MB Madaera
Lost 31.7 lbs fat
Built 11.7 lbs muscle


Chris Madaera
Built 9 lbs muscle


Keelan Parham
Lost 30 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle


Bob Marchesello
Lost 23.55 lbs fat
Built 8.55 lbs muscle


Jeff Turner
Lost 25.5 lbs fat


Jeanenne Darden
Lost 26 lbs fat
Built 3 lbs muscle


Ted Tucker
Lost 41 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle

 
 

Determine the Length of Your Workouts

Evaluate Your Progress

Keep Warm-Up in Perspective


ARCHIVES >>

"Doing more exercise with less intensity,"
Arthur Jones believes, "has all but
destroyed the actual great value
of weight training. Something
must be done . . . and quickly."
The New Bodybuilding for
Old-School Results supplies
MUCH of that "something."

 

This is one of 93 photos of Andy McCutcheon that are used in The New High-Intensity Training to illustrate the recommended exercises.

To find out more about McCutcheon and his training, click here.

 

Mission Statement

H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy

Privacy Policy

Credits

LOG IN FORUM MAIN REGISTER SEARCH
One Of The Biggest Questions Of HITers.
1 | 2 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

NeuroMass

Dr.Darden ,

This maybe the BIGGEST QUESTION that lingers in most HITers (and non-HITers)mind. If HIT is so effective and the best way to build muscle, why do you think we haven't seen or heard any successful bodybuilder(natural or otherwise) utilizing it in it's strictest form yet? Even Dorian Yates although very influenced by the theory of Arthur Jones and Mentzer did more volume and frequency than normal.

I have heard all the rationalizations and excuses throughout the years such as pros are on drugs and are tremendously gifted and stuff like that. Sorry but I couldn't accept it in my mind that ALL HITers coincidentally all have POOR GENETICS and that is the why we don't see any successful competitive bodybuilders using PURE HIT!
Even guys like Casey Viator, Mike and Ray Mentzer that we consider the EPITOME of HIT did not utilize HIT as applied in the present(very low volume and frequency with very limited exercises). Also I wanna know what happened to that guy (subject) you showed in your book Bigger Muscles in 42 days, the guy who gaines 40+ pounds in 42 days? I beleive he was a COMPETITIVE BODYBUILDER (AAU). Is he still on a HIT program? Is he still doing SuperSlow?

PEACE.
Open User Options Menu

Mark S

Hi NEUROMASS,

I'd like to chuck in my opinion on this,basically i dont think there are any top competitive bodybuilders training this way,but more importantly why?.as a person who has trained on HIT principles for some years i cant understand why anyone would want to train any other way,but i think that HIT is just not taken seriously,i dont know how long you have been training,but when i started using HIT principles everybody who wrote books or gave advice were pulling in the same direction,there didnt seem any confusion as to which way to train,now take a minute and read on these forums in the hot tips(check the intensity of your exercise)and then go and read some of the questions and answers on here,you will find that the advice is littered with contradiction,because it seems now everybody has got a different opinion on the way hit should be performed.HIT appealed to me because it was a far more logical way of training i used to read on the subject and think yes that is true, it made sense where at the time multiple sets were being performed because everybody else was training that way,it was just the done thing.we now have not to failure sets(like i said reread hot tips),we now have a workout plan by quite a few people that gives you enough time to go on vacation in between workouts.So if a a newcomer to HIT wanted to give it a try and joined these forums they would find more confusion than the multiple set boys,at least that way of training has remained constant throughout.As an example in the nautilus bodybuilding book with Boyer Coe there are as many sets in just the specialised back routine as what some trainees are now doing in a month
I dont wish to appear confrontational or argumentative,but HIT is now in my opinion developing into a joke,people should go and reread DR Dardens earlier books or try to buy them which fully explain the HIT PRINCIPLES apply them correctly to their own training,and we just might get a couple of good bodybuilders to come out of HIT,but sadly there is now too much contradictory advice to think about.

mark
Open User Options Menu

rmyers

Actually, the new USA overall winner is Mark Dugdale an avid HIT'er. He just earned his pro card with this win. There is a nice article which shows his workouts and explains his training in last month's Flex. The judges apparently felt that his more classic lines were superior to the "as massive as you can get" crowd, according to the article.

Rick
Open User Options Menu

Mark S

Then why is he training on a split routine 4 days a week,i'm afraid this only underlines what i said about the confusion regarding this method of training,proper HIT IS NOT ABOUT SPLIT ROUTINES

MARK
Open User Options Menu

rmyers

Mark,

Are you saying that HIT can only be considered valid if it is done full body at each workout?

While I train full body 3 times a week, and believe it to be the most effective way for me, I was not under the impression that this was required to be considered HIT. I have always believed that HIT was about how the exercises were performed both during the exercise and between exercises more than how the workout was structured.

Mentzer's Heavy Duty workouts are not like his ideal workout, which is not like his consolidated workout, which is not like Dr. Darden's workouts, etc. Is there really no latitude in HIT for individual workout preferences?

This is not meant to be a criticism of your statements, Mark, but I guess I am not certain that HIT has as rigid a definition as you imply.

Rick
Open User Options Menu

Mark S

RICK

Yes i do consider it be only TRUE HIT if the whole body is exercised at one workout.
SPLIT ROUTINES will lengthen the workouts and therefore will lesson the intensity this is a fact and not open to individual training preferences,the HARDER the work the LESS time it can be performed for ie a mile jog is less intense than a 200 metre sprint,this is my main argument the fact that people are adapting HIT to their own means and therefore it's turning into something else.
Individual preference can take the form of exercise choice and equipment used,but the basic principles should remain constant,if a second set of any exercise is considered then i'm afraid the first set wasnt worked hard enough. I would consider a split routine to be closer to the multiple set workouts than HIT training.

MARK

Open User Options Menu

rmyers

Fair enough, Mark, but even in Mentzer's last book, he states at one point that there should be a warm-up set, followed by a heavier set to get used to the weight, followed by a working set to failure. The way I have always believed HIT to be defined is that you should only have one working set to failure. Whether a trainee requires a warm-up set before the working set is up to the trainee's best judgement. I use only 1 set for most exercises, but find that for squats and chest press, I must add a warm-up set before my working set, as my 44 year old body simply cannot handle the stress of a heavy set without the warm-up.

With regard to you assertion that not enough intensity is provided by any less than a full body workout, you may be correct. HIT advocates maintaining high intensity for fairly small number of exercises, which I do. But let's take the deltoids as an example that is of concern for me. I have been having trouble making progress in this area. It seems as though I do best if I use bent reverse fly, lateral raise, and front raise, plus military press. That is four exercises out of the generally prescribed 8-10. So I am doing a full body workout, but only occasionally rotate some of these deltoid exercises in, to avoid having workouts with large numbers of exercises. Still my shoulders lag. Under a very strict definition, I'm not sure I will be able to make progress in this weak area. How would I overcome this and still remain within HIT guidelines?

Rick
Open User Options Menu

SubDoc

Washington, USA

One of the things that needs to be considered is why do we workout in the first place? Most of us started as teenagers trying to get bigger for football and to look good at the beach. So in a sense we are looking for approval. HIT or Superslow are different, by definition if you are looking for approval you do what everyone else does. Those who have the genetic apptitiude make great gains right from the beginning so why change? The guys in the magazine are not the way they are because of how they train, they are the way they are in spite of how they train.
Open User Options Menu

kevindill

Maryland, USA

AS shown on this board, and many others, one of the defining features of being a HITTER is that you believe your interpretation of HIT is the only correct one. :-)

I've always liked Dr Ken's:

Dr. Ken Leistner, ... gives a good answer to the question 'what is HIT?'

HIT is a philosophy of training and not a specifically defined set of dictums that delineate a training methodology.
The philosohy utilizes basic principles that allow for safe and productive training. These principles do not limit the practicioner to a narrow view of the equipment used of the number of sets done in any one workout. In short, HIT is an effective training procedure suitable for the most advanced and well-trained athlete or the mere beginner...HIT cannot be done frequently. Training as hard as possible does not allow a person to train a large number of times within any one week or month. The trend in athletics, as it seems to be in many areas of the popular culture, is to assume that more is better. Business executives and football coaches are praised for their willingness and ability to work ungodly hours each day. We revere the athlete who adopts a spartan training regime that requires massive amounts of work. I
believe that this concept allows many to justify their inability to achieve similar goals. They believe that only those blessed
with outstanding abilities and an inordinate amount of time for training can succeed, but in reality training very hard requires
time for rest and recovery..."HIT," to quote a statement I made many years ago, "is going all-out, not almost all-out; it is
taking each set to one's absolute limit, not almost to the limit; it is using whatever piece of equipment that's available, not
just a machine or group of machines; it is not the words of two or three men, but a commitment to work as hard as possible
while in the gym or weight room...without socializing, resting excessively between sets, or falling prey to the 'this isn't going
to work so I'll copy the star' attitude." HIT is hard but effective. It is hard but it should be safe relative to other methods
of training. It is demanding but rewarding. It can, if used properly, be the necessary vehicle to alter one's physical
strength, muscular size, and level of confidence both in and out of the athletic arena.
Open User Options Menu

Mark S

RICK,

If you feel you have a bodypart that is lagging you could try the specialization routines as listed in the nautilus advanced body building book,where individual body parts are trained at the beginning of the workout.For example the shoulder routine consists of a triple drop set on the lateral raise machine,to failure with your normal weght then reduce the weight by 20% to failure again and again by another 20% to failure.on this last set keep going until the handles cant be moved,this exercise can be done super slow.Due to the severity of this only do this twice per week and for no more than 2 weeks at a time,you can return to this method periodically.For the rest of your workout do a basic 5 OR 6 SETS done in traditional fashion.
Another routine involves pre exhaust,again at the start of your workout LATERAL RAISE immeadiately followed by OVERHEAD PRESS and then SHRUGS immeadiately followed by UPRIGHT ROW,again dont do this more than twice a week and for no more than 2 weeks, also do a few basic sets to round out this routine.
You can take these methods and apply them to whatever equipment is available to you,but do it hard until failure and as i've said only do this occasionally throughout the year

mark
Open User Options Menu

Dustin Jordan

Florida, USA

I was gonna post a longer version of what Subdoc wrote. Bodybuilding is a whole culture. It has a look, language, and behavoir that is considered appropriate just like any other culture. But...I also see what's wrong with our reasoning. We're saying that every champion bodybuilder is a conformist to bodybuilding's dominant culture, and none of them are interested in life outside of the gym enough to seek out more time efficient ways of training. I find this hard to accept as an answer to NeuroMass's question. If we take any group of people, we know that individual behavoir, interests, and oppinions will vary among them.

Although, I know that the old famous bodybuilders mentioned in the new book have submitted themselves to HIT, as well as more modern ones such as Keith Whitley and Eddie Robinson, I do wish a young genetic freak would offer themselves to Dr. Darden for long-term training. Who knows, maybe they can duplicate the success of AJ and Viator.

I do understand the desire of having a pro who is strict HIT, but in the end it really doesn't matter. As long as HIT helps us as individuals get the results we desperatly want effectively and efficiently, then who cares what the Professionals are doing?
Open User Options Menu

rmyers

Mark,

Thanks for the advice. I have Dr. Darden's newest book which has much the same routines. I had not really considered the drop set technique, since I try to keep it to one set to failure per bodypart. Also, being a more advanced technique, I was not certain I was quite ready for dropped sets using HIT. However, I will try it and I am sure it will help.

Rick
Open User Options Menu

crazeeJZ

Neuro,

Casey Viator, Mike Mentzer, and Ray Mentzer DID use proper HIT. Just because it MAY have evolved, which in itself is VERY debatable, it doesn't mean they didn't use proper HIT.

Like someone else said, I think current pros haven't used it because it's not taken seriously, and because people like to be in the gym. Mentzer's HIT, especially, with a lot of time in between split workouts, wouldn't be taken seriously.

On the other hand, if the pros used HIT, because of their enhanced recoveries, they would be performing FREQUENT HIT, and most HITers would say they aren't performing proper HIT anyway, so what's the point?
Open User Options Menu

Drew Baye

Florida, USA

Speaking of training genetically gifted subjects...

Dr. Darden suggested that I find someone to train to use as an example, so I went out and found someone who appears to be a perfect test subject.

He used to box, but has never seriously trained with weights for any period of time.

He is currently about 200 lbs at a height of about 5'8" and his upper arms measured nearly 16" cold, while hanging at his sides, relaxed. I have not measured his arms flexed, yet. He also has huge forearms and extremely wide shoulders.

There is barely 1/2" of tendon between his biceps and his elbows, and the long heads of his triceps appear to run nearly all the way to his elbow. I have no doubts he will be able to develop an 18" upper arm.

He currently has about 15 to 20 more pounds of fat than he should be carrying, but we are working on reducing that. Once he's leaner, we're going to work on adding as much muscle as possible.

After about one month of training and a relatively strict diet, his weight has not changed appreciably, but he has obviously lost fat and his clothes fit differently.

I have circumference and skinfold measurements, as well as before photos done by a professional photographer, and we'll be doing more photos and measurements every 8 weeks or so.

The measurements and photos will be on the web eventually.

Drew Baye
www.baye.com
Open User Options Menu

SubDoc

Washington, USA

Dustin,
I understand what you added to my post but I WAS making a generalization. That is one of the problems with this thread. I completely understand the dose/response theory of exercise.

Having said that however, when I prescribe antibiotics, there is a theraputic range I use in my dose calculations. So really we are back to the old question of "not how much exercise we can stand but how little do we need for maximum training value". The ancillary thread here, trying to define HIT strictly is difficult. Dr D's version, Dr Ken's version, Mentzers, Yates et al. The genetic superior using HIT would still be able to workout more frequently due to greater recovery ability i/e Yates. But Dorian's workouts were short compared to his competitors.

We, as a community, would be better served if we could unite over our similarities instead of fighting over our small differences.
Open User Options Menu

Dustin Jordan

Florida, USA

Drew,
The gifted subject sounds interesting and promising. I'm looking forward to seeing the progress you two make together.
SubDoc,
I couldn't agree with your statement about uniting over similarities more.

-Dustin
Open User Options Menu

Mark S

SUB DOC

We, as a community, would be better served if we could unite over our similarities instead of fighting over our small differences

It seems we as a community have FEW similarities and LARGE differences,you say that trying to define HIT is difficult,why do you say that? as i said on my first post on this thread,read on these forums hot tips(checking the intensity of youe exercise)that sums up HIT perfectly,that is basically all you need to know,but as i have also said,we have a so called new HIT, which is suggesting that its ok to take things easier,7-10 days between workouts ,NTF WORKOUTS,i was under the impression that NTF workouts belonged to the multiple set boys,talking of which they are more united in their ideas than we are and we perceive ourselves as the community that apply logic to our training.
I was trying to get the point accross,that HIT is not taken seriously because of the increasing contradictory evidence being handed out,for whatever reason,usually financial rewards,in the form of new books,once you have the grasp of HIT there is very little else you need to know,get the principles of going to failure.learn the skill of doing the reps correctly,and things will take care of themselves
Open User Options Menu

mr_andreassen

www.markdugdale.com/training.html
Open User Options Menu

rmyers

Hi Mark,

I believe the concept of NTF workouts, while not HIT specifically, may have it's place in one's regimen. My sport is bicycle racing and quite a lot of research over the last few years has been devoted to the question of whether recovery from difficult workouts is better accomplished by staying off the bike completely or by cycling at less than high intensity. The results have shown that very often the better choice is to get on the bike and do a light workout. This is largely do due to the effects of increased blood flow to recovering muscles carrying away toxins while speeding repair to the muscles.

As an example, there are 2 rest days during the 3 weeks of the Tour de France. You would think that after so many miles of difficult racing day after day, the riders would simply rest and completely avoid the bike. However, they all ride 25 or 30 miles on the rest days and they will tell you that it is far better for recovery than not riding at all.

So I wonder if perhaps NTF is simply an evolutionary addition to HIT that has been influenced by advances in exercise science.


Rick
Open User Options Menu

NeuroMass

myers,

After reading Mr. Dugdale's article and seeing his training program I'm afraid to say that it was not HIT! It may take to account some principles of HIT but that's it. Like Dorian Yates and Lee Labrada before who devised their own versions of lower volume (lower than the ususal)training but a very different from the IDEALS of HIT. Rememeber that HIT is not just about lowering the volume and frequency of training in fact the true essence of HIT is to train in the most efficient manner possible(the least required exercise to stimulate optimum growth).
PEACE.
Open User Options Menu

Mark S

NEUROMASS

HALLELUYA

MARK
Open User Options Menu

rmyers

NeuroMass wrote:
Rememeber that HIT is not just about lowering the volume and frequency of training in fact the true essence of HIT is to train in the most efficient manner possible(the least required exercise to stimulate optimum growth).
PEACE.


This will not be the same for everyone. I do 1 set to failure of most lifts, but I need to do 2 sets of squats because I simply cannot squat my failure weight without 1 warm-up set. So that is minimum for me. In Mentzer's last book, "High Intensity Training the Mike Mentzer Way", he says on pp 135-136 that you should do a light warm-up set followed by a medium set to get used to the weight followed by a working set to failure. Is he wrong? Some would say yes, but perhaps that is what he personally required.

I don't follow Mentzer's book, I prefer Dr. Darden's approach, but my point is that every person is different, and optimum varies with the individual.

Rick
Open User Options Menu

NeuroMass

myers,

It's one thing to warm-up before performing a proper set and I agree with that but it'e another thing to perform 2 sets (excluding warm-ups) each for 3 or more exercises per bodypart and working out 4 timeas a week which what Mr.Dugdale is doing. I'm afraid to say it is definitely NOT HIT! PEACE.
Open User Options Menu

crazeeJZ

NeuroMass wrote:
myers,

After reading Mr. Dugdale's article and seeing his training program I'm afraid to say that it was not HIT! It may take to account some principles of HIT but that's it. Like Dorian Yates and Lee Labrada before who devised their own versions of lower volume (lower than the ususal)training but a very different from the IDEALS of HIT. Rememeber that HIT is not just about lowering the volume and frequency of training in fact the true essence of HIT is to train in the most efficient manner possible(the least required exercise to stimulate optimum growth).
PEACE.


Hey Neuro,

Who's to say HIT stimulates optimum growth? There are many objective people who have said that they have had good strength gains, but poor size gains. Each objective individual who applies HIT is to say whether it stimulates optimum growth for them or not. For many, HIT stimulates optimum growth, but for many others, the NEW HIT stimulates optimum growth, and for them, the NEW HIT is the least amount of exercise that stimulates optimum growth.

Open User Options Menu

NeuroMass

CrazeeJZ,

My last post wasn't about if HIT is optimal or not. I was just proving my point that Mr. Dugdale isn't a proponent of HIT. PEACE.
Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | Next | Last
Administrators Online: Mod Phoenix
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy