Open letter to HIT believers, hardgainers, etc. Seminar.

[Vince B]

I can see there are not many students of hypertrophy here. It is so easy to laugh and dismiss others instead of contributing to some progress in bodybuilding. The arrival of stacking in drug protocols ended hypertrophy theory for the most part. I have no idea what drugs Sergio was using and what contributed what. However, he never again duplicated the size he had when working with Arthur. So I credit Arthur, his methods and machines with generating more hypertrophy in one of the giants of all time. That is no mean feat.

If we look at many of the top guys we discover that they cannot sustain huge size for long and if they take a long break they can not duplicate the former size they had. I give you Dilette and Sonbaty. We have more to learn about androgen receptors and such. Somewhere, somehow natural bodybuilding overlaps with open bodybuilding. At the moment no one has a clue about what is possible naturally. As soon as most guys reach a peak or come into contact with others who are larger they adopt the current practices and abandon natural training. What a pity that is.

Sometimes it is a matter of beliefs and I wonder how solid our theories of hypertrophy are. Oh, it is far easier to criticize theories than to present true ones. What bothers me is that the very process is now discouraged and ridiculed. Who would have thought that would even happen to bodybuilding?

[McFarland]

I can see there are not many students of hypertrophy here. It is so easy to laugh and dismiss others instead of contributing to some progress in bodybuilding. The arrival of stacking in drug protocols ended hypertrophy theory for the most part. I have no idea what drugs Sergio was using and what contributed what. However, he never again duplicated the size he had when working with Arthur. So I credit Arthur, his methods and machines with generating more hypertrophy in one of the giants of all time. That is no mean feat.

If we look at many of the top guys we discover that they cannot sustain huge size for long and if they take a long break they can not duplicate the former size they had. I give you Dilette and Sonbaty. We have more to learn about androgen receptors and such. Somewhere, somehow natural bodybuilding overlaps with open bodybuilding. At the moment no one has a clue about what is possible naturally. As soon as most guys reach a peak or come into contact with others who are larger they adopt the current practices and abandon natural training. What a pity that is.

Sometimes it is a matter of beliefs and I wonder how solid our theories of hypertrophy are. Oh, it is far easier to criticize theories than to present true ones. What bothers me is that the very process is now discouraged and ridiculed. Who would have thought that would even happen to bodybuilding?

Vince I'm not so sure you should focus so much of your time and energy on trying to find a better way to look like you're on drugs when you're natural if you haven't even come close to having taken your natural training to the limit.  BTW, do you even claim to be a lifetime natural?

[Vince B]

To obtain maximum hypertrophy you cannot put it down to simple numbers. There might be an equation that indicates what to do but it would be progressive and complex. I suspect we are talking about a geometric process or part of one. That might explain why Sergio required someone to push him beyond what he was able to do on his own. We have to salute Larry Scott who built magnificent arms in 1965 that even today are remarkable. What he found to generate that growth is also part of the field theory of hypertrophy.

It isn't about sets and reps so don't ask for that. All training can be described in sets and reps but in maximum hypertrophy training the goal is the key and triggering further growth requires effort, novelty, persistence and precision. It is hardly a simple or easy thing to do. Those who insist I spell out this theory have no idea about what I am talking about.

Question to students of hypertrophy. What do we make of the animal studies that generated hypertrophy? Are they essential and required knowledge or are they irrelevant or mostly so? Does hyperplasia occur? What exactly is DOMS and why does it happen?

The main thing Adonis and I have in common is that we are both students of hypertrophy.

[dr.chimps]

Vince, I have gone through this thread and your posts and I see three common strands:

1) drugs have ruined bb, and, for you, halted any substantial research into 'hypertrophy'

2) everybody responds differently to training -ie. we all individuals (intone like 'Life of Brian'    )

3) you don't really have any more 'real' answers than many of the 'experts' or some of the better versed members of Getbig who are trashing you, rightly so, for hinting that you do

Maybe instead of looking for absolutes, you could enjoy some of the relative pleasures that working out bring?  Make an improvement here or there, always looking to improve somehow, rather than trying to re-invent the wheel. 

[SteelePegasus]

Vince, no one is being critical of you. Personally I enjoy this kind of discussion.  

but....have you ever had an uncle or older relative that would stare off into the yonder and about matters that seemed distant? almost like he is talking to someone that is not there. He would rehash stories of past glories, wars and experiences. Some of it true but alot of he probably saw while watching MASH. Vince my friend with the pink workout machine you have now become that person


The children gathered at your feet are now looking at each with other puzzled looks. Asking "is he asleep or dead"? Then the old guy farts and the kids runaway and seeking exciting stimuli elsewhere.


I prefered your thread where you were trying to get a shag..that is getting creepy..please don't fart

[McFarland]

To obtain maximum hypertrophy you cannot put it down to simple numbers.

Question to students of hypertrophy. What do we make of the animal studies that generated hypertrophy? Are they essential and required knowledge or are they irrelevant or mostly so? Does hyperplasia occur? What exactly is DOMS and why does it happen?

To what degree of size have these animals hypertrophied in these studies (that I'm presuming didn't involve drugs or gene mutation, if your premise is sound) that you keep referencing?  

[Vince B]

I am confident I can exceed previous muscle size at my age and naturally. It would be interesting to see what others could do who have less injuries and tenderness in joints. The sky is the limit. I doubt many are crazy enough to do what I suggest. My ideas are so unusual I get called crazy and an idiot when I post them. If others insist on using what they think is true about training then they will never be able to accept new ideas. Clearly most theories are false in science and this is also true about something as pedestrian as bodybuilding. Has anyone ever wondered why we are still discussing and arguing this very subject? Grown men are still debating hypertrophy theory endlessly on line and this will continue until someone comes up with the true theory of hypertrophy. So far no one has done that. Sceptics clearly know that. It takes an accident or unusual experience to abandon pet theories and beliefs. I can assure you that is required before you can appreciate the requirements of maximum hypertrophy training.

I could prove my theory in three months. By then I would know if it is true or not or partly so. If I can do this at 64 and without drugs or supplements that would be something newsworthy in the Irongame.

[Vince B]

The experiments with fowl are interesting for hypertrophy. Dr Antonio was able to generate a 300% increase in one muscle in 30 days. That is phenomenal. What might be possible in humans if they used that research to base protocols on?

It is 4 am here in Sydney and I am off to bed. See you lads later.

[SteelePegasus]

Vince, let me save you some stress. At your age, no one will fault for getting in a good HRT. Actually we would very happy for you.

[Army of One]

I am confident I can exceed previous muscle size at my age and naturally. It would be interesting to see what others could do who have less injuries and tenderness in joints. The sky is the limit. I doubt many are crazy enough to do what I suggest. My ideas are so unusual I get called crazy and an idiot when I post them. If others insist on using what they think is true about training then they will never be able to accept new ideas. Clearly most theories are false in science and this is also true about something as pedestrian as bodybuilding. Has anyone ever wondered why we are still discussing and arguing this very subject? Grown men are still debating hypertrophy theory endlessly on line and this will continue until someone comes up with the true theory of hypertrophy. So far no one has done that. Sceptics clearly know that. It takes an accident or unusual experience to abandon pet theories and beliefs. I can assure you that is required before you can appreciate the requirements of maximum hypertrophy training.

I could prove my theory in three months. By then I would know if it is true or not or partly so. If I can do this at 64 and without drugs or supplements that would be something newsworthy in the Irongame.

You are typing long rambling Paragraphs which basically reveal nothing, just stating we dont know how Hypertrophy occurs in an as many different ways as you can.The only hint you have given to your theory, is it takes a driven, goal setting, willing to mix styles and not shy to push himself to the limits person to build muscle, we didnt know this already?

[McFarland]

I am confident I can exceed previous muscle size at my age and naturally. It would be interesting to see what others could do who have less injuries and tenderness in joints. The sky is the limit. I doubt many are crazy enough to do what I suggest. My ideas are so unusual I get called crazy and an idiot when I post them. If others insist on using what they think is true about training then they will never be able to accept new ideas. Clearly most theories are false in science and this is also true about something as pedestrian as bodybuilding. Has anyone ever wondered why we are still discussing and arguing this very subject? Grown men are still debating hypertrophy theory endlessly on line and this will continue until someone comes up with the true theory of hypertrophy. So far no one has done that. Sceptics clearly know that. It takes an accident or unusual experience to abandon pet theories and beliefs. I can assure you that is required before you can appreciate the requirements of maximum hypertrophy training.

I could prove my theory in three months. By then I would know if it is true or not or partly so. If I can do this at 64 and without drugs or supplements that would be something newsworthy in the Irongame.

Make yourself look better than you do now over the next 3 months and then come back and tell us how you did it.  If your list of new behaviors employed doesn't include 1) an increase or decrease in calories, 2) a change in exogenous hormone manipulation, or 3) greater intensity, volume, or frequency used during your training, we will be surprised.  If you come to look better than you do now by training less frequently, with less intensity, and/or with less volume than you have performed over the last 3 months, we'll be somewhat more than surprised.

If you tell us you painted your pink weight machine blue we'll probably deem that highly irrelevant to whatever physique changes you achieve.    

[McFarland]

The experiments with fowl are interesting for hypertrophy. Dr Antonio was able to generate a 300% increase in one muscle in 30 days. That is phenomenal. What might be possible in humans if they used that research to base protocols on?

It is 4 am here in Sydney and I am off to bed. See you lads later.

Was that a 300% increase in size, weight, or strength of the bird's muscle?  Did this size increase come with a decrease in the size of any of the other muscles had by the bird?   

[Hedgehog]

My ideas are so unusual I get called crazy and an idiot when I post them. If others insist on using what they think is true about training then they will never be able to accept new ideas.

How would you know that?

To my knowledge, you still haven't posted any training layout or suggestion for anyone to try, I believe you once three years ago mentioned doing ten sets of heavy reverse grip pulldowns, but that was about it, that was just an example of one excersise then?

Post a layout. I doubt nobody will call you an idiot, but rather will be glad that you finally explained what kind of workouts you are EXPERIMENTING with right now.

That could also be a way for you to get your point through:

Tell us how your workouts have changed since the 70's, briefly of course. Mostly focusing in on the last few years, and the different layouts that you've used that are the result of your DOMS theory.

Basile, I sincerly believe it's a failure to communicate. Nothing more.

Try using the method of posting the history of your DOMS related training layouts, and what you discovered, what parts you kept, and what parts of those workouts you disclosed.

Good luck.

YIP
Zack

[voiceofreason]

2) everybody responds differently to training -ie. we all individuals (intone like 'Life of Brian'    )

I'm not

[Hedgehog]

I'd like to hear him elaborate on how steroids have ruined bodybuilding any moreso than they've helped create it.     

It's simple really.

Instead of forcing the bodybuilders to develop the best possible training methods, steroids allowed for enormous mass gains with the same level of knowledge on training as previously.

If you would look at some of the strength feats at the ancient Greek Olympics, you would be surprised to see the power displayed. An athlete named Bybon, lifted a 315 lbs stone above his head.

With one hand.



Strength training hasn't developed much.

The steroids are paralysing the world of sport, instead of improving it. I won't mention names, but I wouldn't call anyone a great mind, as far as training goes, if his success is with clients that are on the juice.

Take out the drugs of the equation, and you are left with only training, mental training, nutrition and rest.

That way, you are forced to take the training methods to a higher level, instead of upping the dosage.

I know a guy who competed in NOC recently, and didn't do all that well, he shared with the board earlier this year, that he upped the dosage in order to improve.

What if there would not have been any drugs. Then the only thing he could have improved on, was the other parameters.

You get the picture.

This is not really about drugs being bad for the health, or whatever.

It's how they have paralysed the evolution of training systems.

I urge you to look up the training protocols of the Ukraine powerlifters. The Russians. The Bulgarians.

All these protocols relies on drug use. The Bulgarians have tried to find a natural version of their 18 workouts/week protocol. It's currently 8 workouts a week.

But it's still a protocol based on faulty premises.

It's originally made to fit drug users. The Bulgarians still don't really have no idea of what is optimal for the natural trainer.

YIP
Zack

[pumpster]

One fact that cannot be disputed is that Arthur Jones helped generate additional size on already huge Sergio Oliva. So, what Arthur said cannot easily be dismissed. That success has to be part of the true hypertrophy theory. What a pity Sergio didn't return to train with Arthur and see how big he could have become.

Jones' training of Oliva was the most beneficial of his career; Oliva said he later regretted that he didn't continue with it.

The only problem with Jones' training is that it's difficult to discern which factors contributed the most. That is assuming that they can be split up:

1/ The machines-Oliva said they were more effective than free weights, which the majority on most BB sites don't get.

2/ HIT

3/ The fact that someone was pushing him beyond his normal limits.

[dr.chimps]

I'm not

Shut up, you. 

[davie]

Arthur jones traiing he did with casey viator would almost be fun to try but apparently u have to have access to nautilus machines that can be used (e.g.) for flys then bench press.

If this workout style was as effective using say pek dek then bench press, then it might b worth trying.

davie

[McFarland]

It's simple really.

Instead of forcing the bodybuilders to develop the best possible training methods, steroids allowed for enormous mass gains with the same level of knowledge on training as previously.

If you would look at some of the strength feats at the ancient Greek Olympics, you would be surprised to see the power displayed. An athlete named Bybon, lifted a 315 lbs stone above his head.

With one hand.



Strength training hasn't developed much.

The steroids are paralysing the world of sport, instead of improving it. I won't mention names, but I wouldn't call anyone a great mind, as far as training goes, if his success is with clients that are on the juice.

Take out the drugs of the equation, and you are left with only training, mental training, nutrition and rest.

That way, you are forced to take the training methods to a higher level, instead of upping the dosage.

I know a guy who competed in NOC recently, and didn't do all that well, he shared with the board earlier this year, that he upped the dosage in order to improve.

What if there would not have been any drugs. Then the only thing he could have improved on, was the other parameters.

You get the picture.

This is not really about drugs being bad for the health, or whatever.

It's how they have paralysed the evolution of training systems.

I urge you to look up the training protocols of the Ukraine powerlifters. The Russians. The Bulgarians.

All these protocols relies on drug use. The Bulgarians have tried to find a natural version of their 18 workouts/week protocol. It's currently 8 workouts a week.

But it's still a protocol based on faulty premises.

It's originally made to fit drug users. The Bulgarians still don't really have no idea of what is optimal for the natural trainer.

YIP
Zack

So you're saying that there's no better way you can think of for Vince Basile to impress the world than by having honed an ability to pick up heavy rocks overhead without the use of drugs.  Interesting.  How often do you advise this to others?        

[McFarland]

That looks like a big rock, though.  The guy lifting that without drugs must be hella strong.   

[The True Adonis]

Gravity Training is the most efficient way to train.

[McFarland]

Gravity Training is the most efficient way to train.

Well, yeah, I guess gravity does play a part, Adam.   

[pumpster]

Arthur jones traiing he did with casey viator would almost be fun to try

Supposedly they have to carry the trainee from one machine to the next; throwing up is common. Eventually they get used to it.

[SteelePegasus]

Arthur jones traiing he did with casey viator would almost be fun to try but apparently u have to have access to nautilus machines that can be used (e.g.) for flys then bench press.

If this workout style was as effective using say pek dek then bench press, then it might b worth trying.

davie

the idea of using the pec dek is to pre-exhaust the chest thus taking the triceps out of the equations.  The downside being that you obviously won't be able to go as heavy.

why not use the smith machine?

[Hedgehog]

So you're saying that there's no better way you can think of for Vince Basile to impress the world than by having honed an ability to pick up heavy rocks overhead without the use of drugs.  Interesting.  How often do you advise this to others?       

No. That's not what I am saying.

Firstly, I am not trying to make any case for Basile.

Secondly, re-read my post.

Instead of forcing the bodybuilders to develop the best possible training methods, steroids allowed for enormous mass gains with the same level of knowledge on training as previously.

The example with the stone lift, was an attempt to show that training hasn't developed all that much in 1500 years.

Sorry for confusing you mate.

Hope this clears things up?

To sum it up in ONE sentence:

I believe drugs have prevented bodybuilders from developed optimal training methods.

YIP
Zack