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
Not Training Hard Enough?
First | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
Author
Rating
Options

HeavyHitter32

AShortt wrote:
Resting too long between sets allows for too much ATP replenishment. You tend to end up working with bundles of fibers that are already sacked rather than getting at new ones if you know what I mean.

The phosphate cycle takes about 25 to 35 seconds so rest breaks are bets kept below 20 seconds. Rest that is during the same set (breakdowns, rest pause etc) or super sets for the same muscle.

Regards,
Andrew


How much rest between exercises for the same muscle (not talking supersets, or breakdowns, etc.). Two minutes? Three?

Open User Options Menu

Ellington Darden

Rest between normal exercises?

At the most . . . two minutes.

Ellington
Open User Options Menu

spud

In a one-2-one personal training facility like Drew's, 2 minutes rest would mean 2 minutes rest.

The time from the end of one set to the beginning of the next would be 2 minutes.

In a commercial gym, the 2 minutes rest wouldn't actually be 2 minutes rest.

The 2 minutes would be spent moving to another piece of equipment which could be right down the other end of the gym. Then you have to set it up. That's after you've made a note of your reps and load for the previous exercise, and then you can start the next set. And that's if the equipment you want to use is free at the time. It probably won't be.

So basically, in a commercial gym, your rest periods are anything but restful.
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

I might add or interject that the amount of time one takes between sets is a "FUNCTION" of the goal of the workout.

Smaller rest periods can created favorable conditions to stimulate other systems other than simply the muscles, such as the CardioRespiratory system.

Additionally with adequate intensity, shorter rest periods are beleived to increase hormonal response such as testosterone and HGH.

Longer rest periods allow for "clearing" of metabolites and recovery to allow for larger loads to be used to produce a greater "average" load or as some call it TUL, in the exercise.

So rest between sets is NOT a cut and dried "this is the best" way. It is goal dependant.
Open User Options Menu

rtestes

Mississippi, USA

BIO-FORCE wrote:
I might add or interject that the amount of time one takes between sets is a "FUNCTION" of the goal of the workout.

Longer rest periods allow for "clearing" of metabolites and recovery to allow for larger loads to be used to produce a greater "average" load or as some call it TUL, in the exercise.

So rest between sets is NOT a cut and dried "this is the best" way. It is goal dependant.


Why not put a number on that? Would 30-60 seconds rest between exercises be a goal for those seeking to build muscle mass or should it be longer.

What would you, AJ or Dr. Darden suggest? In all HIT instructions, I have ever received I has never been suggested I should seek less than 30 seconds. Would you recommend that?

Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

rtestes wrote:
BIO-FORCE wrote:
I might add or interject that the amount of time one takes between sets is a "FUNCTION" of the goal of the workout.

Longer rest periods allow for "clearing" of metabolites and recovery to allow for larger loads to be used to produce a greater "average" load or as some call it TUL, in the exercise.

So rest between sets is NOT a cut and dried "this is the best" way. It is goal dependant.

Why not put a number on that? Would 30-60 seconds rest between exercises be a goal for those seeking to build muscle mass or should it be longer.

What would you, AJ or Dr. Darden suggest? In all HIT instructions, I have ever received I has never been suggested I should seek less than 30 seconds. Would you recommend that?




Because you "can't" put a number on it that would apply to everyone, of every age and conditioning level.

Plus it is a "moving target".

That is, the better shape you're in, the less rest you'll require.

A good rule of thumb, might be to never fully catch your breath between set to start, and then work to reduce that time and still maintain the same weights/reps or go higher depending on your goals.

I just finished training a few minutes ago, and I supersetted BentOver Barbell Rows, with Bench Presses.

These were rather heavy (for Old Guy like me) and I rested at least 3-6 minutes between sets.

Then perfromed a TriSet of:

Pulldowns w/Bands added
Dumbbell Pullovers
Cable Spyders

On these three I rested only long enough to get in position for the exercise (maybe 30-45sec)


For Maximum Strength, never begin the next set until you are fully recovered and feel like you can funtion at "Full Strength"
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Portugal

excerpts from Richard Winett (Master Trainer):

The goal of "metabolically devastating" a person - reaching a state of physical collapse seemingly cherished in some quarters - has decidedly not been part of the scientifically conducted studies and has never been demonstrated to be essential for gaining strength and muscle mass.

Many have been overdosing on intensity and then rationalizing the predictable results (e.g., inability to recover) by cloaking them in science - but where there is no science to support what one is doing.

Again, take Lance Armstrong, a person at the absolute extreme end of the genetic continuum even for his sport. Armstrong does not attempt to train at 100% day in and day out despite an ability to recover from training and racing that is legendary. If this guy is not going to the brink in every training session, what am I doing trying to go over the brink in every session?

But, yet, doesn't it seem odd that throughout centuries of athletic training there was no one who discovered that one maximum sprint per week, one maximal lift, or one maximal 10-mile run per week was all that was required to improve? Aren't we being presumptuous in believing that no one before us had ever tried very brief, very infrequent, very high intensity training?

Open User Options Menu
First | Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy