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
I'm Right, You're Wrong
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

bodycoach2

Florida, USA

Dr. Darden et al,
Having been a member of the HIT community -but no longer- I was one of the 'I'm right' people. Always thinking I knew better than the others. It seems that mindset dominates HIT, and the subsets of HIT (Super Slow, HeavyDuty/Randism, Leistner followers, SlowBurn, etc). With some of these people, if they disagree with your comments and experience, they'll actually accuse you of lying and fraud.

In the mainstream fitness community, I don't see that mindset much, unless it's financially motivated. There is more of a "That's an interesting concept. I'd like to learn more," attitude.

Dr. Darden, have you observed this effect? If so, what do you think is the reason? What is the appeal of HIT to the "I'm right," mindset?

And, for all of you who believe yourselves to be 'right' why is that?

Personally, I find it unlikely that we've advanced that far in science to really be so vain and bold as to come to an absolute conclusion on anything.

Then again, I could be wrong.
Danny
Open User Options Menu

davise

I'm an abbreviated trainer for sure and follow some HIT principles (limited sets and training frequency...lots of intensity....good form etc), but talking to some of the HD and Superslow guys is like talking to a brain-washed cult member. They can quote their guru word for word, but lack common sense and dont think for themselves. I find Darden and Leistner a little more rational and they have trained lots of people with great results. The slow burn guys are way out there and really cant produce guys who have made good results. I saw some pictures from one of their seminars and it looked like they were attempting to emulate the physique of Woody Allen.
Open User Options Menu

autoartist

This is going to be good. :)

About the I'm right mindset:

Perhaps it comes from the fact that most ppl in gyms don't do HIT. Or perhaps it comes from all those people looking and buying all those supps thinking they will get big.

Just the other day: Saw a early 40 year dude, kind of big, but fat, trying to show some scrawny teens how to lift. His form was all-wrong on the shrugs, actually was rotating the shoulder. I just chuckled to my self. Then I saw Mr. Mentor educating the young lads on supps. That was funny too.
Yeah it kinds kind of boring being right all the time?.hee hee

For real:

I am not sure but I do know for me I have done workouts like those in the mags and I have done workouts like/similar to HIT. I am far much happier w/ HIT than using high volume. It just seems to work and makes sense to me, plus it is more efficient. I don't want to live in a gym. I want the max results with the least amount of time. I also don?t want to spend money on Supps. I don?t care to try and look like some dude in the mags. I just want to look like me but w/ more mass.

I think HIT is the best for those who don?t take anything other than a daily vitamin.

Just my cents.
A.
Open User Options Menu

TapHappy

You'll find dogmatic people on all sides of the fence. People who say HIT "doesn't work" are clueless. People who say Volume "doesn't work" are clueless as well.
Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

It would be completely improper to allow this thread to pass with out an IARTer posting, because as most are already aware - WE ARE NEVER WRONG ;^)

Danny, I agree with what you said about the mainstream and about the complete impossibility of anyone having the majority of the answers. Fact is though we see less belligerence in the mainstream NOT because of good manners and good intentions but as a result of the worst kind of B.S. going. Politically correct B.S. founded on junk science and new age mentality. People in the mainstream tend to be open minded letting any old garbage fall in because it sounds exciting and possibly trendy (spelled $). The mainstream tends to be horribly infected with money-making scams and bogus science. The mainstream suffers terribly from an almost complete lack of understanding and connection with the related disciplines of science. Mix in the fact that health at the prevention level is very low on the medical totem and you have a recipe for a stomach turning hodge podge of outdated and un-ripened ideas.

Unfortunately, HIT has suffered big time from a knee jerk reaction to the mind-boggling amount of nonsense in the mainstream. HITers all too often claim superiority because the mainstream missed training to failure and single set protocols. Fact is though if you take any particular exercise element too far or out of context you arrive at the exact same place as the mainstream ? the corner of nowhere and confusion avenue.

Regards,
Andrew
Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32


Personally, I find it unlikely that we've advanced that far in science to really be so vain and bold as to come to an absolute conclusion on anything.


You're actually contradicting yourself with that statement. You say we can't have absolutes, yet you are stating one.


I think with years of critical thinking and training experience, we can be certain as to what is valid and invalid as far as training and diet for optimal muscle size -- at least for ourselves. I only really know MY body. However, I do think general principles are applicable to everyone. The application gets tricky sometimes, but the theory (intense, brief, and infrequent training) is valid for everyone.
Open User Options Menu

bodycoach2

Florida, USA

Mr. HITTER32,
I said:
"Personally, I find it UNLIKELY that we've advanced that far in science to really be so vain and bold as to come to an absolute conclusion on anything."

Unlikely- adjective,
1. Not likely; improbable

I could be wrong about this, but I don't think adjectives make and point as an absolute. Adjectives can qualify an absolute, which is what I attempted to do. Maybe, I was unsuccessful.

And, I think you made my point with yours.

Danny - The AntiChrist of SS/HIT
Open User Options Menu

splice

TapHappy wrote:
You'll find dogmatic people on all sides of the fence. People who say HIT "doesn't work" are clueless. People who say Volume "doesn't work" are clueless as well.


Agreed Obviously hvt works because almost everyone at gyms do it and some are in good shape (some i said). H.i.t works as well because there a lot of people that do it. Most things will work but like one person said i don't want to live in the gym or be this huge person either. For me h.i.t is working great hands down. Working out with weight for an hour a week instead of an hour a day is excellent. Is h.i.t the best well for me yeah for others maybe no. I think you should do as little as possible to get the results you want not what others want.
Open User Options Menu

BF Bullpup

Massachusetts, USA

Good question, I would think.

I do have a bit of a question myself: are the majority of HIT adopters HIT users since they first touched iron, or were their routines more "mainstream" before they turned to HIT?

For me I lifted in the more "popular" way, as much as 6 times per week for an hour each session, with cardio 3x to 4x a week, during my "peak" as a volume trainer. Since turning to HIT last February (and using the book's beginning and intermediate routines, no less), I'm bigger, leaner, and have much more muscle density. All this without cardio. Right now I'm only doing this twice a week for 45 minutes each (I know, I know, should be shorter, I'm working on it).

If other HIT users have similar experiences, then I'm sure they feel the same way that I do: that HIT, while it isn't perfect and "absolute", is a hell lot better than anything else we've tried. It ALWAYS rule to get more results for doing less. I can understand the fanaticism of the so-called "Jedis", even if I don't have to agree with them about everything.
Open User Options Menu

newbie05

BFBullpup wrote:
Good question, I would think.

I do have a bit of a question myself: are the majority of HIT adopters HIT users since they first touched iron, or were their routines more "mainstream" before they turned to HIT?

For me I lifted in the more "popular" way, as much as 6 times per week for an hour each session, with cardio 3x to 4x a week, during my "peak" as a volume trainer. Since turning to HIT last February (and using the book's beginning and intermediate routines, no less), I'm bigger, leaner, and have much more muscle density. All this without cardio. Right now I'm only doing this twice a week for 45 minutes each (I know, I know, should be shorter, I'm working on it).

If other HIT users have similar experiences, then I'm sure they feel the same way that I do: that HIT, while it isn't perfect and "absolute", is a hell lot better than anything else we've tried. It ALWAYS rule to get more results for doing less. I can understand the fanaticism of the so-called "Jedis", even if I don't have to agree with them about everything.



I agree with you. I did start out doing volume training becasue thats all i knew. DId it work? yeah You can do anything when starting out and get results, because of the change to your body. But to read someone say that you can get into shape by working out 20-30 minutes three tiems a week seemed crazy. But if it worked why not do it to get more time since i was overtraining while doing hvt.

So i did the switch and for the better. I can't get enough those 20 minutes are hell for me but the results i am getting are crazy. I know excersise should be fun but if i have to work out for an hour a day and have it be fun or work out 20 minutes and not really enjoy it but get sick results, i'll stick with that. ALso just bfbullup i don't do cardio and it's amazing something that you are said to do you don't really need per se. I still have the same stamina, same speed as i was when doing it. I was lifting at the gym with my buddies but they would be in there for so long i would get bored so now i work out at home and do my workout and get on with life it's great.
Open User Options Menu

Bill Sekerak

California, USA

bodycoach2 wrote:
Dr. Darden et al,
Having been a member of the HIT community -but no longer- I was one of the 'I'm right' people. Always thinking I knew better than the others. It seems that mindset dominates HIT, and the subsets of HIT (Super Slow, HeavyDuty/Randism, Leistner followers, SlowBurn, etc). With some of these people, if they disagree with your comments and experience, they'll actually accuse you of lying and fraud.

In the mainstream fitness community, I don't see that mindset much, unless it's financially motivated. There is more of a "That's an interesting concept. I'd like to learn more," attitude.

Dr. Darden, have you observed this effect? If so, what do you think is the reason? What is the appeal of HIT to the "I'm right," mindset?

And, for all of you who believe yourselves to be 'right' why is that?

Personally, I find it unlikely that we've advanced that far in science to really be so vain and bold as to come to an absolute conclusion on anything.

Then again, I could be wrong.
Danny


In other words , who can really know anything, there are no absolutes , everything is possible , so how can we be certain of anything ? I've heard this before.

Bill
Open User Options Menu

Bill Sekerak

California, USA

AShortt wrote:
It would be completely improper to allow this thread to pass with out an IARTer posting, because as most are already aware - WE ARE NEVER WRONG ;^)

Danny, I agree with what you said about the mainstream and about the complete impossibility of anyone having the majority of the answers. Fact is though we see less belligerence in the mainstream NOT because of good manners and good intentions but as a result of the worst kind of B.S. going. Politically correct B.S. founded on junk science and new age mentality. People in the mainstream tend to be open minded letting any old garbage fall in because it sounds exciting and possibly trendy (spelled $). The mainstream tends to be horribly infected with money-making scams and bogus science. The mainstream suffers terribly from an almost complete lack of understanding and connection with the related disciplines of science. Mix in the fact that health at the prevention level is very low on the medical totem and you have a recipe for a stomach turning hodge podge of outdated and un-ripened ideas.

Unfortunately, HIT has suffered big time from a knee jerk reaction to the mind-boggling amount of nonsense in the mainstream. HITers all too often claim superiority because the mainstream missed training to failure and single set protocols. Fact is though if you take any particular exercise element too far or out of context you arrive at the exact same place as the mainstream ? the corner of nowhere and confusion avenue.

Regards,
Andrew


Yep.

Bill
Open User Options Menu

BF Bullpup

Massachusetts, USA

newbie05 wrote:
I can't get enough those 20 minutes are hell for me but the results i am getting are crazy. I know excersise should be fun but if i have to work out for an hour a day and have it be fun or work out 20 minutes and not really enjoy it but get sick results, i'll stick with that.


Now it's my turn to agree with you, Newb. Yeah, HIT isn't as "fun" as volume; we can't like chat with other people between sets or spend 2-3 minutes between exercises pumping ourselves up for a big lift, but DAMN, HIT does work!

Jeez, I guess a great body, just like everything else worthwhile in life, takes hard work. And that's a fair statement even for something that seems "easy" at first, HIT.
Open User Options Menu

bodycoach2

Florida, USA

No, Bill, not 'in other words.'

This ain't about eastern philosophy, quantum mechanics, and metaphysics. Shirley McClain ain't on this board.

I'm talking about science; biology, physiology, even physics.

Basically, exercise is still very young, as a science. Only in the last 40-50 years has other classical sciences begun to look at exercise, observe and research it. Even apart from exercise, physiologist are still learning new things, everyday.

My point is that exercise, as a science, is in it's infancy, and dogmatic thinking limits it's exploration, at least for now.

If HIT was even close to the 'conclusion', people wouldn't be asking the same questions they did 30 years ago.

Danny
Open User Options Menu

STanner

Texas, USA

bodycoach2 wrote:

Danny - The AntiChrist of SS/HIT


Danny,

I like you but you're not Anti-Christ to HIT/SS. Maybe to those who are fresh out of certification or have financial investment in "training slow", but not for any curious, observant trainer who happens to primarily use SS/HIT.

You're the Anti-Christ of HIT like Canada is the Anti-Christ of the USA. ;)

Skyler

Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

If HIT was even close to the 'conclusion', people wouldn't be asking the same questions they did 30 years ago.

Speak for yourself.

Not all people are asking the same questions they did 30 years ago. Only the confused are asking.

Many of the confused are also asking how to lose weight and whether socialism is the answer to all of the problems.
Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

bodycoach2 wrote:
Mr. HITTER32,
I said:
"Personally, I find it UNLIKELY that we've advanced that far in science to really be so vain and bold as to come to an absolute conclusion on anything."

Unlikely- adjective,
1. Not likely; improbable

I could be wrong about this, but I don't think adjectives make and point as an absolute. Adjectives can qualify an absolute, which is what I attempted to do. Maybe, I was unsuccessful.

And, I think you made my point with yours.

Danny - The AntiChrist of SS/HIT


You can play word games, but your implication is clear: one cannot be certain (though you seem pretty certain of it!).

We don't have the answers for everything --- BUT --- with one's experience and existing knowledge, any individual should be able to reach his upper limit of potential.
Open User Options Menu

bodycoach2

Florida, USA

Guess I'll have to work harder.
Open User Options Menu

bodycoach2

Florida, USA

Heavy,
You're right. You are SO right. How could I have been so stupid, so blind, so confused.

Thank you, for helping me to see the light, again. Thank you for leading me back to the HIT flock. I shall carry the word, from now on.

HIT is the truth, the way, the RIGHT way.

Is it just me, or does anyone else see Heavy making my point?

Danny, who escaped the HIT cult.
Open User Options Menu

NeuroMass

bodycoach2 wrote:
Dr. Darden et al,
Having been a member of the HIT community -but no longer- I was one of the 'I'm right' people. Always thinking I knew better than the others. It seems that mindset dominates HIT, and the subsets of HIT (Super Slow, HeavyDuty/Randism, Leistner followers, SlowBurn, etc). With some of these people, if they disagree with your comments and experience, they'll actually accuse you of lying and fraud.

In the mainstream fitness community, I don't see that mindset much, unless it's financially motivated. There is more of a "That's an interesting concept. I'd like to learn more," attitude.

Dr. Darden, have you observed this effect? If so, what do you think is the reason? What is the appeal of HIT to the "I'm right," mindset?

And, for all of you who believe yourselves to be 'right' why is that?

Personally, I find it unlikely that we've advanced that far in science to really be so vain and bold as to come to an absolute conclusion on anything.

Then again, I could be wrong.
Danny


Great post ! In fact I myself had been observing this strange self righteous and all knowing attitude especially in the HIT community. Maybe this is due to the Belief taht HITers are supposedly INTELLECTUALS and the others are just mindless BRUTES. Although I must admit that their are some OPEN MINDED HITers out there but there are also a few FANATICS that take every word that comes out from Jones or Mentzer's mouth as gospel. It's so strange because Mike Mentzer himself who was an OBJECTIVIST had always advocated "INDEPENDENT and LOGICAL THINKING" among his students but ironically thier are a few who just do that opposite, by just blindly following what was dictated to them.


I don't know if you were arawe of a series of post that I made a few months ago which dealt with the issue of double standards in the HIt community as far as as accepting and legitimizing scientific studies go. If a certain scientific study showed anything contrary to the principles of HIT we automatically reject it as a FLAWED study which to me is not only unfair but also rediculous ! As HITers we often pride ourselves as purely "Science Based Method" but on the contrary we discount MOST scientific studies which related to weight training. Furthermore I have no doubt whatsoever that everybody in the business including the HIT theorists have also there own personal interest (hidden agenda) in mind reason why they are often so DEFENSIVE when it comes to protecting thier commodity (training method).

The fact is only those WITHOUT any hidden interest like some of us here can afford to be OPEN MINDED and have FREEDOM to learn new and better things.
Real science should be PROGRESSIVE. Nobody grows by being STAGNANT.

PEACE.



Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Portugal

We need a paradigm shift among the HIT crowd. However, there are a few problems therein.


1) We need realworld weightlifter(s) to take the LEAD in promoting what really works for the long haul. (NOT some 6-week study, but long term weight lifting results)

2) These leader(s) should have no COMMERCIAL interests involved therein. In other words they are not promoting themselves, or their product(s).

3) HIT needs an official club that is active.
a) holds regular regional bodybuilding shows, power lift meets, and strongman events,(Wow, that would show if HIT really worked), meets that are open to all comers.

Marc
Open User Options Menu

Landau

Florida, USA

"I think it is most important to discover as quickly as possible, not how much exercise is necessary, but how little is required." The logic behind HIT that Arthur read over 50 years ago, forgot it for nearly 20 years and used it as a base for his systematic training. It is the premise behind intelligent training, and is almost always ignored by the mainstream.

I personally think it is brilliant beyond anything else in exercise. No emotion, find the minimal dosage, apply it and then back off until it is needed again. It is too basic for an exercise world that goes way beyond the scope of this required simplicity, dismisses it and tries to integrate complex and confusing theories to human endeavor and athletic training.

Some "self proclaimed" expert approached me today one of his theories of Chaos Theory a new science for sports behavior, I never heard of it - Danny maybe you can help. The explanation was beyond my possible understanding to the degree that someone would go this far to have such conclusions in my opinion and to go on to apply and even suggest (in my opinion) these inane and outerspaciousness applications to "sports science?"

HIT still is the KISS approach (motor learning, see Specificity the Facts and the Fables) (another KISS principal) but the direction that formal education takes in the world of exercise physiology is way beyond the reach of ration, including logic where this individual professed elite study in. Again, I lost my emotion for exercise a while ago, but am always willing to listen, but their explanations need to be in plain language. In spite of their "scientific gobbledegook," it never really applies. David
Open User Options Menu

Bill Sekerak

California, USA

bodycoach2 wrote:
No, Bill, not 'in other words.'

This ain't about eastern philosophy, quantum mechanics, and metaphysics. Shirley McClain ain't on this board.

I'm talking about science; biology, physiology, even physics.

Basically, exercise is still very young, as a science. Only in the last 40-50 years has other classical sciences begun to look at exercise, observe and research it. Even apart from exercise, physiologist are still learning new things, everyday.

My point is that exercise, as a science, is in it's infancy, and dogmatic thinking limits it's exploration, at least for now.

If HIT was even close to the 'conclusion', people wouldn't be asking the same questions they did 30 years ago.

Danny


Are you sure ? After all you don't want to be dogmatic about your conclusions. People are still asking the same questions about lots of things , some for thousands of years , that we have answers for. Hell, it took the Roman Catholic church 500 years to admit Gallileo was right.

Bill
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

bodycoach2 wrote:
Heavy,
You're right. You are SO right. How could I have been so stupid, so blind, so confused.

Thank you, for helping me to see the light, again. Thank you for leading me back to the HIT flock. I shall carry the word, from now on.

HIT is the truth, the way, the RIGHT way.

Is it just me, or does anyone else see Heavy making my point?

Danny, who escaped the HIT cult.


Hi Danny,

If you look through and find many of my recent posts (I'm a newbie here, but not to the world of training) you'll find a similar message.

HIT has evolved to a point that it is not really High Intensity Training. It is not at its basic level based on INTENSITY.

INTENSITY is a gradient or concentration of energy or power. It is a density of force or power.

High Intensity would mean an expenditure and demonstration of that density.

Slow reps, and such "are not" Intensity. Granted they might be "hard to do" but they ARE NOT "Intense".

In fact they are examples of reducing intensity.

I agree with you that various factions of HIT have taken paths that are far from the original root of the term.

I suppose some can blame AJ, but why should he really be an expert in exercise? Jones was no doubt very bright man. In fact his accomplishments are gigantic, but his scientific foundation and principles are less that accurate, supportable or of meaningful value.

So it that "anti-HIT".

Hell no!!!

It is PRO-HIT. It is get your act together and realize what High Intensity Training really is HIT.

It is quit trying to make HIT something it is not and can never be HIT.

It is facing reality.

Intensity is a meaningful and important element to training , it can be applied across a broad spectrum of training systems.

Intensity is the element that makes the difference between a good result and the best result, BUT. . . . It is NOT. . . the best system of training for every training situation, and the current dogma is FAR from it.

The amount of disinformation disseminated by some of the more radical factions is border line fanatical.

This is not a "religious war", it is a quest to achieve a greater understanding of what works, and what works better and best.

When I encounter some on this board who are so closed off and blindered, I wonder why they try so hard to "support" some of these clearly strange perceptions.

But, these very types of threads will hopefully provide enough questions and searches for answers, that most of this "chest beating" and sectionalization will melt away and be looked at fondly as a growth period.

A coming of age where finally enlightenment and curiosity move the element of Training Intensity to the position it deserves, rather than being thought of as a "radical" splinter group from the 80's.
Open User Options Menu

eintology

California, USA

Danny,

Regarding your original post:

This subject runs deeper than it appears on the surface, but for the sake of the effort involved, I will try to be as brief as possible. I think I understand, at least in part, the crux of what it is you are taking to task, here, as I too have given this one some thought over the last several months.

I think a lot of what you are seeing is a trickle down effect from Arthur Jones, his communicative style, and his choices. You can tell by the language used, then link it to the personality types it attracts, and follow the dots. I now think this was done largely by design on his part. It's an inevitable BI-product of his ability with persuasive message.

Of course Arthur Jones was, and is a talented individual, I am certainly not suggesting otherwise. When you've got it you've got it, and no one can deny him of that. But to be kind, I am now seeing that a great deal of the attraction to HIT was as much Arthur Jones and the romanticizing of him as an individual, as it was his views on exercise. He knew how to attract that type of fervor. It's all part of his talent. Part of the momentousness of it all. I'm just not convinced that type of personal bravado has served HIT in the best possible light as a system of exercise. In fact I would go so far as to say, I think it has probably turned as many, if not more people off to it, than it has on to it.

You know, it's one thing to have an affinity toward something, or someone, and it's another to have an emulation attached to it that borders on the vicarious. Where I am going with this on the tangible benefit level is that I think this passion for Arthur Jones ultimately shrouds some of the information. It's certainly not everybody who has ever done HIT, or has written books about it, or is on this forum; as the inability to single out the individual from the aggregate is a form of racism, after all. But it's there.

Let the chips fall where they may, it's come to be my understanding of it.

Erik
Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Next | Last
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy