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

[dr.chimps]

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.

Perhaps, Vince, with an eye on motivation, you could combine making some gains and testing out your hypothesis, keeping us informed of your progess. I would be very interested in seeing what happens and, I think, for others here, it would add some validity to your words. Age calls us all home before we are ready, so it might be reassuring to see that one can still get better as we get older.

/Although, now that I think of it, perhaps informing us at spaced intervals, rather than the continuous onslaught that was contest preparation Arvilla, would be better. 

[Fatpanda]

pumpster, do you actually own the book? and have you actually tried the workouts arnold prescribes?

trust me when i say they are not intended for a natural.

and vince, i comend you for your love of the iron game, and your determination to succeed, however why wont you address my concerns? if this theory is the ultimate hypertrophy program you should be able to answer my ligitimate questions

1. how can your system improve muscle size, with no change in calories?
2. how will you address the obvious overtraining that will occur?

[SteelePegasus]

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.

Vince, I may not have the necessary vocabulary to carry on a discourse on this topic. But with that said I appreciate your posts and have modified my training accordingly. 


lol, I won't put down the supplements
my post workout shake tastes too good and besides with the heavy volume perscribed a natually would need assistance for recovery.

I have been reading alot of insulin, glycogen and muscle repair as it relates to hypertrophy

[BEAST 8692]

vince criticises hst because the creator is not currently making gains, even though he has obviously achieved success and so have others. he has, in fact, experimented.

vince has not even attempted to perform his program. no one has. he hasn't even committed it to text 15 pages later.

now he is starting to whinge about his detractors, implying their negativity and if THEY CRITICISE he (who has not even so much as committed a theory to text, never mind actually testing it) they are simply not constructive.

is that not the very height of arrogance.

he has played on people's desire for results to achieve his own agenda, that being attention. now he wants to grab his bat and go home in a huff.

my issue is not his ideology, but his hypocrisy and arrogance. remember WHY he commenced this thread (to critique hst and hit, etc), but then comes up with some cock and bull theory THAT HASN'T EVEN BEEN APPLIED YET.

vince says doms is the most important aspect when science and field tests on athletes proves that it isn't.

vince says that one must eat more during the program but then says that nutrition isn't important.

vince says that overtraining doesn't exist, but then says that one must not train more than once every 3 days, especially if their natural

vince says that one must progress every single workout no matter what sex, age, health, size, level of fitness, hormonal levels, recovery ability, genetics, strength/muscle mass level, drugs/natural, etc, etc, etc.

vince looks like shit. sorry pumpster but this is a factor when he has only himself to offer as a subject that has PARTIALLY performed the program. the difference between your example and vince's is that the football coach can actually offer countless successful athletes that have practised his ideology. vince can only partially offer himself (he hasn't even fully applied it and god knows what ACTUAL results he got).

there are too many contradictions with vince's logic, aside from the fact that he seems to make it up as he goes along.

if vince had come on here and said, "guys, i want to discuss this theory i have. what do you think?" i would have been more receptive, but he has not done this. he has come on here and said everyone else is wrong and he is right (and perhaps vince gironda and larry scott are worthy also ).

vince basile = attention whore.

[Rammer]

Beast, thank you.  I wanted to make a post like yours but couldn't justify spending the time to go through the previous 15 pages to quote all the contradictions that Vince said.

[pumpster]

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.

Interesting comments VB, but kindly refrain from the personal stuff if you want to be taken seriously. It should've been evident by now that there are others with experience, some of which may rival yours. Amateur & unfriendly to  assume otherwise.

[Vince B]

I will say something to Beast and then ignor what he has to say. You are incapable of comprehending what I post so there is absolutely nothing to be gained from interacting with you. Others here are worthy of replying to and I will interact with them.

[Vince B]

To reply to Max Rep. I talked with Ray Mentzer a lot about training when he stayed at my house in Sydney. We discussed the desirability of getting a pump and he, too, insisted it was irrelevant. When pushed about it he admitted it was a comcomitant of hard training but wasn't a goal in itself. I suppose he wanted to avoid saying that just pumping a muscle would lead to hypertrophy. Ray was very much into strength and he was a powerful man. My position is that you try to pump more than ever before but with heavy resistance.

We agree that a muscle must be stimulated before it can grow. Everyone assumes this is easy to do but the larger you get the more difficult it is to trigger more hypertrophy. It may well be that special movements are required. I claim that the best stimulus is volume with the maximum resistance. I think something like a minimum of 5 or 6 sets are required for growth. For maximum hypertrophy it might be many more sets than that.

Progressive resistance is the key to hypertrophy. One always tries to do more reps with a resistance and then adds resistance so that the reps remain the same.

I deny that recovery is required for growth. Those who train calves daily often report they make gains. How is that possible if recovery is part of hypertropy. In fact, you have to avoid the repeated bout affect that accompanies recovery. Therefore I insist on stimulating growth and then contining to stimulate growth before recovery. This is where I vary from most other theorists. In practice I am hardly different because HST suggests we train every second day. The optimal frequency is a matter for scientists to determine but it appears to be 2 or 3 days. HIT would argue that you need longer. If HIT trainees recover then the amount of stimulus required next time might be much more than was needed in the first place. That could explain why so many get frustrated with those short, intense workouts.

When I was training for my pinch grip assault on the world record I discovered that the best frequency was every 4th day. So strength and hypertrophy might have different frequency intervals. Hypertrophy needs more frequent training. Again, this is a matter for science and not speculation. I suspect that the super long workouts might need a couple of days rest. That is just a hunch. It may not be necessary to train more frequently. The ideal is to do the minimum required for the maximum result.

With maximum hypertrophy training it shouldn't be necessary to rotate protocols from intense to volume. However, that again is a matter of fact that is open to science to establish. Novelty itself, as long as the threshold stimulation is reached may help many grow a bit. I think novelty has to be built into all hypertrophy programs.

[Vince B]

To CT. We all have a lot of experience. It is always possible that a beginner and even a knucklehead can be right about training and old timers mistaken. Most of us are too darn stubborn to abandon our cherished beliefs so I understand the resistance towards what I have been outlining. We use our knowledge and experience to evaluate programs and methods. Sometimes we feel we can dismiss something because it just sounds crazy. Or we can dismiss some method as being insufficient to trigger hypertrophy in us. If someone tells me I can grow my calves with 2 sets every 2 days I will laugh in his face. Ditto the rest of my body. It just is not going to happen. Then we find out the 2 sets means the 2 training sets and not the 5 or 6 warm up sets. Well, folks, that is misleading and dishonest. Tell us how many sets to do and count them all. If someone said I could gain with 7 sets every 2nd day I wouldn't dismiss that because I have trained like that before. I might wonder about the close frequency but it is possible such a program might give modest results. It will never be a maximal growth program.

How much in the way of gains can we expect from MHT? I have no idea. If someone is natural and has 19 inch arms who knows how much he can gain? If it is possible to cause hyperplasia then no one knows what the limit will be for size. I should think that 20 inch arms on an average man is truly huge muscular size. Heck, most men would be delighted to have 18 1/2 cold arms. Everyone would notice you and comment on your size.

I predict that MHT will add 1/4 or more to your arms every week you sustain the program. How long one can continue to grow I have no idea. I suspect it is possible to gain 2 inches in 2 months. Anyone who can do this will be absolutely delighted. If you gain that much on your arms your whole upper body will be larger because the supporting muscles will have to handle the extra weight being lifted.

There is always a limit to any enterprise. Suppose we added 10 pounds a week to our bench press. Well, in one year we would be lifting an extra 520 pounds. We all know this is impossible or virtually so. So there is a drop off and that is reached sooner than later. It may well be that gains slow down as one gets larger. If this is so then new strategies will have to be created to keep the growth going.

The main benefit of MHT is to discover how to make muscles grow rapidly then apply that knowledge to other body parts. There is no way anyone can make all the muscles grow rapidly at the same time and sustain this for 2 months. I suspect that would be too stressful for the body and might even be a physical impossibility.

[Vince B]

To fatpanda. MHT requires that one eat enough to support the growing muscles. This means one must eat extra calories. I doubt one needs extra protein. However, as always, I will be guided by nutrition scientists and not writers and magazines.

Overtraining is an idea promoted by HIT theorists. I deny it occurs in typical trainees. I agree with Lee Priest it is probably nonsense. Most young fellows simply do not eat enough so of course then cannot grow. I also think the concept 'hardgainer' is nonsense. Many might find gaining hard but not because they are hardgainers. The programs I have outlined might be described as overtraining but so was suspending weights on the wings of those birds. We will do whatever is required to trigger rapid and sustained growth.

It is 3:45 am and I am off to bed. Catch up with you guys later.

[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

Bump for reply from Basile.

YIP
Zack

[Rammer]

Vince, if overtraining is a myth then why not train every muscle as hard as you can, 8 hrs a day, every day, 365 days a year?

As far as counting warmup sets when doing HIT, I don't think they count. None of my warmup sets gave me a pump or taxed my muscles.  Think of warming up for a HIT workout as you would warm up for a one rep max on the bench.  You wouldn't want your warmup to take away from your maximal effort but you also wouldn't want to hit your max weight cold.  So you get a little blood flowing to the muscle and joints with a low intensity, light weight set then maybe a moderate weight for a few reps so your work set weight isn't a shock when you pick it up.  Then you hit that one set as hard and intense as you can.  For example when I trained chest I would do incline bench press, starting with an empty bar for 15 reps to get blood into the shoulder joint and to get a feel for the movement.  Then I'd do about 10 reps of incline flyes with 30lb dumbells to stretch the pecs and warmup the tendons.  Then I'd do another warmup with 185 for 8 then another warmup of 275 for 3 just so I could feel a heavy weight.  Then I'd do my one work set of 365 to failure, say 8 reps.  None of my warmups gave me a pump or taxed my muscles.

[Vince B]

Overtraining is not the reason novices fail to make gains. It sounds good but an analysis would refute this conjecture.

Re training frequency. Suppose we need 100 units of a substance to remain healthy. If we take 150 or 200 units we will still have a sufficient but unnecessary amount of that substance. Likewise, it is probably not necessary to train daily to grow at the maximum rate. The ideal is to do exactly what is sufficient and no more. In practice this is never easy to know. Again, we need more research to find such points. When you think about it hypertrophy is not well understood by science at all. Look at all the important questions we have no answers to. The lack of information is what allows so many competing theories to exist. The more we know the less competing theories exist to explain things.

If the muscles and connective tissue require 5 sets to sufficiently warm up then this is a necessity and those sets have to count. If you or anyone else does those 5 warm up sets but do not count them then you are lying to yourself and everyone else about a program. It is about time HST and HIT and other programs started being honest. I dislike when systems claim to be based on science when that is a lie and the reality is trainees have to fine tune and adjust programs before they will grow. In other words they have to do something else and not the prescriptions advocated by the methods. I am ready to debate Dr Ellington Dardon and Bryan Haycock but they have better things to do. Will either of them be prepared to abandon their theories if they are refuted or found wanting? I doubt it. If they are not willing to abandon false theories then they are hardly scientists. I just wish there was more intellectual honesty in bodybuilding. I would bet that all parties mentioned sell things at their sites. The bodybuilding methods are just a way to attract gullible customers. Don't you think we should have the answers to most bodybuilding questions? If everyone was fair dinkum about the theory and science behind bodybuilding we not be in the ignorant position we find ourselves today.

The test of truth of theories is if they work. If my theory doesn't work then it is false. I will be pleased if it is close to the truth. The likelihood that any hypertrophy theory will universally work is small, indeed. At best we can find some method that works for most people.

[Vince B]

SteelePegasus. If you insist you need supplements then you haven't read the post-graduate textbooks in nutrition.

[Vince G, CSN MFT]

Overtraining is not the reason novices fail to make gains. It sounds good but an analysis would refute this conjecture.

Re training frequency. Suppose we need 100 units of a substance to remain healthy. If we take 150 or 200 units we will still have a sufficient but unnecessary amount of that substance. Likewise, it is probably not necessary to train daily to grow at the maximum rate. The ideal is to do exactly what is sufficient and no more. In practice this is never easy to know. Again, we need more research to find such points. When you think about it hypertrophy is not well understood by science at all. Look at all the important questions we have no answers to. The lack of information is what allows so many competing theories to exist. The more we know the less competing theories exist to explain things.

If the muscles and connective tissue require 5 sets to sufficiently warm up then this is a necessity and those sets have to count. If you or anyone else does those 5 warm up sets but do not count them then you are lying to yourself and everyone else about a program. It is about time HST and HIT and other programs started being honest. I dislike when systems claim to be based on science when that is a lie and the reality is trainees have to fine tune and adjust programs before they will grow. In other words they have to do something else and not the prescriptions advocated by the methods. I am ready to debate Dr Ellington Dardon and Bryan Haycock but they have better things to do. Will either of them be prepared to abandon their theories if they are refuted or found wanting? I doubt it. If they are not willing to abandon false theories then they are hardly scientists. I just wish there was more intellectual honesty in bodybuilding. I would bet that all parties mentioned sell things at their sites. The bodybuilding methods are just a way to attract gullible customers. Don't you think we should have the answers to most bodybuilding questions? If everyone was fair dinkum about the theory and science behind bodybuilding we not be in the ignorant position we find ourselves today.

The test of truth of theories is if they work. If my theory doesn't work then it is false. I will be pleased if it is close to the truth. The likelihood that any hypertrophy theory will universally work is small, indeed. At best we can find some method that works for most people.

 

[Vince B]

I will outline the minimum requirements for a growth program that intermediates and advanced trainees can use. Novices might be able to grow with less stimulation. It is always best to do the minimum that is required for maximum results. This outline is not for Maximum Hypertrophy Training but should work for sustained hypertrophy training.

1. How many workouts per month?  Ans: 10

2. How many workouts per week?  Ans:  every 3 rd day.  If there is no DOMS following a workout you have to train again the next day and do something different. It might be that you have to try a different exercise. There is no rigid answer on frequency. I suggest 3 day intervals but this may not be optimal for anyone. It may be better to vary the intervals to add novelty to the process. The goal is to do whatever is required to stimulate more growth.

3. How long would the workouts be?  Ans: minimum 1 hour. You can stimulate growth supersetting one or more exercises representing push-pull muscles. It may be necessary to increase the length of workouts as more sets might be required. For MHT it might be necessary to train at leasts 4 hours for 50% growth potential and up to 8 or more hours for a 100% stimulation.

4. How many excersises used per workout?  Ans: 2. Eg. Lying triceps extensions supersetted with chins or close grip lat pulldowns. You could use more exercises and rotate them. I found using one movement per muscle group is best. The trick is to find effective exercises.

5. How many sets per workout?  Ans: 5 warmup sets and at least 5 maximum resistance sets. If you do not experience severe DOMS the next day then the stimulus was insufficient to cause rapid hypertrophy. You can wait 3 days and do something different or train again the next day and see if that induces severe DOMS. Exercise selection is crucial for some bodyparts. You cannot do just any exercise and expect to grow. For MHT the number of sets will be the number of hours X 15 to 20. I count all sets including warmups. You do 1 superset every 3 minutes. If you cannot do the number of reps then rest a bit longer between supersets.

6. How many repetitions? The warmup reps should be high. For triceps you can aim at doing over 40 reps for the first set. Add a plate and do as many as you can. Keep adding one plate until you can do only 15 reps. Then stay at that resistance for the rest of your sets. 15 reps will be safe and will help you stay pumped. When you drop to 8 reps after 4 or 5 sets you can stay at this resistance indefinitely. You should be able to add small increments on a daily basis to the maximum resistance. You will get stronger quickly then reach a level where smaller increases are all that will happen. Use 1/4 plate increases. You are always trying to do more reps and sets at the maximum resistance.

7. What percentage of 1RM (1 Rep Max)? I have no idea. You could work this out easily enough. Of course one should never demonstrate strength. One must avoid injuries at all costs. One muscle tear and your career might be over. You can on occasion see what you can do for 5 reps. That is a better guide to strength improvement.

8. How many bodyparts per week or month? This is something not worked out. I advocate doing upper body training only for a month to see if you can grow rapidly. Since bodybuilders insist they have to train all bodyparts then I am afraid that is a myth that prevents most from growing. Select opposing muscles and train them. Don't do too much in the body because you are unlikely to stimulate much at all to grow. Masochists can train legs on the day following the upperbody day. You could do leg press or Nautilus duo squat supersetted with calves. Donkey calf training is preferred because you are putting the calves under stretch. Loading while stretching is a good idea for effective hypertrophy training. Chins and lying triceps extensions both provide resistance in the stretched position. If you have an assisted chin machine you could hang at the bottom of each rep for a pause of up to 5 seconds. You could do dips and chins on that machine and have a total upper body workout. I find that dips are a bit hard on the elbows so I tend not to use that exercise. If you experience sharp pain in any movement you have to stop doing that exercise.

I don't know if Hedgehog is satisfied with these answers but that is about as good as I can give at the moment. I am sure more definitive answers can be given once the longer protocols have been tried.

[Vince B]

Would Vince G CSN MFT know an effective program if he saw it? Thank goodness a man's knowledge is not guaged by his physique. I hope Goodrum supports me on this fact.

[chris_mason]

Vince, you stated in this thread that from what you have read regarding DOMS it is indicative of hypertrophy.  I cannot find the quote I saw earlier but I did find this related one:

"In my theory all that is important is the resultant growth from each workout. That is the constant test of the theory's truth. That is the feedback that is important. No growth and you are not doing something right. I use DOMS as the best feedback mechanism to guage growth occurring in muscles. So far no one has refuted my suggestion that DOMS is associated with muscle hypertrophy as long as sufficient nutrition is provided so that growth can occur. I also require that the DOMS be induced by using programs where one repeatedly does sets with the maximum resistance possible for 8 or more reps."

Tell me more about your theory of how DOMS and hypertrophy are related.

[Vince G, CSN MFT]

Would Vince G CSN MFT know an effective program if he saw it? Thank goodness a man's knowledge is not guaged by his physique. I hope Goodrum supports me on this fact.

When I first started lifting weights in 83, coach made us do Arthur Jones Full Body Workout routine 3 days a week in high school.

I used Mentzers HIT training in the late 90s because of the limited time I had to hit the gym and I got some great results from it although it could have been the gear I started using at the time.  I used the same thing for the Metrolina


For the Mountaineer, I used Arnold's split training routine working out twice a day 6 days a week. 





Honestly, I think that there is no superior training routine.  I just mix it around so the workout doesn't get stale and the body can't really tell the difference.  Resistance is resistance

[chris_mason]

Vince, you stated in this thread that from what you have read regarding DOMS it is indicative of hypertrophy.  I cannot find the quote I saw earlier but I did find this related one:

"In my theory all that is important is the resultant growth from each workout. That is the constant test of the theory's truth. That is the feedback that is important. No growth and you are not doing something right. I use DOMS as the best feedback mechanism to guage growth occurring in muscles. So far no one has refuted my suggestion that DOMS is associated with muscle hypertrophy as long as sufficient nutrition is provided so that growth can occur. I also require that the DOMS be induced by using programs where one repeatedly does sets with the maximum resistance possible for 8 or more reps."

Tell me more about your theory of how DOMS and hypertrophy are related.

Bump for Vince to answer.

[SteelePegasus]

Bump for Vince to answer.

Vince is a good guy at heart..I have seen guys that have never worked out that have more muscle mass than him.

[Rammer]

If the muscles and connective tissue require 5 sets to sufficiently warm up then this is a necessity and those sets have to count. If you or anyone else does those 5 warm up sets but do not count them then you are lying to yourself and everyone else about a program. It is about time HST and HIT and other programs started being honest.

Vince, let me ask you this.  If a guy can bench press 365 for 8 reps does doing a warmup with the empty bar for 15 reps count as a set?  The warmups required for a HIT workout do not tax the muscles nor give a pump, if they do then you are doing HIT wrong.  If I grab a 5 lb plate and do some shoulder rotations to warm up the joint is that a set?  Does picking up a couple of plates to load the bar count as a set?  Vince I take it that you have never performed a HIT workout in your life.  You can either train long or you can train hard.  You can't train long and hard which is what you are advocating.  I did some searching and found an interesting post on the ironage board from years ago about Dorian training using HIT.  It has an account of an actual workout and the weights he handled and the reps.  You should check it out Vince:
http://ironage.us/yabbse/index.php?topic=2393.0
HIT works, I know because I did it, and it works better than any other type of training I have ever done.  I'm natural and built a national level physique.  Why spend 8 hours in the gym when all you need is 45 mins?  I wish I had a nickel for all the time you've wasted in the gym Vince.  I'd be a multi-billionaire  .

[Vince B]

SteelePegasus. I don't see too many guys my age who  have more muscles than me and that includes Arnold. What interests me is the potential of all bodies to grow and even in supposedly old age. Anyway, my theory is independent of individuals. All my results are anecdotal and not a scientific experiment.

By the way, I wasn't knocking you in this thread.

[Vince B]

Vince G CSN MFT. From what you have posted it doesn't sound like you know how to make muscles grow rapidly.

[Hedgehog]

Basile, many thanks for the detailed response.

With the answers you supplied, I am sure people will be able to try your theory out in reality.

YIP
Zack