are a mix of ectom meso...or sum combination), if i dont eat too well/much my weight just stays the same. But increasing weight requires quite alot of food.
Though saying that if i didint have rugby 3 times a week mayb id put on weight alot quicker lol.

I think so called hardgainers need alot of intensity instead of lifting until it starts to get tuff then mving to another exercise. Working until u can hardly lift (after proper warmups) is the way to force ur strength/size levels up!!

guys who gain easier can lift and chat etc and probs still gain if on good diet etc. But hardgainers need to really get every fiber by lifting heavy and with alot of intensity. So i am not really sure high volume is the way to go for hardgainer!!
High volume keeps u in gym too long and anything over an hour starts to be counter productive i feel.
Iv done v high volume, and i find myself lifting harder and harder and reducing sets more and more.

davie


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: GoneAway on November 14, 2006, 04:11:06 AM
I'm an ectomorph and I need alot of food to put on weight, but I don't believe that I'm destined to be a lightweight in BB terms. It may be harder to get bigger, but that's what BBing is.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: Figo on November 14, 2006, 05:49:01 AM
its always funny to see skinny ectomorphes who think they re going to get as big as an endomorphe or mesomorphe...they should be realistic..there s a huge gap between their own perception of how they look, what they want to look like, and what mother nature gave em...

Be realistic and be a freak of nature, whatever natures gaves you...If you do your best with what you have, you re going to look great and impressive, even if you re not going to be 300 pounds of sheer muscle mass..

A pure ectomorphe with a ripped and muscular physique, with veins poping from everywhere, is as impressive as an endomorphe who powerlifts and looks like a moutain of muscles.

They re both good at what they re doing, if they do it with passion.

But enough of these ectomorphic skinny 120 lbs idiots who think they re going to weight 300 pounds of pure muscle with bull traps,canon bowls pectorals and shoulders,  25 inches arms and 50 inches thigs...


I used to think like that, I now realize that I'll never weigh more than 295lbs, and whereas my traps are bull sized, my pecs and delts are like cannon balls, my arms will never go above 24 1/2, and my thighs will never breakthrough 48in...

Its a sad reality, but one that you literally have to live with.

Good post man.


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: BEAST 8692 on November 14, 2006, 08:56:16 AM
I used to think like that, I now realize that I'll never weigh more than 295lbs, and whereas my traps are bull sized, my pecs and delts are like cannon balls, my arms will never go above 24 1/2, and my thighs will never breakthrough 48in...

Its a sad reality, but one that you literally have to live with.

Good post man.

 ;D


Title: Re: Overtraining: bodybuilding's biggest myth ?
Post by: finurface on November 14, 2006, 10:26:05 AM
I used to think like that, I now realize that I'll never weigh more than 295lbs, and whereas my traps are bull sized, my pecs and delts are like cannon balls, my arms will never go above 24 1/2, and my thighs will never breakthrough 48in...

Its a sad reality, but one that you literally have to live with.

Good post man.

teee eeee  ;)