But when some one fails on HIT it is the fault of HIT.
Double standard maybe?
When people switch back from HVT to HIT, they kind of forget the “I” part. You can’t use the same weight you are used to. You need to plan to progressively increase your weight by 20-30% if you where doing 4 sets or more.
The biggest factor in determining if HIT is for you, is your personality. Do you like to test your limits every workout? Every 1 or 2 workouts should yield a PR either in weight lifted or number of reps done on all big exercises. When you are progressing on HIT, it is very rewarding because you see progress almost every workout. That is the part I enjoy the most and the reason my training is mostly HIT. Yet I acknowledge, it might not be for everyone.
Also I think some people in this board like trainning too much for HIT. It’s a lifestyle for some. They love to go to the gym and they go there 4 times a week or more for more than 1 hour, and they are probably not going to change that. Then I’d say HIT is not for them. They should stick to volume, not to failure training or they would destroy themselves pretty quickly.
[/quote]
I hold the solid opinion that those several training sessions a week are necessary if the goal is to actually resemble a bodybuilder one day.
That is why I keep asking for proof of the system. I am more than sure someone could make SOME progress on it. That isn’t even being argued. The question is, will that person maximize that progress by training that way. That would be proven by the overall physique change, not just in quoted numbers.
One thing I’ve also seen from some HIT member is the focus on numbers to the degree that they ignore that many lifters are seeing more progress than that by training more often.
I think Mentzer became too obsessed with efficiency later in his career. He seemed to devise programs around someone who lost their passion for training.
Just for the record, I was a huge fan of his earlier routines back when Dorian Yates credited him. But he scaled back his volume and frequency to such a ridiculous degree that there is no way you could keep an interest in following the program.
At least Arthur Jones and Dr. Darden advocated a sane frequency protocal.
I’m not a total HIT advocate, but for me it has some merits, and if you can do 20 reps squats/deads when your body is screaming NO MORE after 10 reps, then you can understand the rationale behind HIT. I’ve read a HIT article which suggests that lifting the following weights/reps will equal a lean physique of 200lbs, 16 inch arm and 45 inch chest:
Squats: 300lbs x20
Deadlifts: 350lbs x20
Bench press: 240lbs x8
Standing shoulder press: 180lbs x6
Bent over rows: 220lbs x8
Now, build up to those those reps and poundages, and then tell me whether HIT works (sorry to all of you who are already single digit body fat and can do those targets).
If Mike Mentzer were to see how I train he would first question my intelligence, move on to a long drawn out diatribe about all the reasons why only God could improve upon his views (and that would be only a maybe) and end up calling into question my parenting skills because obviously someone so misled on weightlifting couldn’t possibly be trusted anywhere else either. Somewhere in there I’d be bound to hear how he was robbed in the 1980 Olympia.
The take home message from HIT as far as I’m concerned is many people would rather do more less taxing work than really push themselves and one set done until you are DONE will out produce 50 sets done like a fairy.
thanks for the info, but from what i understand, intensity requires some kind of speed?? and yea TUT. another component of lifting speed. so how is TUT achieved when one is lifting fast…
Intensity can mean many different things. Some use it to mean % of 1RM, some use it to mean the level of physical exertion, it can also mean a mental state.
In HIT, intensity is mostly related to the mental state, and level of physical exertion. Basically, you are pushing yourself to the absolute limits of your physical capacity (the program is very “intense”).
TUT (Time Under Tension) simply means the amount of time your muscles are working during a set. It really has little to do with lifting speed (possible exceptions might be if you actually were to throw the weight, thus unloading the muscle’s momentarily).[/quote]
exactly. how can one achieve high TUT if he is lifting fast? im just pointing out that tempo of one’s lifts def do come in to play. for strength throughout the spectrum of the lift, and of course hypertrophy. ive read a couple articles from trainers who promote 20 seconds concentric and eccentric lifts on the pull ups for size.
Just for the record, super-slow lifting isn’t a requirement for HIT. It’s what lifters use to try to avoid or break plateaus. I’ve tried that before and it is indeed harder, but I feel like I work harder lifting heavier weight faster.
exactly. how can one achieve high TUT if he is lifting fast? im just pointing out that tempo of one’s lifts def do come in to play. for strength throughout the spectrum of the lift, and of course hypertrophy. ive read a couple articles from trainers who promote 20 seconds concentric and eccentric lifts on the pull ups for size.
[/quote]
If you wanted to increase TUT doing fast reps, you’d just have to do more reps. Also, some people think in terms of TUT as in the total TUT done in the workout for that muscle, while others think in terms of just each set.
Super slow reps will put the muscles under a very high TUT and completely eliminate momentum, but you won’t be able to lift any where near the amount of weight that you could if you were to just pull/push as hard as you could (which, depending on the weight used the actual bar speed could be fast or slow).
I also didn’t say that tempo doesn’t play any role at all, but it’s nowhere near the top of the priority list IMO.
you cant deny that rep speed isn’t important.
[/quote]
I can, and not only that, I just did.
Yes, they both lifted at the tempo that made the most sense to them. And low and behold, they both got big and strong. Hence my saying that it’s not all that important. Also, power lifters don’t snatch.
This is the Bodybuilding forum.
Sure, why not try both. But, if you find that you really like a specific tempo (and the program works for you) and stick to that tempo for years, while adding substantial weight to your lifts, and eating and resting enough, it will produce results. It really doesn’t matter if it’s 401, 104, X0X, or whatever.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
The take home message from HIT as far as I’m concerned is many people would rather do more less taxing work than really push themselves and one set done until you are DONE will out produce 50 sets done like a fairy.[/quote]
I agree with this statement. Another problem with 1 set to failure that is rarely mentioned is that you only have one chance to stimulate the target muscles properly. So everything must be perfect. If your technique and form are poor, you are probably going to hit failure a few reps earlier than if your technique was perfect and stimulation will be lesser or nil. In my opinion technique is way under rated. And I am not talking about rep speed here. I am talking fine tuning hand and feet placement, bar path, etc.
So basically HIT is a bit idealistic in that you strive for that perfect set. HVT is more of a shotgun approach, you hit muscles multiple times, from multiple angles and something is bound to happen eventually.
