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
How Can Muscle Grow?
Author
Rating
Options

Carlos.Molina

If one needs to lose fat,they reduce their calories below maintenace level. Drink a lot of water also. But,if one wants to put on muscle, aside from HIT workouts, one needs to add whatever amount of calories above maintenance.

So many extra calories are needed to keep a new muscle alive or you will lose that new gain. So, If one goes on a calorie reduced diet to lose fat(say they have 25% fat)and continues to do HIT, how can they gain muscle or at least not lose existing muscle by not eating at maintenance or above it to keep new muscle alive?
This is very confusing.

C Molina
Open User Options Menu

spud

The fact that you are stimulating your muscles by lifting weights means that you will not lose muscle mass.

The main purpose of lifting weights on a fat loss program is to ensure that the weight you lose is fat, not muscle. This is known as discriminant weight loss.

Lifting weights as part of a fat loss program is not supposed to build loads of new muscle, merely maintain what you already have. If you gain any muscle, then that is a bonus.

Even though you may not be looking to pack muscle, your weight training should still be progressive.

People with a lot of fat may well build a few pounds of muscle as well as lose say 20 pounds of fat. However, if you are already quite lean then you will probably not build that much muscle, as you will not have the necessary fat reserves to provide you with the energy to do so.

Having said that, you certainly won't lose any muscle provided that you stimulate it.
Open User Options Menu

Andrew42

I believe that is true for beginners (maintaining all/most of your muscle mass while losing fat) but not advanced trainers unless you lower your caloric instake very gradually.

For advanced trainers; every day we verge on the "tipping point" of being either catabolic or anabolic. It is a very fine line. Add the stress of a drastic reduction in calories and your body will quickly attempt to "self preserve".

Combining HIT with a dramatically lower calories diet "works" for beginners as Dr. Darden's case examples prove because the body needs to protect itself from the weight bearing stress.

Once you gain 10-20lbs of muscle, the body doesn't see such a need to preserve ALL of that when you drastically want to reduce weight. Muscle is costly to maintain and it would rather shead a few lbs of it then be forced into a situation where it has to eventually sacrifice organ tissue.

When you drastically diet; the body doesn't know you will stop in a few weeks - it prepares in advance for the chance that you may never increase calories again.

I have found the best plan is to gradually reduce calories while maintaining a standard HIT schedule and brisk walking. Once at a desired level of bodyfat; cycle increased calories during times when you increase intensity/exercise demands at a level significantly higher than "normal".

For beginners; I recommend what Dr. Darden suggests. Reduce calories more dramatically while on a "reduced HIT routine". This provides the fastest results in getting to your "launching point" for new gains.

At that moment you are satisfied with your bodyfat level; gradually increase calories and add a bit more exercises and start training with some "intensity variables" and occassional specialization work.

If you want fascinating and fact-based (documented) examples of the phenomean of getting "ripped" while trying to build/maintain muscle mass; Clarence Bass's RIPPED books (particulary books 1&2) have validated body fat test results along with the diet and training mistakes that lead to the "truth" about diet and intense exercise.

Clarence is pro-HIT so he won't offend anyone's sensibilies here either.

Andrew A.
Open User Options Menu

amg455

I believe Clarence knows what he is talking about. But my question to Andrew A. is in regards to Clarence's current workout routines. Clarence says he only trains once/week and does a cardio routine once/week. He believes if he had switched over earlier that he would have made better gains (quicker). I'm referring to recent postings on his website and to his Challenge Yourself book. What are your thoughts on this?
Open User Options Menu

spud

Andrew,

What are the differences in the methods adopted by:

A) a beginner looking to lose a lot of fat e.g. dropping his bodyfat from 30% to 15%.

and

B) an advanced trainee looking to drop his bodyfat from 10% to 6%?

Does the advanced trainee simply reduce his calories at a more gradual rate? Or does he have to train differently?

Thanks in advance,

AC.
Open User Options Menu

Andrew42

Amg:

I have followed Clarence's writing and training career for almost 20 years and find him to be a "voice of wisdom" in this field. Clarence has strong opinions on some things but doesn't make any claims of only "one way" to do something. I like that and find it refreashing. He is very good at teaching principles.

I have also corresponded with Clarence a bit in the last several years about some of the changes he's made to his training approach.

Clarence looks fantastic today at age 65 and only weight training "once a week" on a brief, periodized, HIT-type routine (although more recently he added some kettlebell training on a second day of the week to keep more muscle conditioning).

His priorities now are to keep as "fit" as possible. He also includes high intensity aerobics in his weekly schedule.

In Clarence's earlier books he documented how he overtrained with both HVT and HIT routines. Since I am still interested in being as "muscular" as possible I take hints from when he at his size peak (which happends to be about the age I am right now - 40 years old).

Clarence was at his most impressive when he did one set per exercise; spread over 3-5 movements; and trained each bodypart twice in 8 days (with only one of those days being maximum intensity). He may have done just as well on "less" but that can only be speculation at this point.

Twenty five years later, Clarence still trains using one set per exercise/msucle, and now just once a week. His muscle mass though is 20% less than it was at his peak so it is speculation that he would have been "better" using his current routine. He is not focused on competitive bodybuilding now either - balanced strength and conditioning. He is also 65 years old so muscle loss was inevitable as well.

I think the point Clarence was making in his book "Challenge Yourself", was that many of the routines he used in the past were "excessive" - but I wouldn't neccesary extrapolate this to suggest his "all time best peaking" routine was TOO MUCH or that his current routine would have been better (he gained 15lbs of muscle in two months on a "peaking HIT routine"). time). There is no real way to judge that now.

The "take home" point I garner from all of this is:

Once muscle is developed to a point; it doesn't take much exercise to maintain your gains for a long time (65 years and more!)

After you reach your muscular maximum; you do not have to put your body through excessive strain "all the time" and doing so may be counterproductive from a long-term health standpoint.

Once you have a good level of muscle mass - get LEAN! You will look twice as impressive!

The key to Clarence's findings...

If didn't take much exercise to HIT a muscular peak and it doesn't take much exercise to maintain a good level of muscle mass in advancing years.

Andrew A.



Open User Options Menu

amg455

"I think the point Clarence was making in his book "Challenge Yourself", was that many of the routines he used in the past were "excessive" - but I wouldn't neccesary extrapolate this to suggest his "all time best peaking" routine was TOO MUCH or that his current routine would have been better (he gained 15lbs of muscle in two months on a "peaking HIT routine"). time). There is no real way to judge that now."

I didn't extrapolate anything from what he said. He writes word for word that his progress would have been better and quicker had he switched to once/week training in his 30's, 40's, and 50's. As for if he did more or attempted to peak, I doubt it would make a significant difference as his age is a huge deterrent to making, let alone keeping his gains as per Richard Winnet's viewpoints of recently and the last couple of years.

I think leanness, less than 10% BF is where most trainees thoughts should be focused, because most individuals will never be huge...unless they are huge and fat and then, yes they will have increased their muscle mass, but will probably have doubled their bodyfat relative to the gain in muscle mass. A fine example would be Darden's new book where he has a method of determining one's potential for arm size. I found that interesting considering most of the people I know are average or below average based on his figures.

Why do all trainees attempt to top their previous attempts at increases in body mass? (When most should know it is more than likely fat gain). Case in point, in Darden's new book, he shows Hudlows progress in four phases. Look at the photos between phase III and phase IV. All Hudlow got was fatter. Yes, I will admit that some of it was muscle, but his abs basically disappear as do other areas of previous definition. Someone please explain to me, why a trainee would attempt to get larger and then try to cut down "slowly", when in reality, one will lose most of the LBM they gained during their attempt at bulking up. So, the trainee gains 10-15 lbs of "supposed" LBM (in reality it would be closer to 5 lbs of LBM and 10 lbs of FAT), but can they maintain all the LBM when they want to get lean? Doubt it! But I'll wait to hear from the experts on this.
Open User Options Menu

bill1

California, USA

Carlos.Molina wrote:
If one needs to lose fat,they reduce their calories below maintenace level. Drink a lot of water also. But,if one wants to put on muscle, aside from HIT workouts, one needs to add whatever amount of calories above maintenance.

So many extra calories are needed to keep a new muscle alive or you will lose that new gain. So, If one goes on a calorie reduced diet to lose fat(say they have 25% fat)and continues to do HIT, how can they gain muscle or at least not lose existing muscle by not eating at maintenance or above it to keep new muscle alive?
This is very confusing.

C Molina


Fat is the bodies method of storing excess calories and if you add a pound of muscle without increasing your caloric intake , there is a source for the body to get those extra calories needed to keep that extra pound of muscle going ,if you have a store of fat. The fat itself.

Bill
Open User Options Menu

Andrew42

Amg:

Clarence wrote:

He wished he would have started once-a-week training earlier

He "felt" he would have been better training LESS FREQUENTLY in his 30, 40, and 50s. He did not say he would have been BETTER on a once-a-week program for the past 35 years - only that he felt his programs of the past could have been/should have been LESS. He did not specifally define "less" in the book as it relates to the past.

Clarence trained up to 20 sets per workout 3-4 days a week for much of that time. He realizes he probably didn't need that much now - that is all.

Clarence did not say he would have been more muscular at age 41 training once-per week.

Amg - I have no arguement with you. What you must understand is that people have different goals. So what if I still beleive I can "inch out" another lb of muscle or keep the aging process from taking some away. To me that is the fun and constant challenge in training.

My training only takes 60-90 per week usually, and never more than 2 hours.

I enjoy it; it "works" and I have fun trying to look my best/be my strongest on such a schedule.

Again - I have no axe to grind. Just offering my opinion in relation to my goals and what I find motivating and challenging.

Regards,

Andrew A.
Open User Options Menu
Administrators Online: Mod Phoenix
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy