Mike Mentzer's Objectivism

I've recently gotten into Mike Mentzer's material after seeing an edit with a speech by him used as motivation music. I then googled the guy and realised that he approached bodybuilding in the most high IQ way possible. But what I'm most interested in is if his philosophy and bodybuilding approach of do a set till failure and his focus on high intensity training and surivived sscruitiny since his philosophy and material he had available to him in the 70s and 80s. His view on diet too seems very out of the mainstream.

I wanna be a full on Mentzerite but I want to know if there have been any critiques or studies that refute his view. It's hard to argue with a guy who built just a body but at the same time it does seem too good to be true.

Pic related is the god himself.

  1. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    > "Learning logic and acquiring the ability to think critically is not easy, though not impossibly difficult"

    Wow, what an insightful and intelligent fellow. I can see why Rand appeals to him.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      What's your point? Why did you feel the need to make this post?

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        Assuming you're op: objectivism is for brainlets and you can do better

  2. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    >High IQ
    >Trains for the most part the exact same way as Arnold and every other high volume bodybuilder
    >Starts doing HIT while he's already in his prime
    >Pretends that the shit that is the best
    >Says that a bodybuilder is a weightlifter, not an athlete, and thus shouldn't care about how many hours he works out.
    >Works out like once a week

    >Listen to one of his lectures
    >It's mostly just him calling Arnold stupid

    I don't think someone who keeps calling his 'competition' stupid is very confident in his own techniques.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Trains for the most part the exact same way as Arnold and every other high volume bodybuilder
      Was this before or after his research?

      >Starts doing HIT while he's already in his prime
      So? He quotes studies like the Colorado experiment to prove the efficiency of HIT training.

      >Listen to one of his lectures
      >It's mostly just him calling Arnold stupid
      You've listened to ONE lecture of his and you've made a judgement on his entire character and fitness based on that one lecture alone?

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Was this before or after his research?
        Before
        >So? He quotes studies like the Colorado experiment to prove the efficiency of HIT training.
        What's your point? Have you ever tried HIT training? Yes, slow negative reps absolutely build muscle, but revolving your entire workouts around them? Good luck bro, the room for error is far too big.
        >You've listened to ONE lecture of his and you've made a judgement on his entire character and fitness based on that one lecture alone?
        Yes. I don't need 10 types of evidence of someones character when I have 1 strong one. If you're willing to roast someone with obvious results whilst trying to sell your book at that age, I am willing to call that someone a retard.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Before
          Exactly

          >What's your point? Have you ever tried HIT training?
          No, but the anon below has:

          I got very much into Mentzer about 10 years ago. Yes that training works, no it's not as simple as "just do one set to failure" because 1) his strictness of form makes each rep considerably harder than typically is the case and 2) his idea of failure is total failure not just the point where reps are grindy. What I tended to find was that doing HIT, my single working set would take between 1-2 minutes to complete, most of that under near maximum intensity. Compare this with a typical 3 sets exercise with bro form and it's probably about the same TuT, just with a lot more intensity. That's why it works. It's not going to work if you just do a normal set slightly closer to failure.

          The more modern HIT guys go even slower and stricter on rep cadence, anything from 4 seconds per rep like Mentzer to 30 seconds per rep in the case of superslow. I tended to find that 6-8 seconds like Dr Doug McGuff was really effective but it does make you self-conscious doing it in a public gym since you look like you're grinding/struggling every rep even if you aren't.

          I don't do HIT anymore because honestly I'm not cut out for it mentally. I did it for a few months and got burned out, it was hard to motivate myself for workouts because I'd get a kind of anxiety thinking about the CNS loads. It's much much easier to do a higher volume workout than it is to do HIT, contrary to what some people say. The benefit of HIT is that it's the most efficient way to train, it's just incredibly taxing mentally if you do it properly. I guess being on steroids and stims helps with that.

          >Yes. I don't need 10 types of evidence of someones character when I have 1 strong one.
          Fag

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Exactly
            Brainlet 'gotcha' moment. He built his physique using high volume. You're gonna take advice from a roider, that didn't build his physique with the training he preaches. As a natural I presume? Good luck buddy, let us know how it works out.
            >I don't do HIT anymore because honestly I'm not cut out for it mentally. I did it for a few months and got burned out, it was hard to motivate myself for workouts because I'd get a kind of anxiety thinking about the CNS loads. It's much much easier to do a higher volume workout than it is to do HIT, contrary to what some people say. The benefit of HIT is that it's the most efficient way to train, it's just incredibly taxing mentally if you do it properly. I guess being on steroids and stims helps with that.
            Yeah maybe you should read it better. Also read what I said:
            the room for error is far too big.
            >Fag
            Sorry but you're the one sucking off a fundamentalist that puts other people down even though he built his entire career on the same philosophy.

            You're just a brainlet that's amazed by his stern and convincing manner of speech.
            Go ahead, do HIT training. There's a reason you don't ever see someone here post body claiming HIT works.

            • 3 months ago
              Anonymous

              >He built his physique using high volume. You're gonna take advice from a roider, that didn't build his physique with the training he preaches.
              HIT has been practised by other people and he quotes studies to prove his point. One being the colorado experiment.

              >Yeah maybe you should read it better.
              That post only motivated me more. Now I SERIOUSLY wanna try HIT.

              >You're just a brainlet that's amazed by his stern and convincing manner of speech
              No, I like his philosophy. The way he turns weightlifting into a philosophy is what I really like.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                >That post only motivated me more. Now I SERIOUSLY wanna try HIT.
                Yeah ok let us know how it goes

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                Can you show me one (1) actually natty lifter who got good results from it? No? Then it doesn't work. Simple as.

  3. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    he was a pseud and speed freak who died at 40. HIT is a meme and the only person who successfully used it (dorian) tore 5 muscles and had to retire. and dorian using more gear and gh than anyone else until ronnie came along probably had alot more to do with his success. there's no one else who does it. no one does it now. people who used to a few years like that black guy with gay voice (cedric i think) have stopped and train normally now. and how many of these threads have you made?

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      >and how many of these threads have you made?
      First one. Literally found out about this guy 5 minutes ago.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      >(dorian) tore 5 muscles and had to retire.
      Dorian had a terrible diet and was cutting and worked out too often. I think that plays into it more than just HIT.

  4. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    I got very much into Mentzer about 10 years ago. Yes that training works, no it's not as simple as "just do one set to failure" because 1) his strictness of form makes each rep considerably harder than typically is the case and 2) his idea of failure is total failure not just the point where reps are grindy. What I tended to find was that doing HIT, my single working set would take between 1-2 minutes to complete, most of that under near maximum intensity. Compare this with a typical 3 sets exercise with bro form and it's probably about the same TuT, just with a lot more intensity. That's why it works. It's not going to work if you just do a normal set slightly closer to failure.

    The more modern HIT guys go even slower and stricter on rep cadence, anything from 4 seconds per rep like Mentzer to 30 seconds per rep in the case of superslow. I tended to find that 6-8 seconds like Dr Doug McGuff was really effective but it does make you self-conscious doing it in a public gym since you look like you're grinding/struggling every rep even if you aren't.

    I don't do HIT anymore because honestly I'm not cut out for it mentally. I did it for a few months and got burned out, it was hard to motivate myself for workouts because I'd get a kind of anxiety thinking about the CNS loads. It's much much easier to do a higher volume workout than it is to do HIT, contrary to what some people say. The benefit of HIT is that it's the most efficient way to train, it's just incredibly taxing mentally if you do it properly. I guess being on steroids and stims helps with that.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      >I don't do HIT anymore because honestly I'm not cut out for it mentally. I did it for a few months and got burned out
      This is the universal experience. Think about it from the point of view of operant conditioning: you are literally training yourself to dread working out and associate it with crippling pain. And I left humanity behind a long time ago, the idea that steroids will change what is essentially a psychological phenomenon is baseless, I can tell you from experience.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      How do reps work? Is HIT a 1 rep thing or do you do multiple HIT reps?

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        >How do reps work? Is HIT a 1 rep thing or do you do multiple HIT reps?
        Mentzer changed a lot. Originally he had people doing common bodybuilding reps 8-12 or so. Later he had people down to 1-3 reps of super heavy weights, slow negatives, forced reps, etc. It's hard in discussing his work because it became more extreme and solipsistic as time went by and he descended into drug addiction and madness.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          Oh, sorry. I meant sets. How many sets did he do or is HIT a 1 set thing?

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            There are different approaches to HIT: Jones, Mentzer, Yates, they all vary to some extent. But yes, for much of Mentzer's work, he was advocating an abbreviated warmup working up to ONE max set. In some respects, not that different than 5/3/1.

            • 3 months ago
              Anonymous

              If it gets me big and strong in a low amount of time then I don't care. I'm going for it! Looking forward to the mental crisis and CNS burnout the other anon mentioned here:

              I got very much into Mentzer about 10 years ago. Yes that training works, no it's not as simple as "just do one set to failure" because 1) his strictness of form makes each rep considerably harder than typically is the case and 2) his idea of failure is total failure not just the point where reps are grindy. What I tended to find was that doing HIT, my single working set would take between 1-2 minutes to complete, most of that under near maximum intensity. Compare this with a typical 3 sets exercise with bro form and it's probably about the same TuT, just with a lot more intensity. That's why it works. It's not going to work if you just do a normal set slightly closer to failure.

              The more modern HIT guys go even slower and stricter on rep cadence, anything from 4 seconds per rep like Mentzer to 30 seconds per rep in the case of superslow. I tended to find that 6-8 seconds like Dr Doug McGuff was really effective but it does make you self-conscious doing it in a public gym since you look like you're grinding/struggling every rep even if you aren't.

              I don't do HIT anymore because honestly I'm not cut out for it mentally. I did it for a few months and got burned out, it was hard to motivate myself for workouts because I'd get a kind of anxiety thinking about the CNS loads. It's much much easier to do a higher volume workout than it is to do HIT, contrary to what some people say. The benefit of HIT is that it's the most efficient way to train, it's just incredibly taxing mentally if you do it properly. I guess being on steroids and stims helps with that.

  5. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    he was wrong about heavy duty and HIT
    he was also completely wrong about diet

    if you want to know the details:
    his method of HIT is way too low in volume and frequency
    he focused too much on perceived effort rather than actual mechanical tension in the muscles trained which are completely different things, purposefully slowing reps down is vastly inferior to going all out regardless of speed during exercise for stimulating all muscle fibers
    he ripped off arthur jones who himself ripped off eric pederson
    arthur jones' HIT was superior to mike's heavy duty because it had reasonable weekly volume and frequency (3x a week full body, as opposed to the retarded heavy duty 2 sets once a week per muscle group shit)
    eric pederson's HIT was full body 5x a week
    his diet advice was completely mainstream, he advocated the food pyramid and eating every food group and macronutrient, be tracked calories and was as cookie cutter as can be you must be confused
    he was wrong about protein requirements for health and maximizing results, the body is very inefficient with utilizing protein solely for muscle growth but it doesn't mean eating a lot is a waste of money, you just get diminishing benefits the more you eat until you get to really stupid high intakes like 3g+ of protein per kg of bodyweight
    protein intake relative to calories also greatly changes your appearance even if you don't benefit in terms of muscle growth you will see that you look better with high protein diets

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Nice, on the diet side though. Is it possible to gain 50lbs of fat or muscle or both in a year? Assuming you do regular cardio and weight training? I'm currently at 165lb at 6'0 and my goal is between 200 and 220 lbs. Is this possible? I've seen that nuts have high protein and are my cheat way of getting lots of protein, carbs whilst saving money.

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        it's possible to gain 50lbs of fat in a year
        it's possible to gain 25lbs of fat and 25lbs of muscle in a year if you're q beginner
        it's not possible to gain 50lbs of muscle or mostly muscle in a year unless you're a skeleton primed for growth on steroids

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        also don't waste your money on shit like nuts, drink milk and eat chicken

  6. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Went too far with it, which is understandable when you're the only one selling something against the mainstream.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Elaborate.

  7. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    1. I think Mike Mentzer did a retard change in Arthur Jones routine. By the end of 1990s he was advocating super low volumes like:

    Week 1: Legs
    Week 2: Chest & Back
    Week 3: Legs (including Deadlift)
    Week 4: Shoulders and Arms (including Dips)

    So your whole Chest work for the month would be a incline press superseted with Flies on week 2, and Dips in week 4.

    About diet, he also thinks that you need 16 KCal of surplus to sustain 1lb per month of lean body mass growth.

    2. Arthur Jones is more sensible with training 3x per week, full body, 1 set to failure. This was not unusual in the past, before Arnold come along. What I think was his negative contribution was promoting his machines over barbell, which makes sense from a commercial standpoint but nonetheless misleading.

    3. Dorian Yates grow the most while doing 1 set per exercise, 2 to 3 exercises per muscle group, hitting each muscle group twice in a 9 days period. This is low volume but it is not extreme low volume.

  8. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    He was great. He would advertise his phone number if you wanted him to give you advice (for a fee) so normal people could receive this kind of coaching from him. He trained many, many people and saw what worked and what didn't work and came up with his ideas based on what he saw. Nobody really argues that HIT doesn't work anymore, but many will argue that most people aren't going to train that intensively and that simply doing more volume at a lower intensity is a better approach for most people.

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.