Mentzer's Consolidated Training Program

[bic_staedtler]

Just flipping through my copy of John Little's "Wisdom of Mike Mentzer" and noted the trend that MM had regarding his 'ultimate' training program.  Now, I know that the HIT'ers out there are very devoted and will argue every point to the Nth degree. 

My observation is this....his final version of Heavy Duty looks like this...pardon me if I'm mistaken, but it's a 2 part workout.  One workout is deadlifts (5-8 reps) and dips (6-10 reps).  The other is Squats (8-15 reps) and Lat Pulldowns (6-10 reps).

Each exercise is comprised of ONE set to failure, which by Mentzer thought has a couple warmup sets and plenty of static holds, negatives and other beyond failure techniques. 

Each workout is done once every 6-10 days.

Hmmm.

I just wonder why he'd advocate such a training regimen?  Really, the original Heavy Duty type program seemed based on real world experience, but towards the end of his life, Mentzer's Heavy Duty had become somewhat of a self-styled experiment in which he figured that ANYTHING to get to the LEAST amount of work neccessary was the 'best' program.  That is, trying to make ONE general theory of training seemed to be his goal.

I'm here to say that I don't think ANYONE could experience ANY gains from such a program, other than incur severe muscle soreness from doing such infrequent workouts at such a 'high' intensity.

I really admire a lot of what Mentzer said and did, but like Bruce Lee said, it's best to take what works and discard what doesn't.  That to me means that you can still take MM's training advice to heart in some cases, but you don't have to go to his extreme 'end product' to find benefit from his advice.

Anybody care to comment?

[Bluto]

Was the question if you can make gains by just doing it every 6-10 days? I think so. Would be optimal? Now that's a different question.

Also I don't see the point of making it as brief as possible, the fact is that a lot of people actually LIKE to be in the gym and wouldn't mind being there for 45-60 minutes rather than 20. On the other hand, being there for 5 hours like Serge Nubret, now tha'ts a different story alltogether 

[bic_staedtler]

...that's the thing, even Mike would argue that the gym is for working out, not spending time in....but there's some fine LADIES training that just need me to hit on 'em, sooooo.....seriously though, I just think he made his 'final' program to fit his ideal in his head, not in the real world of pro bodybuilding.

I just can't see a future Mr O who used only FOUR exercises...which is what this consolidated program calls for.  Sure, they're four great exercises, but I can't see it happening. 

[natural al]

I have that book.  Mike seemed to be getting strange in his later days.  There is a study that shows that people who work out really hard need the amount of recovery that is being cited in this workout.  Mike figred these 4 basic movements if performed the correct way would hit every major muscle group.  I don't know how I feel about it, I love short intense workouts but 2 sets seems a little too little for me.

[Bluto]

there's a dvd with mike when you actually see him coaching a bodybuilder lifting, i think that says more than a book

basically he goes real slow and controlled

[MB]

We don't really know where the line is with regard to training volume & frequency for ideal growth.  Most pros (and regular gym rats) are unwilling to explore that limit.  Dorian was influenced by Mike and trained 4 days per week, 1 bodypart per week, 1 set per exercise; which at the time was very unconventional.  Now, 1 bodypart per week training and low volume is commonplace.  Who's to say that even less wouldn't work better.  I think many pros could make equal or better gains than they currently are by training once every 4 or 5 days.  It would take an independent thinker (like Dorian in his time) to break away from the pack and base their training on results, not what everybody else is doing.     

[bic_staedtler]

I also have the Mentzer workout DVD (on VHS actually) and even that workout, made in 1999 I believe, has far more exercises than his Consolidated Routine.  In fact, the workout he displays on that tape is actually something that I believe 'could' work...it's very demanding, and the supersetting of exercises and intensity needed are tough.

But even in that tape, there's no 'one' set.  In fact, I count at least 3 sets for most exercises, sets which, for many if not most people, would constitute 'working' sets.  But that's besides the point, call it what you will....Heavy Duty requires a hell of a lot of very hard work, and that's undeniable.  And that's a big reason why most don't train that way, it's very demanding, taxing and brutal.  And since you can get some pretty damn good results training other ways, that's the way most choose.  It's the way I choose! 

Interesting thoughts on this topic.  I also think that if people did the real trials of many different styles, they'd find some benefit in ALL of them....many settle on 'best'  being somewhere between where results, enjoyment and difficulty meet.  Kind of like getting an education...sure, you could get a degree in 3 years by not taking summer holidays, but some folks like more laid back approach.  In the end, you generally get the same result.