Mike got most of his material from Arthur Jones. The low volume to muscular failure came from Arthur Jones as well as the 2 second positive and 3-4 second negative to guarantee the muscle is always working during exercise (the 4 second positive was just something that Mike was experimenting with on his clients a few months before his death and John Little put into the "High Intensity" book released after Mike died). And then there was Casey Viator who was doing a similar single set training before Mike (and beat him in the 1971 Mr. American contest and got third in the 1982 Mr. Olympia) as well as Boyar Coe who was in some of the old Nautilus videos.
So basically he trained eg chest three times per month (ok there's some dips there too but still) ? Anyone really follows this routine? Especially natty. I don't know anyone irl who'd do that. If you suggest that people will think you're like bananas
Mike's original training was with an AB routine.
The "ideal routine" is an attempt to create a universal routine based on some training principles and was used on his clients. Some of his clients were training once every 48-72 hours on it. Before that, he recommended a PPL routine in his book (pic related).
https://i.imgur.com/dXZxoUt.jpg
When he was actively competing he actually trained 4 times a week hitting every muscle group twice.
He reduced it to 3 sessions per week in the last couple of years he competed and cut the number of sets in half for average of 1.5 times per week per muscle group.
So basically he trained eg chest three times per month (ok there's some dips there too but still) ? Anyone really follows this routine? Especially natty. I don't know anyone irl who'd do that. If you suggest that people will think you're like bananas
I've trained that program and it was great for my legs. Chest and Biceps struggled though. I now do a 5th day of lots of Dips and chin ups between leg press and the rear and side delt day and have 3 days before and 3 days after in stead of the 4. Works for me
I've spent a great deal of time reading Arthur Jones' works recently and I've come to the realization that Mentzer actually did not come up with anything original. I do like Mentzer, and his audiotapes are a nice means of packaging the information into a convenient format, but none of it was new.
arthur jones mainly used and promoted full body 1 set per exercise splits 2-3x a week
mentzer used the same per session volume but spread bodyparts up in different sessions into something that would look like a low volume brosplit but also experimented with push/pull and upper/lower and started going to ridiculous extremes when he was no longer competing like training a muscle group once every two weeks
Arthur Jones also said to do frickloads of sets with almost no rest, progressing by the literal ((volume)) of what you can get done in an hour.. for cardio.
In my experience the brief intense and infrequent strategy simply detrains me in between lifting days and I'm wondering if his and Mike's experience with it was alongside this volumefest of conditioning work.
>Arthur jones mainly used and promoted full body 1 set per exercise splits 2-3x a week
Only in the 70's. By the 90's he had many of his test subjects doing one session every one, two, or even three weeks. One session per three weeks is what he reserved for hardgainers and women.
Arthur Jones also said to do frickloads of sets with almost no rest, progressing by the literal ((volume)) of what you can get done in an hour.. for cardio.
In my experience the brief intense and infrequent strategy simply detrains me in between lifting days and I'm wondering if his and Mike's experience with it was alongside this volumefest of conditioning work.
>Arthur Jones also said to do frickloads of sets with almost no rest, progressing by the literal ((volume)) of what you can get done in an hour.. for cardio. >In my experience the brief intense and infrequent strategy simply detrains me in between lifting days and I'm wondering if his and Mike's experience with it was alongside this volumefest of conditioning work.
I've never come across a recommendation from him to do a frickload of volume. Even in his 1971 Nautilus Publication #1, he recommended a MAXIMUM of two sets per muscle group per session.
I don't mean to be rude, but I don't think you're actually familiar with his work. I think you're just parroting what you hear on IST or Youtube. I would highly recommend you read his 1997 publication directly from his website.
Well, again, it's his cardio. And here it is: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qtrOWsI8WBQ
52 minutes in. Frickloads of work, progressed by the volume. If this is how he does cardio then it's no wonder he doesn't recomend any volume at all for the strength part.
Okay, I understand. Tbh I avoided all of his written work that had anything to do with cardio. On his website I recall seeing a few things related to cardio, but I didn't read them.
you missed my point which is that average frame people that aren't t-rex armed little goblins will struggle to look anywhere near as muscular as either one of those two
sure jeff nippard might look good as a natural, but keep in mind that's with over a decade of consistent training and trying everything under the sun besides roids at 5'4 while posing under perfect lighting
all that just to look "good"
if you are average height it will be much harder for you to fill out your frame and look like a bodybuilder
if you aren't built for bodybuilding you will never look like a bodybuilder
Obviously. They’re short with underdeveloped legs and israetel has like genetics. I’d say nippards upper body at a normal height would hold up just fine next to your pic related
Midwits should be hunted like rats …Arnold would have died with 50 if he wouldn’t have had access to the best medical care available back in the day. He had a genetic heart defect, just like Mike and his brother.
So spelled out for bottom tier midwit trash like you; outcome is not necessarily indicative of competence (in a certain field). The best looking guy doesn’t necessarily know how to look best…
He was a pioneer in exploring the correlation between failure and gains and also stress & recovery management, but he failed by committing "less is better".
I think there is something to what he was saying about training less, but you need to build a base first. I used to train up to 6 days a week with multiple sessions, but now that I got far stronger my body will grow more with just 4 days a week. I only do one major exercise for 5 sets, a secondary exercise that is still difficult but still recoverable, and then two accessories. I'm getting gains I never would have expected after training for 15 years. If I hit another plateau I'll drop to 3 days a week.
There is a very important aspect to Mentzers ideology that never gets discussed. Leaving aside the fact that he was bitter and he took ideas that had some merit WAY too far, HIT low volume training is best suited to advanced lifters on steroids. Yet incredibly it gets peddled to the exact opposite audience. Both Mentzer and Yates built up their physiques with conventional high volume bodybuilding training. All of their peers have repeatedly stated this based on first hand observations. You NEED reps to build the mind muscle connection. It takes time and practice. If you start out doing a single set once a week you will never build that connection, plain and simple. But once you are advanced and experienced you can really annihilate your fibers in one extremely tough set if you so desire. The other key is steroids. You won’t lose strength with two weeks off on steroids. Hell even a month off for legs as an advanced lifter on gear and you can come back stronger. This is not possible natty. You will lose muscle and strength far more quickly natty than on gear. >tldr: as an advanced lifter on steroids HIT can definitely work. As a midwit know it all intermediate and below natty your results will be dogshit. But enjoy feeling like you are smarter than everyone else, that’s what really matters to you anyway if you stick with this shit as a natty
Of course he was full of shit
It was a mix of him being assblasted he lost and meth psychosis
Mike got most of his material from Arthur Jones. The low volume to muscular failure came from Arthur Jones as well as the 2 second positive and 3-4 second negative to guarantee the muscle is always working during exercise (the 4 second positive was just something that Mike was experimenting with on his clients a few months before his death and John Little put into the "High Intensity" book released after Mike died). And then there was Casey Viator who was doing a similar single set training before Mike (and beat him in the 1971 Mr. American contest and got third in the 1982 Mr. Olympia) as well as Boyar Coe who was in some of the old Nautilus videos.
Mike's original training was with an AB routine.
The "ideal routine" is an attempt to create a universal routine based on some training principles and was used on his clients. Some of his clients were training once every 48-72 hours on it. Before that, he recommended a PPL routine in his book (pic related).
He reduced it to 3 sessions per week in the last couple of years he competed and cut the number of sets in half for average of 1.5 times per week per muscle group.
Make a guess
mentzer = look like a god
israelite = look like a turd
go figure
Oh well if a fat bald guy says it's bad it must be bad
Yeah, I'm gonna need you to post body.
So basically he trained eg chest three times per month (ok there's some dips there too but still) ? Anyone really follows this routine? Especially natty. I don't know anyone irl who'd do that. If you suggest that people will think you're like bananas
im training like dorian with great results.
He was coached by mike, similar program just few more exercises and each body part once per week.
I've trained that program and it was great for my legs. Chest and Biceps struggled though. I now do a 5th day of lots of Dips and chin ups between leg press and the rear and side delt day and have 3 days before and 3 days after in stead of the 4. Works for me
I've spent a great deal of time reading Arthur Jones' works recently and I've come to the realization that Mentzer actually did not come up with anything original. I do like Mentzer, and his audiotapes are a nice means of packaging the information into a convenient format, but none of it was new.
arthur jones mainly used and promoted full body 1 set per exercise splits 2-3x a week
mentzer used the same per session volume but spread bodyparts up in different sessions into something that would look like a low volume brosplit but also experimented with push/pull and upper/lower and started going to ridiculous extremes when he was no longer competing like training a muscle group once every two weeks
Arthur Jones also said to do frickloads of sets with almost no rest, progressing by the literal ((volume)) of what you can get done in an hour.. for cardio.
In my experience the brief intense and infrequent strategy simply detrains me in between lifting days and I'm wondering if his and Mike's experience with it was alongside this volumefest of conditioning work.
>Arthur jones mainly used and promoted full body 1 set per exercise splits 2-3x a week
Only in the 70's. By the 90's he had many of his test subjects doing one session every one, two, or even three weeks. One session per three weeks is what he reserved for hardgainers and women.
>Arthur Jones also said to do frickloads of sets with almost no rest, progressing by the literal ((volume)) of what you can get done in an hour.. for cardio.
>In my experience the brief intense and infrequent strategy simply detrains me in between lifting days and I'm wondering if his and Mike's experience with it was alongside this volumefest of conditioning work.
I've never come across a recommendation from him to do a frickload of volume. Even in his 1971 Nautilus Publication #1, he recommended a MAXIMUM of two sets per muscle group per session.
I don't mean to be rude, but I don't think you're actually familiar with his work. I think you're just parroting what you hear on IST or Youtube. I would highly recommend you read his 1997 publication directly from his website.
Maybe you aren't
Well, again, it's his cardio. And here it is: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qtrOWsI8WBQ
52 minutes in. Frickloads of work, progressed by the volume. If this is how he does cardio then it's no wonder he doesn't recomend any volume at all for the strength part.
Okay, I understand. Tbh I avoided all of his written work that had anything to do with cardio. On his website I recall seeing a few things related to cardio, but I didn't read them.
The German Reich only lasted 11 years, but they weren't wrong and neither was Mike Mentzer.
You don't get into high level bodybuilding for the longevity benefits.
>just hit the gym every day and be a lifting slave like us bro
>this is your body on 6 days a week 1h+ training on gear at 5'4 height with a pump on while posing under perfect lighting
and people seriously expect to look impressive at 6' naturally lol
the potential for the human body to look muscular is so pathetically low
what are you talking about? the natty literally looks better. If something thats a white pill to not roid
you missed my point which is that average frame people that aren't t-rex armed little goblins will struggle to look anywhere near as muscular as either one of those two
sure jeff nippard might look good as a natural, but keep in mind that's with over a decade of consistent training and trying everything under the sun besides roids at 5'4 while posing under perfect lighting
all that just to look "good"
if you are average height it will be much harder for you to fill out your frame and look like a bodybuilder
if you aren't built for bodybuilding you will never look like a bodybuilder
I know bodybuilder standards are different but is the general consensus that these two actually look better than something like one of these guys
Jeff and mike just look like little meat golems or overgrown babies with those giant legs
you conflate people inflicted with dwarfism with normal people.
people this short ALWAYS look weird, no matter if they pump roids or not.
Obviously. They’re short with underdeveloped legs and israetel has like genetics. I’d say nippards upper body at a normal height would hold up just fine next to your pic related
Midwits should be hunted like rats …Arnold would have died with 50 if he wouldn’t have had access to the best medical care available back in the day. He had a genetic heart defect, just like Mike and his brother.
So spelled out for bottom tier midwit trash like you; outcome is not necessarily indicative of competence (in a certain field). The best looking guy doesn’t necessarily know how to look best…
>program requires a training partner
No one here will ever know.
When he was actively competing he actually trained 4 times a week hitting every muscle group twice.
He was a pioneer in exploring the correlation between failure and gains and also stress & recovery management, but he failed by committing "less is better".
I think there is something to what he was saying about training less, but you need to build a base first. I used to train up to 6 days a week with multiple sessions, but now that I got far stronger my body will grow more with just 4 days a week. I only do one major exercise for 5 sets, a secondary exercise that is still difficult but still recoverable, and then two accessories. I'm getting gains I never would have expected after training for 15 years. If I hit another plateau I'll drop to 3 days a week.
he was definitely full of performance enhancing drugs, that much is obvious.
There is a very important aspect to Mentzers ideology that never gets discussed. Leaving aside the fact that he was bitter and he took ideas that had some merit WAY too far, HIT low volume training is best suited to advanced lifters on steroids. Yet incredibly it gets peddled to the exact opposite audience. Both Mentzer and Yates built up their physiques with conventional high volume bodybuilding training. All of their peers have repeatedly stated this based on first hand observations. You NEED reps to build the mind muscle connection. It takes time and practice. If you start out doing a single set once a week you will never build that connection, plain and simple. But once you are advanced and experienced you can really annihilate your fibers in one extremely tough set if you so desire. The other key is steroids. You won’t lose strength with two weeks off on steroids. Hell even a month off for legs as an advanced lifter on gear and you can come back stronger. This is not possible natty. You will lose muscle and strength far more quickly natty than on gear.
>tldr: as an advanced lifter on steroids HIT can definitely work. As a midwit know it all intermediate and below natty your results will be dogshit. But enjoy feeling like you are smarter than everyone else, that’s what really matters to you anyway if you stick with this shit as a natty