Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
April 24, 2014, 12:25:04 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Interview with HIT proponent Gordon LaVelle  (Read 1085 times)
stevefdl
Getbig I
*
Gender: Male
Posts: 11


Bee in my Bonnet


View Profile WWW
« on: September 13, 2009, 06:32:27 AM »

I recently wrapped up an interview with a proponent of High Intensity Training (HIT), Gordon LaVelle. I wanted to share a few of Gordon's thoughts. Gordon is a published HIT author (Training for Mass), and has articles on BB.com as well.

Gordona LaVelle's approach to HIT looks more like a Dorian Yates style workout then a Mike Mentzer workout.

Interview with Gordon LaVelle

Please understand that these are not my words or views. I interview a wide spectrum of lifters, from Powerlifting fed presidents to natural Mr. Olympians.

----------------------------------------------------------



Quotes from the Interview, Part 1.....

"The big change came in the mid-to-late 80ís when I read an interview of Mike Mentzer in one of the bodybuilding magazines. I canít recall which magazine it was. Of course he didnít outline the entire high-intensity training theory in the interview, but he mentioned a few reasons why a single set, performed with the highest level of intensity, will produce the same or better results than the typical volume-oriented bodybuilding workout. His rationale was too compelling for me to ignore. As a result, I began to ease into it. Because I had gotten decent results from doing lots of sets, I had a hard time letting go of that approach."

"I definitely belong more to the Yates school. His resembled more of a traditional bodybuilding workout: visiting the gym several times per week, training a few body parts each day, and performing two or more exercises per part."

"I seem to recall someone mentioning that HIT was put forth as a ripoff money-making scheme, and nothing more. I donít know where this big flow of money is, and I donít seem to recall ever spending any money on any HIT-related enterprise. I had a Mentzer book once that someone loaned me. As for my own book, I wrote it not expecting to make a red cent. What Iíve gotten out of using HIT, however, has been of immeasurable value: Better results, in less time, with no burnout and no injury."

"One thing you want to do with HIT is make each and every set as difficult as possible. You can accomplish this without using excessively heavy weights. Going slow and making every rep count, really feeling the weight, is important. If I were to name a single most-important beyond-failure technique, Iím inclined to say a slow negative rep at the end of a set."

"Regarding HITís detractors, the majority do not even know what the theory is. They just know theyíre against it. This makes the whole issue rather interesting. For example, Iíd be willing to bet most of these people couldnít describe what string theory is either. But you probably donít see them in Internet forums, railing against string theory and calling its supporters names. So obviously this touches a nerve. But why? No one is forcing them to do it. If someone goes in the gym, trains a certain way, and gets a certain result, why would you even care?"
Report to moderator   Logged

B
Moen
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 2868

Getbig!


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: September 13, 2009, 10:50:30 AM »



First HIT guy that is this big (with yates obv)
Report to moderator   Logged
pumpster
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 18897

If you're reading this you have too much free time


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: September 13, 2009, 12:15:43 PM »

Good reading.

I think with HIT you have to tweak to your own temperment-I like the idea of the Yates version then i would also prefer hitting a muscle twice weekly, which they don't do. So it's worth trying variations to find what works.

Essentially i've evolved in to something of a modified HIT routine now, i find it more efficient.

Just consder volume and intensity as polar opposites on a continuum, that work in inverse proportions-the greater the intensity applied to each set, the less sets are required. I don't like the extreme intensity required of classic HIT and find it hard to put all the neeed work in to one set (and probably same with Yates) so instead spread out the work over a few more sets while applying intensity that is in between volume and classic HIT-much higher intensity than volume and less extreme than one-set classic HIT.
Report to moderator   Logged
slaveboy1980
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Female
Posts: 8415


Thought is the arrow of time; memory never fades.


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: September 13, 2009, 03:07:05 PM »

I recently wrapped up an interview with a proponent of High Intensity Training (HIT), Gordon LaVelle. I wanted to share a few of Gordon's thoughts. Gordon is a published HIT author (Training for Mass), and has articles on BB.com as well.

Gordona LaVelle's approach to HIT looks more like a Dorian Yates style workout then a Mike Mentzer workout.

Interview with Gordon LaVelle

Please understand that these are not my words or views. I interview a wide spectrum of lifters, from Powerlifting fed presidents to natural Mr. Olympians.

----------------------------------------------------------



Quotes from the Interview, Part 1.....

"The big change came in the mid-to-late 80ís when I read an interview of Mike Mentzer in one of the bodybuilding magazines. I canít recall which magazine it was. Of course he didnít outline the entire high-intensity training theory in the interview, but he mentioned a few reasons why a single set, performed with the highest level of intensity, will produce the same or better results than the typical volume-oriented bodybuilding workout. His rationale was too compelling for me to ignore. As a result, I began to ease into it. Because I had gotten decent results from doing lots of sets, I had a hard time letting go of that approach."

"I definitely belong more to the Yates school. His resembled more of a traditional bodybuilding workout: visiting the gym several times per week, training a few body parts each day, and performing two or more exercises per part."

"I seem to recall someone mentioning that HIT was put forth as a ripoff money-making scheme, and nothing more. I donít know where this big flow of money is, and I donít seem to recall ever spending any money on any HIT-related enterprise. I had a Mentzer book once that someone loaned me. As for my own book, I wrote it not expecting to make a red cent. What Iíve gotten out of using HIT, however, has been of immeasurable value: Better results, in less time, with no burnout and no injury."

"One thing you want to do with HIT is make each and every set as difficult as possible. You can accomplish this without using excessively heavy weights. Going slow and making every rep count, really feeling the weight, is important. If I were to name a single most-important beyond-failure technique, Iím inclined to say a slow negative rep at the end of a set."

"Regarding HITís detractors, the majority do not even know what the theory is. They just know theyíre against it. This makes the whole issue rather interesting. For example, Iíd be willing to bet most of these people couldnít describe what string theory is either. But you probably donít see them in Internet forums, railing against string theory and calling its supporters names. So obviously this touches a nerve. But why? No one is forcing them to do it. If someone goes in the gym, trains a certain way, and gets a certain result, why would you even care?"

lol...
Report to moderator   Logged
slaveboy1980
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Female
Posts: 8415


Thought is the arrow of time; memory never fades.


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: September 13, 2009, 03:17:08 PM »

alot of bullshit..i read the interview in the link and if you actually look at the 'science behind' (lol) HIT (in its extreme forms...) it is def not supported by studies.

i could go on but i have had this discussion 100s of times so can't be bothered to destroy this drug user, who doesnt know jack shit about the scientific studies he is talking about.

now..let me say im no 'high volume' advocate...but the extreme 'HITters' are full of shit.
Report to moderator   Logged
dyslexic
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 7133


baddoggy


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: September 13, 2009, 04:02:43 PM »

Why does the word "dogmatic" come to mind?
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!