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

[TheGoldenPrince]

Vince Basile = IFBB Mr Canada!

[Vince B]

HIT will lead to injuries once you get strong enough. It is a dangerous method. MHT is an unknown protocol because no one has tried it. I did injure my elbows while rubbing my elbows on pads. If you avoid that contact you can do the method safely. Avoid ballistic movements in all body parts and especially calves. I am confident I can now train calves safely. It could be that I might aggravate an old injury but warming up a muscle really thoroughly and getting pumped seems to protect the muscle. That is what many bodybuilders have to do to keep training. Injuries in this extreme activity are almost unavoidable.

Gosh, I get up and log onto Getbig and am still here two hours later and haven't even had breakfast. How am I supposed to attend that bodybuilding contest? It is already too late.

[Vince B]

Fatpanda. The protein requirement is not a matter of opinion. I am ready to modify my beliefs if I am convinced by science that we need more protein. So far 100 grams a day is more than enough. I find it amusing that all this research suggests eating protein before and after workouts. In the 1960s some guys were sipping milk while training! Many were taking brewers yeast tablets. It is a never ending source of entertainment to see what some bodybuilders will do. Very few actually read the valued textbooks in the first place. If you read bodybuilding magazines you are bombbarded with supplement ads. Most of those ads are rubbish. It is a pity you can't lock up those guys or put them on a barge outside the 200 mile limit of countries. Bodybuilders, collectively, are ignorant. Nothing has changed since 1959 when I started training. I go by the nutrition textbooks and the latest pertinent research.

I weigh 230 at the moment but am carrying a lot of fat. When I do the DOMS training my body quickly becomes harder and more muscular.

[Fatpanda]

hahahaha

ifbb mr canada on the same gear as everyone else who has been or will be mr canada anytime in the future.

as 240 stated there was a study that showed steroid users who dont workout, put on more muscle that naturals who did. this shows how much effect gear has on muscle mass, so like 240 said give the guy some gh and a bike and there you have a show winner.

vince you owned yourself again with your claims of hst not being based on human studies, then go onto decribe various human studies hst uses to justify its program, also the one animal study you refer to as being dishonest to use, is the same one you used to quantify your theory???

everything else you say about hst i share, it IS poorly designed, and needs a rethink to address the issues i mentioned.

[pumpster]

i'm surprised at that vince, you look no more than 160lbs, so should i throw the baby out with the water? i think not.

Rather a cheap shot, not pertinent for someone well past prime. Parcells supposedly knows football yet looks embarassingly like a blimp, which no one seems to notice. 

[Fatpanda]

i dont understand how you can honestly think 100g of protein a day is enough, untill science says otherwise?

can you answer this question then?

say your body is 230 lbs like you say, and are eating maintenace calories, how can you expect to gain muscle weight if you do not increase protein?

i can admit there is an assimilation problem for the natural trainer, but your body will take care of this itself via hormone/enzyme changes untill it is recycling protein is maxed out. then what will you do? your body will surely start to canabalise its other muscles eventually.

[Rammer]

i dont understand how you can honestly think 100g of protein a day is enough, untill science says otherwise?

can you answer this question then?

say your body is 230 lbs like you say, and are eating maintenace calories, how can you expect to gain muscle weight if you do not increase protein?

i can admit there is an assimilation problem for the natural trainer, but your body will take care of this itself via hormone/enzyme changes untill it is recycling protein is maxed out. then what will you do? your body will surely start to canabalise its other muscles eventually.

I was thinking the exact same thing Panda.

[Fatpanda]

Rather a cheap shot, not pertinent for someone well past prime. Parcells supposedly knows football yet looks embarassingly like a blimp, which no one seems to notice. 

i disagree, it was a pot kettle black situation, and in my eyes was very pertinent. one of its deciples was the german guy he refered to earlier, who was/is a beast, and much bigger then vince himsef ever was, admitidly he is on gear, but so was vince in his prime.

[pumpster]

Anyone on gear really should be looked at differently; it's an entirely different playing field.

I agree that the source of fitness info should look the part but not with advancing age, no. Small time to go after someone well past prime.

This guy supposedly knows something about training, are you going to attack his knowledge to? hahahahaahahh

[Vince B]

I think bodybuilders are considered foolish at best. When university professors look at what they do they shake their heads. I had to reassess what I was doing re vitamins when I was challenged at UBC by a professor from England. He said the sewers of Vancouver were flowing with vitamins and minerals excreted by the body. He was right. At that time I was taking a vitamin and mineral pill. Since that time I haven't taken much in the way of vitamins or anything else. I have read about wonder substances but consider that all hype. It may well be that lots of things are important so I keep an open mind about it. However, I still believe we can get sufficient nutrients from eating well-balanced meals. Why take those additional things if they are not necessary. I think a culture of taking way too much has persisted in bodybuilding.  What is the test of truth regarding supplements? I should think proper scientific tests. Not just taking stuff and extra and believing that makes a difference. How would you determine just how much to take of any substance? Clearly, bodybuilders are not growing and yet are still taking too much protein. That is crazy and stupid at the same time.

[Vince B]

You will all find out age is not very nice to experience. Bodyfat accumulates easily and is difficult to get rid of. If you diet you lose muscle instead of fat which is really disheartening.

Can a so-called old man still make gains? Of course. I might have a go at doing just that. I just can't seem to get motivated enough to do it. Bodybuilding is not a haphazard enterprise but one requiring dedication and pesistence. What value is there in working that hard just to look good? If someone 64 can get bigger than ever before and do it naturally then that is an impressive result and one thought unattainable by exercise scientists. I am confident I can still generate more hypertrophy by triggering the growth and making it happen. We all have vastly more potential than we imagine or are able to fulfill.

[Vince B]

Fatpanda. I am not basing my theories on animal studies. I am conjecturing based on those studies and my own experience. It will work. What I don't know is how well those long sessions will work. If I can induce hyperplasia then that is something that will transform bodybuilding. If I don't get the results I hope for then MHT is a pipedream.

What I am doing and what Haycock is doing are two different things. He has abandoned personal hypertrophy while I am still having a go even at my age. I think Bryan is consumed with his business and has no time to fool around doing bodybuilding. Maybe grown men shouldn't be wasting their time talking about this subject!

[wes]

Vince,if you train using your mehod/theory at 64 years of age,be prepared to wither away and die!!

You would never recoup from such a stupid regimen.

[Fatpanda]

Anyone on gear really should be looked at differently; it's an entirely different playing field.

I agree that the source of fitness info should look the part but not with advancing age, no. Small time to go after someone well past prime.

This guy supposedly knows something about training, are you going to attack his knowledge to? hahahahaahahh

you totally misunderstood what i was saying, i wasn't attacking his knowledge, i was making the point that if i looked at him, and made assumptions about a training style based on his size, i'd be throwing out the baby with the bath water. in effect i do not judge a persons knowledge on his size, he was. i put him in his place, just like i have you.

[Fatpanda]

Anyone on gear really should be looked at differently; it's an entirely different playing field.

I agree that the source of fitness info should look the part but not with advancing age, no. Small time to go after someone well past prime.

This guy supposedly knows something about training, are you going to attack his knowledge to? hahahahaahahh

i am goint to attack arnolds knowledge for training natural, his encyclopedia of bodybuilding was a joke !

[Fatpanda]

Fatpanda. I am not basing my theories on animal studies. I am conjecturing based on those studies and my own experience.

hst is not based on animal studies either, so why do you insist it is? just because bryan mentions one study to highlight a possible outcomes just like you have, does not make hst based on it.

this makes you a hypocrite!

[pumpster]

you totally misunderstood what i was saying, i wasn't attacking his knowledge, i was making the point that if i looked at him, and made assumptions about a training style based on his size, i'd be throwing out the baby with the bath water. in effect i do not judge a persons knowledge on his size, he was. i put him in his place, just like i have you.

Another paragraph later he's still talking in circles.

i am goint to attack arnolds knowledge for training natural, his encyclopedia of bodybuilding was a joke !

This is a fave unproven theory by some getbig amateurs, that somehow all the fundamentals of training change on drugs, with no proof whatsoever that there's any difference other than degree. Absurd.

[Vince B]

It is rather difficult to interact with undisciplined blokes. It is wasting my time. If you guys want to pontificate and think you are clever then keep going because I see little information that anyone has except CT and dr chimps.

I have outlined my ideas in a systematic fashion so that an experienced and educated person would have much to think about. If one or two respond in a sensible fashion then that is more than I expected on Getbig.

[Tapeworm]

I have outlined my ideas in a systematic fashion so that an experienced and educated person would have much to think about. If one or two respond in a sensible fashion then that is more than I expected on Getbig.

Oh, don't be poopy Vince!

We appreciate your thoughts and efforts even if we don't always agree.

[CT]

I see little information that anyone has except CT and dr chimps.

Thanks Vince. I think that we are both somewhat similar in that we are passionate about training AND are always looking for a "better way". Many coaches put out one type of training out there (e.g. HST, HIT, EDT, etc.) and stick to their gun. On the other hand I'm always trying new ideas and when I find something that works I'm not afraid to change my views.

When I was a kid I used to play golf (I come from a "golf family") and every single month I would read "Golf Digest" which had a monthly pro swing analysis (frame by frame)... without fail every month I would spend hours trying to copy that swing in hoe of improving my game! I'm much the same way with lifting. This has led to some interesting discoveries but also some wasted time.

Some of my ideas have been described as "out there" (maybe when I reach 64 years of age internet posters will call me crazy too   ). But the truth is that I will try any method that seems to be sound and that could offer some benefits... I like experiementing too much. Right now I'm making great progress but if my progress comes to a halt I'll be glad to try your approach.

[Hedgehog]

Hello Basile.


Outline in the rough how you would have this "twin" train.

Lets try this, I list some questions, and you give it back if you want and if you can:

1. How many workouts per month

2. How many workouts per week?

3. How long would the workouts be?

4. How many excersises used per workout?

5. How many sets per workout?

6. How many repetitions?

7. What percentage of 1RM (1 Rep Max)?

8. How many bodyparts per week or month?


YIP
Zack

[CT]

Oh yeah ... everytime I read something that sounds far fetched or crazy, I try not to dismiss it before thinking it through. I always remind myself the following:

Just because something goes against what I personally believe doesn’t mean that it’s not true

Objectivity is so important if we are to progress optimally.

Personally I'd rather waste 4 weeks on an ineffective idea than miss out on a lifetime of success.

Okay, it's late and I'm starting to sound like my grandpa... gotta go to sleep.

[Vince B]

CT, I never joke about exercise or bodybuilding although I often have fun with some of the characters involved.

Hedgehog. It is Sat night here and I have to go out. I will give outlines of practical workouts that interested parties can try. I will outline the MHT protocols. Then, if anyone is crazy motivated enough we might find out if it works.

[Max_Rep]

Max Rep. People are criticizing me for contributing to this board as an Ironager. I decided to offer my theories about training on the Gossip and Opinion board and others are interested and that is why this thread is still going. I think this is the first time a training thread has been taken seriously on the Getbig G&O board. I don't think it is an accident. I am doing my best to answer questions and so on.

Have at it Vince. I'm just wondering why it took you 12 pages to actually tell us something about your program and so far it doesn't appear to be anything other than a variation of Vince G and/or Larry Scott's program with a little twist of your own. I respect both Larry and Vince for their contributions MUCH more that Jones.

Larry and Vince both recognized the role of the pump in growth whereas Jones Mentzer both said the pump had nothing to do with muscle growth. This was a THEORY that neither gentleman ever proved. They offered some cockamamie story about doing 100 reps on curls and hw it produced a pump but no growth. Yet their training method with warm-ups offered a pump. And they grew. So it's just a theory that the pump doesn't contribute to growth. A false theory in my opinion. It’s not the only requirement for growth. In other words if you just pump and don’t fulfill the other requirements for growth then and only then would their theory on pump hold water.

The other requirements of course being:

1) Stimulation -- For muscles to grow, they have to have a good reason. (Jones would have called this “intensity of effort”) which includes intensity, pump and rest periods and workout duration. (Jones only recognized one way of measuring/achieving intensity which was another flaw in his thinking).  
2) Stronger/Bigger -- Muscle size and strength go hand in hand, the stronger your muscles will become the bigger they will get and vice versa. Get stronger and mass will follow very shortly.
3) Recovery -- After a workout the body must first recover energy lost during the workout before it can even begin to grow and build new muscle mass. Improved recovery improves results. This also includes workout frequency and body-part frequency.

I must have found it useful to use both High Intensity, Low Volume at times but also VERY High Volume at times.  By starting with volume training, I maximize training stress and to tax my bodies adaptive potential to the limits. Over a period of weeks I add to the workload causing a state of emergency in my body and its ability to adapt is pushed to a higher level. Then I abruptly and dramatically lower the volume. The adaptive energies are already at a high level for a short period of time, because of the previous volume training and the sharp contrast between high adaptive energy and lower volume results in a growth burst (I believe this is what most people experience when they switch to HIT from volume.) I simply make use of the benefits of both systems and could care less about which “camp” is correct.  

[CT]

Vince, just a thought...

Wouldn't your theory eventually prove itself wrong? If I remember correctly on the HST board your argument against HST was that eventally it wasn't enough the stimulate maximum hypertrophy in advanced lifters therefore it couldn't be labeled as being "hypertrophy specific" as it was not effective for all levels of lifters.

You also made a case for DOMS being an indication that the training performed was optimal to cause the body to increase its muscle mass.

Lets consider the following scenario:

Assuming that your theory indeed works and that you should be able to register increases in measurements every week (you even mentionned every workout earlier in this thread). Let's say that a dedicated bodybuilder gains around 1/8th of an inch on his arms per week (the example you stated yourself earlier). That would mean that every 2 months the individual would gain 1" on his arms, so roughly 6" for the whole year... that is IF your program didn't have the shortcomings of HST (you once mentionned that for a theory of optimal hypertorphy to be true it means that it is true in every case/scenario). Would that really be possible? Within a year I would be a tad over 25" ... within 2 years 31" etc.

I think that we will both agree that this is not possible (although it would be cool). Consider that an individual eventually reach 21" on your program (which by all accounts would be considered a huge arm if in lean condition) and at that point the gains stop, YET there is still the presence of DOMS post-workout (a very plausible scenaraio); wouldn't that put a dent into your theory?

By your own standards, a theory of maximal hypertrophy should apply to any level of lifter with equal benefits, yet it is obvious that at some point gains will come to a halt. This puts your thepry in the same boat as HST in that it eventually become insufficient to cause further adaptation.

But the problem I have with this is that once you reach your ceiling, any lesser stimulation than what the body is accustomed to might in fact cause a de-adaptation (loss of size). So does that mean that the individual would have to continue on lifting 8 hours per workout simply to maintain his size? Is that really acceptable?