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

[Max_Rep]

Well said Vince,

Max_Rep should know that the details of Arthur Jones training Sergio are a matter of record... many witnesses have attested to the nature of the training involved.

Max_Rep's post IS completely dishonest: it's a cut and paste job from an old interview Sergio gave in which Sergio's answers have been taken out of context and replaced with answers to different questions.

Sergio made the point in that interview that he trained very high volume with lots of partial reps till he went down to Deland, Florida... With Arthur Jones, Sergio trained exclusively HIT style and achieved what he himself considered his best ever physique.

If you'd read the entire interview you would also note that Sergio credits HIT with being THE most effective training method that he ever used... if memory serves, I remember Sergio also pointed out that the biggest regret of his bodybuilding career was not sticking with Arthur Jones and eclipsing Arnold completely... I also remeber that Sergio said he utilised Arthur's HIT techniques in his free weight workouts when he returned to training on his own... (although he did admit having to slightly increase the volume to compensate for the lack of equipment).

What Arthur Jones managed to do was greatly improve the physiqes of steroid using volume trainers with brief, infrequent, high intensity workouts... Ellington Darden (www.drdarden.com) has been doing the same with scores of natural trainees for decades now.

To my knowledge no one has ever managed to improve the physique of a dedicated HIT advocate via volume training. That should tell us something.

For the record, the vast majority of heavily muscled (relatively speaking) naturals are HIT trainers (the rest are low volume higher intensity types)... I can't think of a single notable natural volume trainer... that should also tell us something.
 
The Luke

Sorry boys but the accounts of Sergio's workouts with Jones that we ALL read about in the 70's were Jones's accounts. The interview I posted from can be found in the September 2002 issue of IM. I posted Q & A directly from the interview without alteration. Of course I did not post the entire interview as it is much to long for this forum. If it is inaccurate then the interviewer "The Sandwich" or Sergio is responsible for those inaccuracies. What reason would I have to alter them?

I find it quite funny that you take Jones so much at his word. We all read the stories of Sergio's workouts with Casey and how Sergio didn't make it through the workouts. What we don't know with any degree of accuracy was how long Sergio followed those workouts until he went back to his own volume training. Weeks? Months?

We all know that a few weeks on any new program will bring about a new growth spurt. To say that Jones was solely responsible for Sergio's growth is to leave out several unknown factors.

[TheGoldenPrince]

All the training conjecture in the world doesn't mean a damn w/o the right nutrition. A whole encyclopedia could be writen concerning this subject. Your thoughts Vince with regard to this critical aspect of BB?

[Vince B]

If you study nutrition textbooks written for graduate students in nutrition then that should be sufficient to address nutritional concerns. The research by supplement companies is suspect to say the least. I guess bodybuilders who are not growing (which is just about everyone) doesn't want to think he is not getting enough protein, etc. The protein requirement is still controversial but I am on record as saying that bodybuilders ingest perhaps 3 times more protein that they need. The rest gets converted to energy and that is a complete travesty of resources in our world.

The theories about nutrition are endlessly ridiculous. In my opinion there is more nonsense than knowledge out there.

The formula is simple: Adequate nutrition + Training stimulus = possible hypertrophy

If you are not growing and ingest enough energy they your training stimulus is inadequate. I can't make it any simpler than that.

[MonstaDwarf]

use the chaos theory....

[Max_Rep]

You keep mentioning Larry Scott.  Now I don't know what principles Larry Scott has developed or used successfully but what I do know is I watched a Larry Scott training video once and it was one of the funniest things I have seen.  He was doing these exercises that looked ridiculous and half the time he couldn't even demonstrate them properly to the training camp in the video.  And when the training camp tried to mimic his movements you could tell they felt awkward and were getting no benefit from the weird exercise form.  He did a bizzare form of pullup and other weird movements, no movement was done conventionally, not even a flat bench press.  He did things like inverted chest flyes using handles attached to chains hanging from the ceiling.  He couldn't even maintain his balance while performing the movement and literally fell down half the time.  I watched the tape mostly for entertainment purposes and didn't glean anything useful from it.  You couldn't workout like Larry Scott in a normal gym because normal gyms don't have chains hanging from the ceiling etc.  Please tell me that somebody else here has seen this tape and can vouch for what I said above because I know it sounds bizarre. I only wish I still had the tape so I could upload it to YouTube.

I have the same 2-tape series and picked up several good tips from it. Of course his performance on exercises was unconventional. They were what Vince Gironda and Larry worked up. To bad you looked at it with so much skepticism because you missed some valuable tips. I looked for what I could learn and not what looked like everything else I’ve seen.

I think Vince is not talking about specific exercise perfomance but Larry's "Bio Phase" training method.

[TheGoldenPrince]

If you study nutrition textbooks written for graduate students in nutrition then that should be sufficient to address nutritional concerns. The research by supplement companies is suspect to say the least. I guess bodybuilders who are not growing (which is just about everyone) doesn't want to think he is not getting enough protein, etc. The protein requirement is still controversial but I am on record as saying that bodybuilders ingest perhaps 3 times more protein that they need. The rest gets converted to energy and that is a complete travesty of resources in our world.

The theories about nutrition are endlessly ridiculous. In my opinion there is more nonsense than knowledge out there.

The formula is simple: Adequate nutrition + Training stimulus = possible hypertrophy

If you are not growing and ingest enough energy they your training stimulus is inadequate. I can't make it any simpler than that.

What would you consider to be adequate nutrition? Like I said, whole tomes would be written on the topic...

[Vince B]

Larry Scott is probably the best bodybuilding technologist out there. He has analyzed exercises and come up with better and more effective ways to isolate and target muscles. It may be difficult to transmit that information outside the gym but if you were to spend time with Larry you would soon know that he is an expert. His methods of inducing pain in the muscles are second to none. His methods work. When comparing HIT to Scott training then Scott wins hands down.

Max Rep should realize that some of us have lived through the Jones era. We were all amazed that Sergio gained while training with Arthur. That is not something anyone can dismiss. A huge guy gets bigger with brief, intense training. We didn't buy the Colorado experiment involving Casey Viator. The Oliva gains were significant. Sergio was reported to have said he didn't have access to Nautilus machines when he returned to Chicago. I suppose the missing element that made the difference was Jones himself. The machines probably are not crucial. However, the way he made Sergio train is probably what was responsible for that growth. It wasn't classic HIT either but a modified method that resembled conventional training but doing the Scott thing of not resting much between sets.

If you want us to reread that interview then post a link to that discussion. Some of us are capable of reading long interviews and even books!

It is easy to be mistaken about matters of fact. If you misrepresented statements in an interview then correct your points and move on. Trying to defend the indefensible aggravates an already dismal position.

[Vince B]

When you are growing you have to eat enough so that you weigh more every single day. That is the requirement. Have a balanced diet and you will be fine. It hardly matters where those calories are coming from. You can have a junk diet but there is no such thing as a junk food. Well, unless you call mushrooms a food. Also, diet drinks have no nutritional value that I can think of except the water. Either a substance is food or it is junk. It cannot be both.

[Vince B]

There is enough information posted in this thread and the links to articles that is sufficient to guess what my method would be like. There is no need to actually post what it is. If you cannot see this then that is too bad. No one told me anything about training or nutrition or posing when I was bodybuilding. I had to find everything out by reading or trial and error. It is sufficient that it is possible to get huge naturally and without taking any supplements or much protein. Giving actual protocols and exercises is not going to inform anyone at all. The research is out there. The theories are out there. Find them and apply them and see what happens.

[The Luke]

Max_Rep,

You need to re-read that interview... the marathon training Sergio describes is what he did BEFORE training with Arthur Jones. It's pointless to take a excerpt from an interview out of context... it's absolutely reprehensible to change the context of someones statement in order that it supports your argument. You, my friend are guilty of the latter.

The Luke

[Max_Rep]

Max_Rep,

You need to re-read that interview... the marathon training Sergio describes is what he did BEFORE training with Arthur Jones. It's pointless to take a excerpt from an interview out of context... it's absolutely reprehensible to change the context of someones statement in order that it supports your argument. You, my friend are guilty of the latter.

The Luke

No Luke you need to re-read it. I took NOTHING out of context. It is NOT the same interview posted all over the internet of Sergio and Brian Johnston. I posted it exactly
as it was stated without alteration of context (the sections which I did post we unaltered but as I said I did not post the entire interview) and it is YOU who is reprehensible to suggest that I changed the context.  The interview is the interview. It says what it says. I reported what it says and you disagree with that so you accuse me of altering it? I'll make a note of that. Only select people get to call me a freind. Don't accuse me of dishonestly and then suggest that you are in that select category. Again... what reason would I have to alter what was printed?

Now my point was this. We all know that Sergio used high volume BEFORE Jones. We also know he went back to high volume AFTER Jones. This has also been verified by several witnesses. What we don't know is how long he followed Jones workouts and we don't know if he went back to volume before his competitions. Was it weeks, or months. If Jones workouts were so successful for him and altered his physique so much for the better why would he go back to volume? That would be like saying I’ve driven the Ferrari and I want my Yugo back! Makes one stop and think, doesn’t it?  THAT is why I'm skeptical about offering Jones credit for Sergio's progress. It’s not because I doubt Sergio followed those abbreviated routines while training in Deland.

We also know Casey followed volume BEFORE and AFTER Jones but we also know that Casey was with Jones for quite a long time. In this case I believe Casey was a true follower of Jones principles. He also left the principles of Jones and the influence of Mentzer to follow his own 40 set per bodypart program in the late 70’s and early eighties. I witnessed several of those workouts. He also recommends about 6 sets a bodypart in his current coaching. This is much more volume than Jones or Mentzer recommend. Again why would someone who spent years following the recommendations of Jones, now recommend something completely different UNLESS he knows otherwise.
   

[The Luke]

Max_Rep,

I read that Ironman interview with Sergio Oliva in the actual magazine and the way you presented it is misrepresentative.

Did you read an online transcript that might have been edited/altered?


The Luke 

[Max_Rep]

Max Rep should realize that some of us have lived through the Jones era. We were all amazed that Sergio gained while training with Arthur.
.

Vince should realize that Max Rep ALSO lived through the Jones era and still has every article printed in IM during that era. He read every one of them in his early years of training. He also has a copy of the original Nautilus bulletin #1, he also trained with Ray and Mike Mentzer. My other post covers my skepticism about crediting Jones for Sergio's progress. I don't know of a link to the interview, I just have the magazine.

Does Vince know what Jones was talking about here?

“Next to intensity of effort, XXXXX may very well be the most important factor for the production of the best rate of training progress; without XXXXXX XX XXX XXXXXXX xx xxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxxx, a trainee will seldom produce good results—and never in proportion to the efforts expended.”

It seems any discussion on hypertrophy from a proponent of a Jones should include this factor being as Jones thought it was THAT important and since good results = hypertrophy.

[Vince B]

There are two issues here and only one is relevant. What training did Sergio do to be at his biggest and best. Answer: follow Arthur Jones. That volume training led to most of Sergio's size is evident. That is probably true of more than 95 % of the biggest bodybuilders. It is possible to retain much size with abbreviated training but very difficult to build size with brief training. I really don't see that this is something worth arguing about. I surely don't want to debate it. The point is how do we resolve such issues? What is the test of truth about matters or fact including interviews and methods?

[UK Gold]

Basille, you are so deluded its almost scary. You hold up Sergio and Larry Scott as prime examples to us all, yet you fail to stress the role of steroids. They used and loved the mighty juice. It made them strong, it made them grow.  

When i am clean volume training works for me, but when i'm 'on' its heavy duty all the way. People have to find there own way - everyone is different.

[Vince B]

That Jones is convincing doesn't mean he is right. His description about muscles contracting like box cars is mistaken because we now know there is a sliding filament theory. If you are mistaken about basic matters of fact the whole enterprise can come tumbling down. Jones commissioned a lot of valuable research and that is important to hypertrophy theory. We cannot dismiss the work that he has done.

Let us look at this issue from another point of view. What good are huge muscles? What can they do that smaller muscles cannot do? When you understand that you will know how to train and HIT and HST are not the optimum methods nor will they lead to maximum hypertrophy.

Another issue that is not mentioned is length of workouts. Well, I keep that open ended because it might be possible to grow the fastest duplicating those animal studies. That introduces something impractical because who out there has the time and energy and motivation to try training for up to 12 hours a day? It is clearly lunacy and no wonder few have ventured there.

There is no way anyone can naturally maximize all his muscles at the same time. That is the downfall of almost all trainees. They assume they have to train all the bodyparts at least once a week. Says who? Another practice universally followed by most of us most of the time. I am naturally lazy and will use a lifting device instead of muscles to hoist heavy things. I prefer to do the minimum training for the best result. After Jones told us we were idiots to train longer than half an hour a day every second day who would imagine one might train for hours and hours daily? That was literally unthinkable after Jones finished 'educating' us.

The trouble is believing something doesn't make it true. So, be prepared to turf out most of your cherished beliefs if you want to attain maximum hypertrophy at light speed.

[Vince B]

UK Gold. Are you proposing a theory there? Volume for naturals and HD for juicers? Seems to me a lot of people will disagree with you.

We have to look at the history of bodybuilding to get an idea of what is possible. Perhaps no one would have 20 inch arms if they didn't use drugs. That is something we can't know although some will insist they got that big naturally. The overwhelming experience is that about 17 1/2 inch arms on an average size man is a good result and usually takes many years to get there. Taller guys might be able to build 18 1/2 inch arms naturally. Again, this is only guessing. There are no scientific studies to base our conjectures on.

The theory is either true of false and has nothing to do with beliefs about the mental states of anyone involved. I make bold claims about my theories and if true they will shake bodybuilding like an earthquake.

I still haven't seen an explanation about what DOMS are and why they follow certain kinds of training but not all training. Why are the biceps difficult to get sore? If we could get them sore they should grow. If you can keep them sore they should keep growing.

[Max_Rep]

Max_Rep,

I read that Ironman interview with Sergio Oliva in the actual magazine and the way you presented it is misrepresentative.

Did you read an online transcript that might have been edited/altered?


The Luke 

Sorry Luke we have the same magazine and I do not agree with your accusation. I have taken many advanced courses on Communication and Linguistics and am aware that 5 people can read or discuss the exact same subject using the exact same words and come to 5 different conclusions or interpretations. But for you and Vince to say I altered it or misrepresented it is totally FALSE.

Again look at the questions asked in my post and answer them.

Steve Mahalick (sp) owned Nautilus Machines, trained with Jones and then trained six days a week and did 75 sets on a bodypart.

Why?

Grymkowski owned the machines trained with Arthur and did 40 sets?

Why?


Sergio went back to 32 sets

Why?

Casey went to 40 and recommends 6 for guys to gain size.

Why?

Not one of the guys followed a full body in one workout routine that Jones recommended.

Why?

Neither did Ray or Mike even though they used lower volume.

Why?

It seems that the onky time any of them followed Arthers routine was when they were in Arthers presence.

Why?

All I'm saying is there more to the topic than meets the eye. Jones once wrote an article in MD on Caseys training. In the article he described Caseys rountine as being 6 days a week Chest, Back, Shoulders (Mon wed, fri) Legs, arms (tuesday, thursday saturday) 3 sets of 3 exercises 12 to 20 reps. When giving a seminar at a local University a student (who had the article with him, I also have the same magazine somewhere and remember the articke as it was "the Mister America Series) asked about it and Jones satated that casy never followed such a routine and where did the fellow ever get a crazy idea like that?

Maybe it was Ghost written?

Jeez it's late.    

[wes]

We all know that a few weeks on any new program will bring about a new growth spurt. To say that Jones was solely responsible for Sergio's growth is to leave out several unknown factors.

BINGO !!!!

[UK Gold]

Basille, i can only say with certainty what works for me. Combining heavy duty with 'heavy' androgens/anabolics makes my muscles fucking explode. But when i'm on if i do volume training i shrink. But, when i'm clean its the complete opposite.

Everyone has their own key to growing. Look at daddywaddy. He has an incredible physique that almost anyone would be proud to have. But he does ludicrous 100 set workouts combined with drinking beer, eating ice cream etc. 

[The Luke]

Max Rep commentary… 32 sets on a body part. Body parts 2 times a week. Workout length 3 ½ hours. Yup that sounds like Jones style training the way we’ve been sold it to me! 

Max_Rep,

The thing Vince and I are taking issue with is that statements such as the one above imply that you are using excerpts from the interview to assert that Sergio used 32 sets a bodypart while training with Arthur Jones.

That simply isn't true... if you think so, you are mistaken.

The Luke

[Vince B]

I subscribe to Ironman on line but they don't go back to 2002. I stopped buying muscle magazines several years ago. Has anyone got that interview at hand so they could post it here? Sort of an honour issue now!

One day I was doing lying triceps extensions with upper arms on pads on a device I made. I got relatively strong in that movement and my elbows needed heaps of sets to warm up. Well, I finished doing 9 plates for a set and Ray Mentzer assumed he could do more because he was bigger. He did the same weight without any warmup and he was rubbing his elbows afterwards. That was lunacy. Elbows have to be watched and you must never put pressure on them. When doing bis and tris make sure your elbows extend past the edge of the pads. If your gym has primitive equipment then don't use that piece that might lead to damaged elbow joints.

[CT]

Sorry boys but the accounts of Sergio's workouts with Jones that we ALL read about in the 70's were Jones's accounts. The interview I posted from can be found in the September 2002 issue of IM. I posted Q & A directly from the interview without alteration. Of course I did not post the entire interview as it is much to long for this forum. If it is inaccurate then the interviewer "The Sandwich" or Sergio is responsible for those inaccuracies. What reason would I have to alter them?

I find it quite funny that you take Jones so much at his word. We all read the stories of Sergio's workouts with Casey and how Sergio didn't make it through the workouts. What we don't know with any degree of accuracy was how long Sergio followed those workouts until he went back to his own volume training. Weeks? Months?

We all know that a few weeks on any new program will bring about a new growth spurt. To say that Jones was solely responsible for Sergio's growth is to leave out several unknown factors.

You could go here: http://www.i-a-r-t.com/articles/Fitness%20Articles/Sergio%20Oliva%20Interview.pdf and read an even more recent interview with Sergio and his account of HIT training.

[Vince B]

I read that interview and it says what Luke and I have been saying. Oliva credits Nautilus and Jones with making the difference. It was how he used those machines. He insisted on combining free weights with the machines and that is partly why squats were included.

It is refreshing to read that interview because just about everything he said is true or has happened. His account of the corrupt IFBB and so on is a lesson for everyone. I respect Sergio. He tells it like it is because he fears no one. Lee Priest has taken the baton from Sergio but the sheep won't follow.

[Army of One]

Oliva credits Nautilus and Jones with making the difference

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$