My HIT log

[davie]

Also meant to say that i go from exercise to exercise with no rest apart from walking there and taking a sip of water.

I am curious as to wether an upper/lower split has ever been merged with HIT training??

I no this would b tough on the triceps as there being used with chest and shoulders, and either chest or shoulders might suffer in a workout like this, but i was just curious as to what u thought about.

I am currently doing certain body parts on certain days, but the idea of upper/lower HIT split got me thinking.

davie

[figgs]

Chest: A new cycle begins!

Total training time- 2 minutes

Pec Deck- 70 x 10-12
Incline Press machine- 60 x 10

This workout was pure perfection. I did the reps super slow and went to positive, static, and negative failure. Pure and absolute muscular failure.

When I reached positive failure on the pec deck I held in the peak contraction position for as long as possible until I was forced into lowering. And that I did very slowly. And then my training partner helped my back into the peak contraction and I held once again for a much less amount of time (static failure) and the weight just dropped instead of being a controlled descent (negative failure).

Incline presses done equally slow and I again reached positive, static and negative failure.

Perfection. I'm perfectly content with this workout.

[GoneAway]

Super slow? I thought HIT was about intense workouts; going as fast as you can.

[davie]

Super slow? I thought HIT was about intense workouts; going as fast as you can.

Wen u do static hold on incline press (or any compound move) r u just holding weight above u, like the start/end position for each rep?

HAve u tried the rest/pause yet, finding it good way of getting extra rep or 2 out, so even after u fail on set u can usually get another rep or 2 out witha  rest/pause.

davie

[figgs]

Wen u do static hold on incline press (or any compound move) r u just holding weight above u, like the start/end position for each rep?

HAve u tried the rest/pause yet, finding it good way of getting extra rep or 2 out, so even after u fail on set u can usually get another rep or 2 out witha  rest/pause.

davie

Static holds are meant to be used only during the peak contraction position of a muscle's range of motion. For example, The top position of leg extensions, leg curls and the highest point of a toe raise.

I havn't tried rest-pause yet because I'm still trying to perfect the whole HIT routine.

Super slow? I thought HIT was about intense workouts; going as fast as you can.

NOOO!!! Try both speeds and compare how they feel! Slow is wayyyy more intense!!

[figgs]

Calves, Back and Hams:

Total training time- 10 minutes

Standing calf rises-
160 x 18
drop set
140 x 9

Machine pullovers-
180 x 9
T-bar rows w/out lower back-
70 x 9
Deadlifts-
295 x 8

Lying leg curls-
150 x 9
drop set
140 x 2
drop set
100 x 4

Workout rating- 9 out of 10

I did the impossible and increased the intensity of my calf training. I used super slow reps, forced reps, static holds and negatives. I was happy to notice an increase in my calf strength (FINALLY!!!!) and was doing non-stop torturous reps.
 
My back workout was the same, I used super slow reps, forced reps, static holds and negatives, particularly on pullovers. T-bar rows were great and the deadlifts that followed told me I increased on these as well!

[pumpster]

I did the reps super slow and went to positive, static, and negative failure. Pure and absolute muscular failure.

Same thought-IMO super-slow's not necessarily the best move. Reasoning: the intensity and burn created in this fashion has nothing to do with increasing the load imposed on the muscles-all the pain from super-slow may end up developing a muscle's endurance rather than size.

Therefore it's reasonable to wonder whether this is really worth enduring the additional suffering, vs. pain that can be incurred by handling heavier and heavier loads using the abovementioned post-failure techniques like negative failure, rest-pause, burns, negatives, etc.

Nothing carved in stone, i'm not saying i'm right but others have noticed same: super-slow is very painful but i'm unsure that the pain in this case equates to growth. It might for example, cause the muscles to increase their endurance from all the time under tension, but endurance isn't the goal.

That's completely aside from the fact that super-slow training simply isn't appealing to most, is truly gruelling. That's in addition to the fact that most don't find HIT appealing to begin with-adding super-slow it would seem is ideal only for gluttons for punishment.

[figgs]

Same thought-IMO super-slow's not necessarily the best move. Reasoning: the intensity and burn created in this fashion has nothing to do with increasing the load imposed on the muscles. Therefore it's reasonable to wonder whether this is really worth enduring the additional suffering, vs. pain that can be incurred by handling heavier and heavier loads using the abovementioned post-failure techniques like negative failure, rest-pause, burns, negatives, etc.

Nothing carved in stone, i'm not saying i'm right but others have noticed same: super-slow is very painful but i'm unsure that the pain in this case equates to growth. It might for example, cause the muscles to increase their endurance from all the time under tension, but that's not the goal.

In that case I'm an experimenter. As you know, I'm a masochist in the gym (the more pain the better!), and I can assure you that slow reps are an intensity technique that produces results!

Look at these videos of example HIT training. On most exercises, reps are done very slow. Leg presses, no. Forget about it. That's dangerous and stupid.

[pumpster]

In that case I'm an experimenter. As you know, I'm a masochist in the gym (the more pain the better!), and I can assure you that slow reps are an intensity technique that produces results!

Look at these videos of example HIT training. On most exercises, reps are done very slow. Leg presses, no. Forget about it. That's dangerous and stupid.

Great to experiment. The only caveats:

-Compare a period of super-slow to standard rep speed training, preferably not one right after the other, as the body may aclimate to HIT in general before trying the alternative version.

-HIT's already a niche because it's gruelling. To add super-slow to it is very unusual and just makes it even less appealing to most, even less viable to do let alone to stay on over time, for most.

[pumpster]

Those videos confirm that this is TORTURE that only some can stomach. I can train just as hard but there's something extraordinarily GRUELLING about super-slow that is entirely unappealing. Might work but so would standard rep speed, probably better given that super-slow's going to emphasize slow-twitch endurance fibers. I like the rhythmn & cadence of normal-speed reps, it's part of training that makes it easier to endure.

Those I hope that's not Mentzer there, he looks/sounds like shit.

The super-slow technique was only used by some; Yates didn't use it. Worth trying for some but hard to envision doing this for any length of time.

[figgs]

Don't forget, this video was filmed soon before Mike's death. He and his brother were both sick for a while priod to their death.

HIT is the most unappealing training program I know of. I'm the only crazy mother fucker it appeals to.  It's backed by science and that's all the motivation I need to keep it up.

Slow reps burn and they force you to lighten the lift but I still get progressively stronger while using this method.

[pumpster]

Weeks or months later do same using standard speed, and compare; i'm sure you were planning on it. I'd say don't do it immediately after finishing super-slow, only because the body may be have temporarily exhausted it's ability to grow from the preceeding super-slow training.

Might be better to try the other version either after a week's rest or with standard training in between for a short while.

[pumpster]

HIT is the most unappealing training program I know of. I'm the only crazy mother fucker it appeals to.  It's backed by science and that's all the motivation I need to keep it up.

I'm sure it works; only question's whether it's any better than HIT variations or standard moderate set training that also incorporates some post-failure techniques that are less  exhaustive per set but still very challenging.

[alexxx]

Hey figgs great log I am enjoying it very much. Great posts!

[pumpster]

Hey figgs great log I am enjoying it very much. Great posts!

Great post! 

[alexxx]

Great post! 

You're just bitter Ronnie lost again.

[pumpster]

You're just bitter Ronnie lost again.

Most are just fine with 8 wins. 

[haider]

HIT is the most unappealing training program I know of. I'm the only crazy mother fucker it appeals to.  It's backed by science and that's all the motivation I need to keep it up.
 

keep syain that bro 

[davie]

keep syain that bro 

Without intentionally doing it yesterday i did cable laterals and was static holding at the top (arm parralel to floor) position. that was hard worl, i think i could have been evenmore intense but shoulders are actually kinda sore for the 1st time ever really.

Also i wasnt pre-exhausting back, i did t-bars followed by pulldowns, backs a bit sore but i want it worse than that!! cant really think of any good isolation back moves tho?!

davie

[natural al]

Without intentionally doing it yesterday i did cable laterals and was static holding at the top (arm parralel to floor) position. that was hard worl, i think i could have been evenmore intense but shoulders are actually kinda sore for the 1st time ever really.

Also i wasnt pre-exhausting back, i did t-bars followed by pulldowns, backs a bit sore but i want it worse than that!! cant really think of any good isolation back moves tho?!

davie

pullovers.  The old natilus machine is the best but DB pullovers will work. 

[Lugar]

interesting

[pobrecito]

pullovers.  The old natilus machine is the best but DB pullovers will work. 

what gyms have these pullover machines? Why are they so rare? DB pullovers just feel like crap to me, as well it's very hard to isolate the lats in lieu of the chest and triceps doing a good majority of the work

[pumpster]

what gyms have these pullover machines? Why are they so rare? DB pullovers just feel like crap to me, as well it's very hard to isolate the lats in lieu of the chest and triceps doing a good majority of the work

The Nautilus versions are somewhat rare because they were introduced 30 years ago in many cases, aren't part of modern gyms with relatively new equipment. Usually found in long-time old gyms, like YMCAs. Newer versions made by other companies like Hammer are also good.

There is an option for pubes: do decline pullovers, which are better than the standard version, or better still and very similar to machine pullovers, use ab straps. The kind used for vertical leg lifts-keep the arms in and pull UP, using a pullover motion. Very similar to a pullover machine, takes the arms out of the equation. Can be done using either a chin up bar or attached to a lat pulley.

[pobrecito]

The one Yates has in Temple Gym is one of the original Nautilis ones....but I saw on their website they are about $5500 so that explains why I've never seen one

Oh, and what's up with the "pubes" shit? Try and keep that immaturity in the truce thread

[natural al]

The Nautilus versions are somewhat rare because they were introduced 30 years ago in many cases, aren't part of modern gyms with relatively new equipment. Usually found in long-time old gyms, like YMCAs. Newer versions made by other companies like Hammer are also good.

There is an option for pubes: do decline pullovers, which are better than the standard version, or better still and very similar to machine pullovers, use ab straps. The kind used for vertical leg lifts-keep the arms in and pull UP, using a pullover motion. Very similar to a pullover machine, takes the arms out of the equation.

I have about 3 gyms locally that have the naut. versions...seems like that's the only piece of the old naut equipment that is still around which is a shame cause it's great stuff.  I heard they have a lawsuit againts them over something regarding all that old equipement that's why it's so rare.  The hammer version is ok but not the same.  I used to work extensively with pullover machines back in the early 90's and they were great for lat work.