QRD on guy? HIT for a busy professional with a family is extremely appealing. Big gains for less time and the gym? Sounds too good to be true. Yet lots of people swear by it. I want to believe, but a quick google search suggests that MM was roided out of his mind and that he didn't even build his muscles using HIT. So what's the deal with him? Can I trust my gains unto him assuming I stay natural?
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
>Sounds too good to be true.
You have to have the balls to actually train hard enough to warrant low volume. This is where most people fail.
"Failure" is not just getting tired. It's concentric failure followed by assisted reps, or if you don't have a training partner then it's followed by static and eccentric failure.
Mind muscle connection is also essential, which a lot of people lack. You have to develop it.
>Can I trust my gains unto him assuming I stay natural?
A big appeal of HIT is that it's actually ideal for natties beacuse it natties need more rest and recovery. The prime benefit of anabolic steroids is their ability to drastically reduce recovery time, which is why so many natties fail, because they do roid routines and overtrain because everyone else is doing it and that's what all the pros and influencers do who are also conveniently roided to the gills and selling their shit to go with daily training.
People here are going to shit on it because they think since he took roids he can't be trusted, or cope by saying you need to be on meth to train with intensities because they are pussies. If you're really interested in HIT then try his routine for natties, give yourself 4-8 rest days between workouts (actual amount of rest will vary massively depending on genetics/quality of sleep/diet etc so figure out how long it takes you to get back to 100%)
The man himself is absolutely based and tbh you should just listen to what he has to say himself, then listen also to where he got his ideas from in Arthur Jones, and the ones who follow it on today like Dorian Yates.
>captcha: G8R0W
wagmi
So what would his ideas look like in practice? Let's say I want to work the upper chest. A couple of warm-up sets on the incline bench then 1 set to failure where the weight is adjusted so that failure is reached in failures comes at the 6-10 rep range, and that's it? Then I wait one week (give or take) until I repeat that with a higher weight?
>A couple of warm-up sets on the incline bench then 1 set to failure where the weight is adjusted so that failure is reached in failures comes at the 6-10 rep range and that's it?
Not quite. As said in that post, it's concentric failure followed by assisted reps to reach true failure, which you will need a training partner for. If you don't have a training partner, like I don't, then you can go to static failure after concentric failure, then finally eccentric failure. That's what I do and obviously this is going to be easier with some exercises than with others as you need to cheat or position yourself at the end of a concentric rep after having already reached concentric failure to do the statics/eccentrics.
You have to tailor which exercises you're doing if you're training alone e.g. you could superset your bench into dips which are easier to cheat alone, in a similar pattern to Day 1 of that routine.
Here are his explanations of using static holds and eccentrics.
He's taking about doing it with a training partner and at one rep max weight or even greater, but the general principle applies to using it for other weights, it takes you to an entirely different level of fatigue that you just don't get by simply just going to concentric and that you need if you are training alone and can't get assisted reps.
>that you just don't get by simply just going to concentric and that you need if you are training alone and can't get assisted reps.
*that you just don't get by simply going to concentric failure.
It's late lol. Goodnight IST
Blessed thread
Bingo
im scared of wasting my time and missing gains, could i test it with db curls and do 1 arm with traditional and 1 with MM HIT and see what gains the best over 3 months?
Testing the theory with minimal impact on your routine would be great!
I recommend choosing one exercise that you don't really care about (ideally an isolation), reduce the volume to one working set to failure per week, and see if you continue adding reps or weight on that exercise.
You might get some change but really the point of the long rest periods is to achieve systemic recovery before working the next muscle group, otherwise HIT would just be a standard split where you train every other day but done hard. Ultimatley you just have to try it
is there scientific literature on systemic vs local recovery?
I wfh and now can go to the gym at lunch because my workouts are 20-25 min. I do the yates split with mentzer’s recommended exercises and I complete the split in 10-12 days instead of 6 like Yates did. In 4 months my DL has gone from 385 to 455lbs. I do it on back day which has been nice. 10/10 would recommend
strategies that work for enhanced (frauds) do not work for natties
these people arent on what you are, they're not on trt, their whole androgen response system is different to yours. only t (trt) will already make a guy gain more muscle doing nothing than you will gain lifting. this, coupled with ARd stimulants and all the other shit pros do, gives them capacity (and needs) you do not have
a natural body needs much more stimulus (volume) to supercompensate. idk why you morons are making 5 mentzer threads a day. if you're overtrained, which very rarely happens anyway, you will know. people in the 80s-90s, even naturals, used to work out for a lot more time than people do today. its hard to actually overtrain
>a natural body needs much more stimulus (volume) to supercompensate
A natural body needs more recovery time, fricktard. That's why Mentzer trained four times a week and why he recommended natties to train only once.
Notice how these morons never give people this speech about arnold splits despite the logic actually applying in that case.
>A natural body needs more recovery time, fricktard.
nta but he said more volume, not more training days.
you're dumb, and wrong, and also a pathetic homosexual
I think you might be on the wrong board
either way you should stop using the internet or at the very least stop using social forums to express yourself because you're such a fricking moronic gay and you clearly have nothing to offer. go throw shit at a wall or something, idk just leave these kids alone
>Sounds too good to be true.
But for someone who loves the gym it sucks. But yes it's true, the 80-20 rule applies. 20% of the work produces 80% of the results.
the idea that anything more than one or two sets to failure is junk is just demonstrably not true
however increased sets do have diminishing returns so it's not like it does nothing
Diminishing returns, yet the damage/fatigue accumulates. Yes, more than 1 (maybe 2) working sets is junk.
returns means positive outcomes nitwit. it takes much more than two sets to see negative returns.
Depends entirely on your ability to recover, which depends on your lifestyle and genetics.
>muh genetics
No set will ever have the ROI that the first working set does. What, exactly, is the point of the second set? Did you not stimulate all the fibers the first time? Sounds like a skill issue.
>No set will ever have the ROI that the first working set does
i said that. that's what diminishing returns means.
if you offer 60 dollars to a HITgay, he will say yes of course, who doesn't want a free 60 dollars.
if you then offer 40 dollars, he will tell you to frick off. can't you see he already has 60 dollars? 40 dollars is less than 60. you are killing his monetary gains by offering 40 dollars.
.............. so are you going to answer my question?
are you going to process logically? the point is that gains are gains. a lower ROI doesn't matter, the second set still builds muscle.
>second set still builds muscle.
The second set is pointless.
unless you want to build muscle, in which case it's not pointless
If you can't stimulate growth from the first working set, then you aren't training hard enough. If you must do more working sets, you're inflicting more stress on your body than what is necessary.
>if the second set builds muscle then the first set didn't
? what?
There's a core piece of theory that we disagree on. The HIT people would say that muscle-building is a binary decision for your body. It's either "my body is building muscle" or "my body is not building muscle". It's a yes or no; a 1 or 0. Once you have stimulated growth of the muscle (turn that no into a yes), there is no point to doing any more sets. If anything, you'll be worse off because you're inflicting damage on your body that you didn't need to.
If you disagree with that theory, then that's fine, but I'm not going to do this "talking in circles" thing with you anymore.
>i have a cult belief based on absolutely nothing and cannot engage in anyone who disagrees
i mean based for admitting it but also deeply moronic, utterly nonsensical, and ridiculously reductive
>based on absolutely nothing
Sounds more like the broscience you hear from the fitness community than anything said by Mentzer, who actually studied this stuff. The fitness community at large has had their minds warped by men taking steroids, doing insane volume, then telling everyone that in order to get as big and strong as them, they need to do the same work. It won't work and millions of men spend years spinning their wheels, doing high volume that their bodies can't recover from. Where is it written in stone that you need 2 or 3 sets to stimulate growth?
Mentzer very well could be wrong, but I like his approach at thinking about these things than what the roidmonkeys preach.
>Sounds more like the broscience
you literally admitted you have a religious belief about muscle building that can't be questioned or your brain shuts off. that doesn't sound like broscience because it's not even trying to be scientific or logical
>Where is it written in stone that you need 2 or 3 sets to stimulate growth?
first of all nothing is set in stone except apparently for your axiomatic viewpoint
second, no one said that. i didn't say that. we have just been reciting the scenario from
over and over. yes, one set will build muscle. two sets will also build muscle, just not twice as much, and so on.
>you literally admitted you have a religious belief about muscle building that can't be questioned
I'm more than happy to question it, I'm not a Mentzer fanatic. Don't confuse me with someone else in this thread, that was my first post.
>two sets will also build muscle
Will it?
> that was my first post
is obviously you and the whole quote string so far looks like the same person to me. i really suspect i am talking to someone with genuine mental problems more serious than thinking that muscle growth is a simplistic binary operation
that's easy to fake and you talk exactly the same, you even got upset at me for questioning you.
These posts here are the final red pills that natty fitizens need
Point 1 - we’ve been brainwashed for years by roidtrainnies to do high volume (this is what they require). These trannies sell their workout routines and other products and it demonstrates that results require lots of time in the gym and lots of sets. Natties need more time to recover than roidtrannies, so their ridiculous routines don’t apply to us. Additionally, if we see a routine less populated, we won’t pay attention to it and other roidtroony routines will compete with eachother by adding even more convoluted volume, sets and days.
Point 2 - HIT is infact high volume from the perspective of the muscle fibres because essentially it’s high time under tension (TIT) which when you strip back everything, this is what it all comes down to.
Summary:
Go hard and intense as possible and destroy the muscle fibres while still being safe. Take adequate rest, 4+ days. And go again. If you’re consistent with this model then you will get better gains over the course of years as a natty.
Its so frustrating that people who criticize mike don't understand this
people understand what you are saying it's just that it's bullshit is all
Bro you're a f*g
Hahahaha did you censor gay? You need to go back.
531 in its basic form is training each lift once every 7 days, and doing 1 set, to failure
But it also programs a nice progression for you
His prescription is extremely unlikely to work due to how low the work over time is. Meta analysis points to 10-20 sets a week per muscle - the kicker is this is all based on studies with people who trained with a variety of efforts, some balls to the wall, some with 5 reps in the tank. So the number of sets YOU should do if you perform each set with Mike's level of intensity is likely a bit less than 10-20 sets a week.
I'd just look up DC Training as that's an iteration of his ideas and it's also the lowest amount of volume that would actually feasibly work for a good segment of the population.
>Meta analysis
Just an average of a bunch of diverse studies. Nothing of value there.
>variety of efforts, some balls to the wall, some with 5 reps in the tank
The reality is that most of the people who participated in the study (at least 50%) made suboptimal gainz or no gainz compared to everyone else in the studies. That's of course assuming that the studies and their methodologies were any good at all. This is also ignoring the fact that these are at best 8-12 week studies and give no long term trends.
>10-20 sets a week per muscle
You're overtraining.
>Mike's level of intensity
Are you using as heavy weight as possible for a given rep range and using a 4/2/4 cadence with strict form while training to at least concentric failure?
>a bit less than 10-20 sets a week.
1-6 sets/week at most depending on whether or not your following Mike's or emulating one of Arthur Jones' programs.
>based on studies with people who trained with a variety of efforts
It's much worse than that. They were done on people who had a variety of muscle already built before the study began. Any study that includes beginners is worthless. Beginners grow from anything, so they skew the data towards indicating that higher frequency (and weekly volume) is better.
I'm living proof it works
this shit is so silly, 99.999 percent of the population will never size up to Olympia standards. counting your exact sets and cadence and all this tomfoolery is silly. just train hard and recover from it. if you can do higher volumes then do so if you cannot rest more. everybody is an individual with different genetic backing. everybody.must go through a trial an error phase at the gym. plus nobody really gives a shit about your physique, only you
First, I think the increase in Mentzer attention is obnoxious, because I attribute it to the homosexual Zoomer obsession with novelty and contrarianism. Second, I believe Mentzer, and I am 100% confident his program works, but I don't think most people are capable of the intensity required to make it work. For normal people, spreading the intensity out over more time is much more feasible than piling it all into one workout, one set, etc. Mentzer literally took meth as a preworkout. I promise most gym goers are not capable of reaching the intensity his HIT requires.
>Mentzer literally took meth as a preworkout
Source on this absolute horseshit. As far as I have seen the only allegations of meth use were long after he stopped training.
Study show that most everything works as long as you are consistent and make progress. HIT training is perfectly legit, especially if it fits your lifestyle. Most of us just want to be jacked. We're not trying to be stage competition bodybuilders. The only thing I would say is there's a difference between applying HIT principles and going full moron with it, which is what mentzer did. Remember he built his body with more traditional methods of the time. He found he didn't lose muscle on high intensity training when he was already at the peak of his career. His heavy duty methods have no evidence backing them and he never used them himself. In short, high intensity principles are perfectly valid, heavy duty is stupid as shit
I tried this shit because of morons spamming HIT every damn day, and I've come to the conclusion that HIT is still volume. The only difference is that instead of taking rest intervals between sets, you modify the movement (via forced reps, drop sets, mechanical drop sets, or isometrics/eccentrics) to allow yourself to keep going.
Going by the effective reps model, typical volume training will have you take a rest interval so that you can be performant again with the same load so that you can accumulate more effective reps. HIT on the other hand will use the aforementioned modifications to allow you to keep going so that you can continue to accumulate more effective reps.
Or, if we go by the hard sets model, the load reductions (yes, isometrics/eccentrics are technically still load reduction since you're removing the concentric, which is the hardest part of the movement, so that you only perform the part of the movement where you have more strength, thus putting you further away from failure (albeit isometric/eccentric failure, not concentric failure)) could be classified as different sets entirely, so as a result you're doing 3-5 sets within a single set.
Point is, both volume and HIT work. As a test, I've been doing "HIT" (quotations because I'm not reading all of mentzer's shit, I just reduced the amount of sets to 1 on every exercise while using various intensity techniques. Also his tempo shit is moronic, slow eccentrics and pauses in the lengthened position are great but slow concentrics are an abomination) for upper body, and volume for lower body (since my legs have been progressing absurdly fast over the last 1.5 years from adding more volume, and because lower body movements are much more susceptible to technique breakdown when pushing to RPE 10 (no machine lifts bc home gym)), and I expect both my upper body and lower body to grow just fine.
>got buck broken so hard during ONE CONTEST that he threw away his career and pretty much the rest of his life over it
Justify this, Mentzerbros. I won't deny that he was obviously robbed after he built himself arguably the best physique of all time (perhaps tied with Ed Corney). He really seems like the opposite of a Randian Overman based on his own actions.
I saw a significant increase in gains just by going from 4 sets per exercise to a maximum of 3 sets per exercise
Im thinking of moving from a 5 day routine to a 3 day one with higher intensity and seeing what happens, i really want this shit to be real a i start uni in a month and i dont want to be spending upwards of 6 hours a week exercising
Nobody says he's flawless, he definetly fricked up by rage quitting body building but that doesnt invalidate HIT training
Just something you could try but a month ago after a long lay off due to illness i started doing a scheme where you max out a first set, and then with less than a minute of rest between sets aim to do double the reps from the first set in as few sets as possible, loads of grinder reps and it take about half the time as 3 sets with 3 minutes rest but has you do the same volume with higher intensity, i pick a weight i can't get more than 7 reps with if i get 7 i move up
Kids don't like it because the rest days means they have to spend that time learning a trade or something instead of hanging out with their pseudo friends at the gym all day. It's been proven to work pretty much the only people who reject it are butthurt gays who somehow think Jay Cutler and Arnold are natty so they emulate their training.
Pic related, drug tested fed and a direct client of Mentzer before he died. He started with HIT and still does it in his 50s and has a youtube channel about it.
>and has a youtube channel about it.
Post it plox
I think that's John Heart.
I like it and it works for me
I do doggcrapp which is based on HIT principles. I've been really happy with the way it's been going.
Let me give it to you 100% straight, no cap fr fr on god, like for super cereal:
Heavy Duty is absolutely real and anyone who says otherwise is a fricking dyke c**t Black personhomosexual b***h pussy who absolutely sucks at bodybuilding.
turbofat powershitters and extremely psychotic roidtrannies hate him, but other than that it's pretty much universally accepted that his teachings are not necessarily gospel, but worth listening to and following.
HOW MANY FRICKING MENTZER THREADS DO WE NEED A DAY
right? a coomerbait or coffee thread died for this