Jesus fricking christ everyone started doing this mentzer 2 sets per exercise shit around me, is it a viral meme? What the frick, the only benefit i see is if you want to have quicker workouts
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
What's the benefit of 3 sets over 2 sets -- or 2 sets over 1 set to failure, for that matter? I've never really understood the volume argument.
Time under tension, one of the factors that stimulates growth
Time under tension isn't sufficient, it needs to be time under sufficiently exerting tension.
>Time under tension
If you want time under tension, you can get as much as you want within only one set. Just doing truly slow negatives (4 seconds or more) will add a lot of time under tension to your set. 3 sets of 10 reps at 1-2 seconds is 30-60 seconds of time under tension. Whereas one set of 10 reps each about 5-6 seconds will get you 50-60 seconds of time under tension.
more exercise, better for you -> simple as
and frick off with your meme fricking bro science routines
Why not train 16 hours a day everyday and become Ronnie Coleman then?
>more exercise is better for you just because
That sounds like bro-science. There is no reason to believe more exercise is better.
Except the enormous body of literature showing the dose responsive relationship between volume and strength/hypertrophy that extends well beyond 2 sets.
This is like saying "there is no reason to believe that losing weight is good for blood pressure."
>dose responsive relationship between volume and strength/hypertrophy that extends well beyond 2 sets.
It is safe to assume for the vast majority of studies in exercise science that:
>no controls for cadence unless the paper is specifically about that
>no control for intensity of effort
>no one goes to failure
>there is an extremely low chance that the researchers/supervisors even know what failure is or have ever seen anyone actually reach it even in papers discussing "failure"
In essence, it is safe to conclude that those results do apply to HIT. They only apply to traditional weight training methods. Then there's the fact that for everyone who did well on those studies there are at least one or two people who did worse from the additional volume (it's just how statistics work) and may have been better off with shorter, less frequent training sessions.
And then people who do traditional volume methods all the time and high frequency, low to moderate intensity exercise then have to take weeks off and deload eventually because more exercise is not better and there's always a point where you have to stop and let your body recover. Without anabolics, many people will hit that point where more is not better after getting to more than twice per muscle group per week for most people if there is any meaningful intensity, and even quicker as they accumulate systemic fatigue from a lack of rest days such as on a PPLPPLx program. Even if you are taking a large amount of anabolics, there is still a limit on what you can get away with. So no. More exercise is usually not better.
You'll get bigger. Use your eyes homie
how many sets do you do?
15 sets to failure a week isn't a big ask even for a natty. Of course, that's assuming you're eating well and sleeping well too. On a cut this would be practically suicidal.
if you are doing 15 sets it's not that bad volume is spread out on multiple workouts.
BUT i would argue that even 6 sets are not something you can do to true failure 2x a week. I reduced my back workout with one lift since i felt it wasn't truly an intense set.
HIT has done WONDERS for me, especially back growth. 4x a week Dorian ish routine
You don't understand? Then do one set of one rep with your true 1rm. Your own argument supports volume. Intensity and volume are a spectrum. If you believe in pure intensity you would lift as much as your body can possibly handle for one rep, because that's the highest intensity you can lift
Morer = betterer
They're fricking dumbasses. Volume with adequate intensity is going to give better results in strength or muscle gain. People on this site spout bullshit all the time, like alright if you're such an expert on this you should go make big bucks writing books and coaching bodybuilders since you know for a fact what works best. Yet they're on IST posting about how you should just do HIT lol
>adequate volume with adequate intensity, adequate frequency, adequate exercise selection and adequate recovery give best results
Somebody update the sticky, I've just single-handedly solved fitness.
Lol it's true though. HIT "intensity" is just made up terminology based off of intensity x volume. Intensity is actually % of 1rm. 1rm is 100% percent intensity, you can not lift more than that. Volume is anything related to reps. 2 reps is %100 for volume than 1, but you're lifting around 95-97% intensity. To recover properly think of intensity and volume as a spectrum. The higher intensity (weight) your lifting, the more you need to limit your volume, and vice versa. The lower percentage of intensity you use, the more volume you need to do to make up for that. Then rir comes into play for recovery recovery. You can lift high percentages of %of rom more frequently if you leave rir in your sets, and vice versa. It really is pretty simple to figure out what you should be doing once you understand this
I got to a 515 x 5 squat doing a single set of 5 once a week.
Volume is a meme. Just do one set of five at RPE 12.
Yeah it was trendy on tiktok recently. It is a meme way of lifting, Mentzer himself didn't even build his physique by training that way, only started doing it later on in his career
Plus you must remember, Mike had amazing genetics AND was blasting boatloads of gear. Literally anything he did would have given him gains, the gainz were practically handed to him
Anyway he makes valid points about too much volume not doing you any good but took it way too extreme
Mike DID train volume while younger.
But Dorian was on that HIT shit from day 1
No he wasn't. He squatted and deadlifted back in the day, which proves he wasn't doing "HIT," since you can't effectively or safely do those lifts in that fashion
Mr America Heart on YouTube is a natural lifetime lifter and has plenty of accolades to show for it and he generally trains 3x a week with 1-2 sets per exercise. This is how he built his physique. The problem is that most people don’t know what training to failure truly is and people don’t listen to their bodies. Volume training is a good way to develop overuse injuries like tendinitis. When I used to do a lot of volume I would actually get physically sick because my immune system would be compromised.
I don’t recommend mentzer’s style specifically though. I would lean more toward Dorian Yates’ approach. 4x a week, training each body part once per week and blasting the frick out of it. I would only recommend this type of training for someone who has plenty of experience in the gym. A (more) traditional volume approach is probably best for DYELs
>A (more) traditional volume approach is probably best for DYELs
Mike Mentzer agrees. Here's his beginner routine from his book. You can find it here free
>https://archive.org/details/hight-intensity-training-the-mike-mentzer-way-with-john-little
Don't mind the spelling mistake on the site. It's found in the section titled "Adaptability." He progresses beginners through a full body program in order to adapt them to the effort required on a high intensity program.
>old school bodybuilders gave shit advice on purpose in order to troll people and give themself an edge over their competition
This statement really isn't true. Arnold is really the only guy who's ever been noted to do this in some instances and this might have just been for the effect of drama in Pumping Iron. Everything Frank Zane ever published was pretty much exactly what he did in his routine and everything he took well after he stopped competing. A couple of his books are literally his workout diaries. Steve Reeves published most of his advice AFTER he stopped competing. Vince Gironda was one of the first personal trainers and only used his personal methods and things he tested on himself on his clients. Mike Mentzer's books were also released after he was done competing and in the case of Heavy Duty II and later, were after he had spent some time as a personal trainer so it doesn't seem like he would have any motivation to screw others over by telling them something he didn't think or had seen had worked.
Blessed gym. It’s a keeper anon. Around me nothing has changed over last 15 years.
I also do only 2-3 working sets per exercise. It’s quick and effective enough if done right
postbody
Omg people are actually going to gyms and training wtf these homosexuals are doing something productive how can I make it about me while moaning like a b***h.
That's you.
Shut up.
>are doing something productive
>this routine
>productive
lol,lmao even
dbol look is so good holy frick
currently running low dose dbol on top of low dose trt for long term, i look and feel amazing bro. if bloodwork stays healthy then im not gonna stop.
I wish more people would do just 1-2 intense set(s) per exercise instead of hogging machines for 30 minutes by looking at their phone and doing 5 half-assed "sets".
>you need to be super advanced to it bro
>he was roiding bro and you have to as well bro
>it's super hard and you have to practically have a nice day to make it work bro
>bro you need to do the work there are no shortcuts
meanwhile HIT is stupidly straightforward, basically way simpler than any other cookie cutter program that makes you calculate shit and doesn't offer anything sensible in case you stall other than spinning your wheels like a moron
you do slow lifts, reach a failure, do negatives until you can't do them, might spice things up with short rest pauses or drop sets (not that necessary)
then go home, recover for 3-4 days (more if you need to or have to skip gym, which usually turns out for the best, bc more recovery), get fully rested and go lift again, for probably no more than 1 hour
that makes less than 2 hours a week of no bullshit work, ample room for very adequate recovery and solid gains
makes me wonder why so many dyels feel a compulsive need to shit on it instead of trying it out, spinning your wheels in the gym is a shitty use of time
I tried it on steroids because kept seeing on zoomtok and it was a complete waste. Made some gains but left a lot on the table. Never again. Although the lesson to be learned here is he was right in a sense that sometimes less is more, however you can't just keep doing low volume, you should ramp it up gradually and if you begin stalling out or are unable to recover at any point, deload and lower volume and rinse and repeat, you should cycle your volume
Try it again and actually go to failure this time.
I did. Got garbage results literally on tren. I'm off cycle now and am getting more results half natty now with gradually increasing volume each work out. Next cycle will be soon and I'll train this way to truly compare. But even just off cycle my pumps are sickening right now, better than when on tren, this shouldn't be possible, but fact is I just wasn't going hard enough. I went to failure on the few sets I was doing, but only doing minimal sets and 1x per week was garbage for me. Now I'm doing muscle group 1x per 5 days and doing more like 6 sets per exercise, and increasing the number of sets each workout, when I stall I will lower volume back to 3 sets per workout and start working my way back up again
>I did
>I just wasn't going hard enough
If you were reaching failure, then you probably would have been going hard enough. If you try it again, do two sets at first instead of just one. A sure sign of reaching failure on the first set is that you can do nowhere near as many reps on the second set as you could on the first set. If you reached failure, your second set will end fairly quickly.
Brother. I know what failure is it's not a difficult concept to grasp, it's when you can no longer complete reps. 1-2 sets is not enough and modern science has proven it. Mentzer was right kind of about less being more, but only in some cases, and for certain people. Higher volume generally is better for me certainly, and for a lot of people, if you can do more and recover properly from it you should, if doing more means going beyond what you can properly recover from, or that you're going to have to take so much time to do like a stupid amount of sets, then back off and lower volume and make the small amount of volume u have as intense as possible, but 1-2 sets per week simply not nearly enough for me and I was on tren going to true failure. I think average person should be doing at least 3-5
>I know what failure is it's not a difficult concept to grasp, it's when you can no longer complete reps
Ever heard of a sticking point in an exercise? It comes in a couple flavors. The first is a point in the motion of a machine where there is additional friction because it hasn't been lubricated, it has been poorly maintained, or it's just a flaw inherent in the machine's construction like a cheaper machine. That point just requires more force to get through. Meanwhile, you can still at least do partials or if you had a partner who could give you a little nudge to push through that point, you'd still be able to complete a rep.
The second is where the resistance curve of the exercise deviates too far from the strength curve of the muscles groups being exercised. A bench press is a perfect example. It has a constant resistance curve and does not match the strength curve of the muscles involved. Typically you have to stop at the bottom of the movement and can't move the weight further. But if you had a partner to give a little bit of force upwards on the bar, you would be able to complete the rest of the motion. Pull ups are another example. You are doing reps and then suddenly you can't get past the halfway point. You haven't failed. You've just reached a point in the motion where the strength curve of the lats cannot produce enough force to lift your body the rest of the way since the lats are stronger in positions where lengthened like in the bottom half of the pull up and weaker near the contracted position. However, you can still do a lot of partials after that point.
Failure is when your muscles cannot generate the force necessary to move the weight at any part of the resistance curve given a fixed resistance curve that matches the strength curves of each muscle group. Since most people do not have ideal machines/exercises, this is why there are techniques such as forced reps, static holds, negative reps, and drop sets.
There's also the psychological concern where you might stop doing the exercise when starts to become too difficult for you to psychologically handle. But your muscles are still able to complete a few more reps. Many people confuse this with failure, when they haven't even come close to failure.
>implying you dont know its been viral for at least a year
>implying you know it not because its viral
>implying you are allowed to know about mentzer routine others arent
>implying that is because you know its bad without trying it and others are non knowers so them trying it makes it illegal for them to know about mentzer
youre such a huge whiny fricking homosexual
he is only popular because people still getto be lazy while pavloving themselves into thinking their making insane gains with the Mentzer method. Little do they know he roided hard and died at 49 or 48? Basically this is the SS of current generations. Just lift hard and you will make it while leaving mentzer fats behind
>Just lift hard and you will make it
I tried that, and all I got was joint problems, tendon problems, and no gains. I think that "just lift hard" only works for people who don't actually lift hard.
Hey man I have time for 2 90 minute workouts a week, it works fine considering I can't gym 5 days a week anymore.
I don't see the problem unless someone is doing only a single exercise for a body part. Like, I don't imagine there's a concrete difference between doing 4 sets of back squats and doing 2 sets of back squats and 2 sets of front squats.
I do 2 (work) sets per exercise and rest pause so I can fit more variations into my workouts (e.g. flat bench, incline bench and OHP on the same day) without having to spend longer, change split (currently ULxULxx) or do different exercises on the A and B day
>dude just roid and work out only once a week LMAO it's literally that simple
He's right you know.
Helps if you're a genetic freak like Mentzer.
>genetic freak
kek he's not even 5'10"
Highly doubt it. I dont know a single zoomer who doesnt do Sam Sulek brosplit or some roidtroony 6-day PPL.
People will latch on to any concept that gives them an excuse to be lazy and do less.
>hurrr I dont have to do abs because "abs are made in the kitchen"
>hurr I need to avoid cardio because "cardio will kill my gains"
>I must not go over 5 reps ever because 5 reps is the only rep range you can build strength in!!!!
>No isolation, no machines, just squats, I'll achieve a godly body by doing 5x5 squats twice a week and nothing else
>Gotta eat big to get big, gotta stuff my face with food all year round for my "bulk"
Frick em, people that latch on the these trash concepts in order to avoid putting in work and justifying skipping the harder parts of lifting deserve their failure.
Also reminder, old school bodybuilders gave shit advice on purpose in order to troll people and give themself an edge over their competition when it came to lifting.
It's the modern equivalent of telling people..
>"yeah bro I just do my 50 pushups a day and go to my zumba class"
Anyone that falls for this shit is a fricking moron that deserves failure.
People can't accept that natty lifting is about making slow and steady progress, so they're always looking for something that's gonna make them "blow up"
any metzBlack person wanna post an aesthetic body cause i haven't seen any natty on his program make it work.
dude looks like a dbz character lmfao
roid monkeys are seeeethin that there dumb 50 work out sets with 10 different lifts for just one muscle are dumb as frick and the idiots that followed there adivce are seeeething
>rest-pause
Taking a brief rest to accumulate more volume with a weight you can lift
>forced reps
Training partners decreases resistance to make a weight you can continue to lift to accumulate more volume
>drop sets
Lowering the weight to continue accumulating volume with a weight you can lift
Hmm where is it you go beyond failure? Looks like you're just accumulating additional volume