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
Unbelievable.
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

Acerimmer1

Just been reading Frank Sepes book.

Interesting rep scheme.

Squats 10 sets of 20
Any takers?
Open User Options Menu

Mark S

Acerimmer1 wrote:
Just been reading Frank Sepes book.

Interesting rep scheme.

Squats 10 sets of 20
Any takers?


What is the reasoning behind it?
Open User Options Menu

leon79

Would that be The Truth?

Although I know now that the training advice in that book does not work for me, I must admit that I tried the routine years ago, back when I was much less knowledgeable of my own response to exercise.

I will say that while I quickly burned out on the volume, I did learn some valuable lessons about supersetting exercises and intensity that I am just now reintroducing to my routine after years of foolishness.
Open User Options Menu

witnessDhitness

Not so unbelievable. Rep schemes from both ends of spectrum are proven to work. For example Serge Nubret used 8 sets of 12-20reps per exercise, 3-4 exercises per bodypart with light weights.High fatigue and low strain.But it seems to work like magic for him.

Seeing his pics from 65 years old I now doubt that he ever took steroids. I am doing this training and am not "burnt out". Your body is just not ready for this kind of load, first time you try it, and it will not be for few weeks.First week I tried it I NEEDED post workout nap every day.What is interesting about Serge is that although he never trained heavy he was very strong.
Open User Options Menu

Mark S

witnessDhitness wrote:


Seeing his pics from 65 years old I now doubt that he ever took steroids. I am doing this training and am not "burnt out". Your body is just not ready for this kind of load, first time you try it, and it will not be for few weeks.First week I tried it I NEEDED post workout nap every day.What is interesting about Serge is that although he never trained heavy he was very strong.


It is naive at best to think Nubret didn't use steroids.
Nubret was very strong,which means he at some point he would have trained progressively heavy to be strong.

Being able to bench 500 is not just a happy by product of repping with 225lbs,he could only do that because he could bench 500 not the other way round.

Doing 10 sets of 20 reps the average person would be using very little weight hence no results.
Open User Options Menu

Acerimmer1

witnessDhitness wrote:
Not so unbelievable.


I couldn't think of anything else to call the thread. I doubt it would work very well for chest.
Open User Options Menu

Acerimmer1

MARK SUFFOLK wrote:


It is naive at best to think Nubret didn't use steroids.
Nubret was very strong,which means he at some point he would have trained progressively heavy to be strong.



Not really you can build strength by training with higher reps lighter weights, better form. The problem is while many trainees practice good form they still like to lift heavy or be seen to lift heavy. They never consider how to get the same affect out of a lighter weight.

This is very important to a pro who can't afford injuries they spend much more time thinking about it and as such they stumble upon some very nice techniques to build strength and size without heavy weights.

How often do you see a pro show off to the cameras in a video with a heavy weight and do 10 or more reps? Yet I've seen plenty of pros train and not one lifting especially heavy in training. Most lift lighter than the average advanced trainee.
Open User Options Menu

Acerimmer1

MARK SUFFOLK wrote:

It is naive at best to think Nubret didn't use steroids.
Nubret was very strong,which means he at some point he would have trained progressively heavy to be strong.



Or perhaps progressively with relatively light weights
Open User Options Menu

Paul Marsland

Acerimmer1 wrote:
MARK SUFFOLK wrote:


It is naive at best to think Nubret didn't use steroids.
Nubret was very strong,which means he at some point he would have trained progressively heavy to be strong.



Not really you can build strength by training with higher reps lighter weights, better form. The problem is while many trainees practice good form they still like to lift heavy or be seen to lift heavy. They never consider how to get the same affect out of a lighter weight.

This is very important to a pro who can't afford injuries they spend much more time thinking about it and as such they stumble upon some very nice techniques to build strength and size without heavy weights.

How often do you see a pro show off to the cameras in a video with a heavy weight and do 10 or more reps? Yet I've seen plenty of pros train and not one lifting especially heavy in training. Most lift lighter than the average advanced trainee.


Good post, and Nubret is a classic example of someone using moderate weights (relative for him) to maximise size, but there is no doubt he also used steroids, he still looks fantastic at 65 though as I've seen the pitcure of him posing.

Open User Options Menu

Acerimmer1

Paul Marsland wrote:
Acerimmer1 wrote:
MARK SUFFOLK wrote:


It is naive at best to think Nubret didn't use steroids.
Nubret was very strong,which means he at some point he would have trained progressively heavy to be strong.



Not really you can build strength by training with higher reps lighter weights, better form. The problem is while many trainees practice good form they still like to lift heavy or be seen to lift heavy. They never consider how to get the same affect out of a lighter weight.

This is very important to a pro who can't afford injuries they spend much more time thinking about it and as such they stumble upon some very nice techniques to build strength and size without heavy weights.

How often do you see a pro show off to the cameras in a video with a heavy weight and do 10 or more reps? Yet I've seen plenty of pros train and not one lifting especially heavy in training. Most lift lighter than the average advanced trainee.

Good post, and Nubret is a classic example of someone using moderate weights (relative for him) to maximise size, but there is no doubt he also used steroids, he still looks fantastic at 65 though as I've seen the pitcure of him posing.



Nubret is another old pro sharing his secrets now he's out of circulation. I would consider getting his DVD except it's all in French.
Open User Options Menu

Paul Marsland

Me too, but wouldn't it be subtitled? He's one of my favourite bodybuilders...
Open User Options Menu

Mark S

Acerimmer1 wrote:

Not really you can build strength by training with higher reps lighter weights, better form.



Do you still believe in Santa Clause?



Open User Options Menu

Acerimmer1

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.g...

Open User Options Menu

Growl

I know you are but what am I?
Open User Options Menu

witnessDhitness

MARK SUFFOLK wrote:

Being able to bench 500 is not just a happy by product of repping with 225lbs,he could only do that because he could bench 500 not the other way round.



He explicitly says that he NEVER trained heavy.Should we add anything to that? He tested his strength once in 3 months with heavy single. I wouldnt call that powerlifters routine.His working weight on bench was 70-100kg.But for 8 sets with 30 seconds pause between sets in perfect form.

If you try that you will see that weight becomes very heavy after 3rd set.By the way he mentions that over 30 persons in his gym(that he trained same as himself) were able to bench 200kg.Weather its lucky byproduct or lucky genetic sample, you judge yourself.I think that strength from higher reps translates to lower and probably vice versa.

I didn't say he didn't take the steroids, I started to doubt.Well then probably he still takes em since he is looking better at 65 then any hitter I saw to post on this board.What is the motive for a person of 65 to take steroids is really a question.
Open User Options Menu

Mark S

Acerimmer1 wrote:
MARK SUFFOLK wrote:

Do you still believe in Santa Clause?



Do you?


Only when my Mrs gets the Santa outfit on
Open User Options Menu

Mark S

witnessDhitness wrote:
MARK SUFFOLK wrote:

Being able to bench 500 is not just a happy by product of repping with 225lbs,he could only do that because he could bench 500 not the other way round.



He explicitly says that he NEVER trained heavy.Should we add anything to that? He tested his strength once in 3 months with heavy single. I wouldnt call that powerlifters routine.His working weight on bench was 70-100kg.But for 8 sets with 30 seconds pause between sets in perfect form.

If you try that you will see that weight becomes very heavy after 3rd set.By the way he mentions that over 30 persons in his gym(that he trained same as himself) were able to bench 200kg.Weather its lucky byproduct or lucky genetic sample, you judge yourself.I think that strength from higher reps translates to lower and probably vice versa.

I didn't say he didn't take the steroids, I started to doubt.Well then probably he still takes em since he is looking better at 65 then any hitter I saw to post on this board.What is the motive for a person of 65 to take steroids is really a question.


What you are looking for is the easier option,sounds great light weights possibly no steroids,it becomes attractive,as it seems anybody could do it,try it see how you get on,he also used to spend hours in the gym every day.If you feel strength from lighter weights transfers to heavy weights then again try it,what will probably happen is you will be grossly over trained before you know it and if anything your weights will drop.
If i pointed you to Ronnie Colemans or Dorian Yates routine of heavy lifting you would probably shout Genetic freak,but Nubrets on the face of it looks easier with the lighter weights,and like i said it looks more attractive.

The gym you are referring to in Paris was a regular haunt for bodybuilders from the uk in the 80's i made the day trip many times although 99% never went to train, fantastic place always buzzing with activity i am not surprised there was a lot of bodybuilders who were benching 200kg as there were always huge blokes in there very often you would get greeted at the door by a smiling Nubret,then you would get taken in to a huge room at the back rammed full of? i'll leave that to your imagination.

As for now he certainly looks fantastic for his age and you are right better than me and anyone else on this board,but have a search round and see the benefits of HGH especially as you get older before deciding whether its totally down to the training.
Open User Options Menu

Paul Marsland

What? You mean there is no Santa???????


Goodbye cruel world as I go to better place......................!!!


At least the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy are real, aren't they??
Open User Options Menu

Acerimmer1

MARK SUFFOLK wrote:

What you are looking for is the easier option.


If you think that 10 sets of 20 is the easy way out then your kidding yourself. It is infact 1 set to failure which is the easiest quickest and least painful method of the two.
Open User Options Menu

Mark S

Acerimmer1 wrote:
MARK SUFFOLK wrote:

What you are looking for is the easier option.

If you think that 10 sets of 20 is the easy way out then your kidding yourself. It is infact 1 set to failure which is the easiest quickest and least painful method of the two.


Firstly if you look at the first post to your question i asked you one? you haven't answered.

The trouble with 10 x 20 is that it the first thing i take from that would be the need to use very light weights.

That is the attraction,because most people have no idea of the concept of squatting 500-600lbs for reps on a regular basis so they can't relate to it.
However they can relate to using a lighter weight,so it appeals.

would you have posted details on here if the book suggested squatting heavy weights?

The 10x20 is easier to relate to for most.

Is 10 x 20 any easier than one set of brutally hard squats? is running a marathon harder than sprinting 100 meters,is running up and down stairs 30 times difficult?
Will it build muscle mass? NO
Open User Options Menu

Butters

Acerimmer1 wrote:
If you think that 10 sets of 20 is the easy way out then your kidding yourself. It is infact 1 set to failure which is the easiest quickest and least painful method of the two.


Neither way is an easy way of training, but ultimately results will be similiar. If the same results can be obtained training Serge's way for around 20 hours a week and HIT way for 2 hours tops, which seems the most productive? I don't know about you, but I have a life outside the gym.
Open User Options Menu

Mark S

Ace What exactly is your training philosophy?

By your posts it isn't clear to me.

Could you post a brief resume of it? i have been off these boards for about 2 years so if you have posted it before can you just post the link?
Open User Options Menu

witnessDhitness

Look Mark you and me don't have a proof if he took steroids or not and I think there is no point in discussing that anymore.I just expressed my doubts as there is widespread belief that once you stop taking steroids you deflate like a balloon.

Nubret's gym was full of monsters, but that wasnt my point. The guys he trained were using light weights and could lift heavy. Thats my point.

I tried both HIT(for 4 years) and Nubret's training and trust me high volume with low rest time is not easier.It is much harder, especially if you take first set to failure as Nubret suggests.You start to feel burn around 3rd set and your whole body is urging you to stop, but you must continue for 5 more.Not very pleasant.

Best thing with lighter weights is that you can focus on muscle better which is point of bodybuilding IMO. For example with heavy training I was never able to hit my biceps right, now I have no such problems.

One more benefit is that this kind of training is cardio in itself so there is no need for such.
Open User Options Menu

Mark S

witnessDhitness wrote:
Look Mark you and me don't have a proof if he took steroids or not and I think there is no point in discussing that anymore.I just expressed my doubts as there is widespread belief that once you stop taking steroids you deflate like a balloon.

Nubret's gym was full of monsters, but that wasnt my point. The guys he trained were using light weights and could lift heavy. Thats my point.

I tried both HIT(for 4 years) and Nubret's training and trust me high volume with low rest time is not easier.It is much harder, especially if you take first set to failure as Nubret suggests.You start to feel burn around 3rd set and your whole body is urging you to stop, but you must continue for 5 more.Not very pleasant.

Best thing with lighter weights is that you can focus on muscle better which is point of bodybuilding IMO. For example with heavy training I was never able to hit my biceps right, now I have no such problems.

One more benefit is that this kind of training is cardio in itself so there is no need for such.


There is no point discussing the steroids,as i have spoken to him face to face about it on more than one occasion,so believe what you want to believe.

So you are doing 8 sets for say bench press and you are taking the first set to failure? Do you use lighter weights as you go on? or use the same weight? if you are truly taking the first set to failure you wont be doing many more sets with that weight especially with short rest periods.
If you are using say 45% of your max bench press for your training sets how many reps does it take to reach failure on your first set? must be 20-25.

What is your method of progression with weights on this method?

Did you implement HIT correctly ? you say you couldn't hit your biceps correctly ,i fail to see if you did close grip chins normal or N.o properly that you couldn't feel your biceps at the end of the set.

Do you need cardio then if you are doing HIT correctly?
Open User Options Menu

Matt, Sweden

Sweden

MARK SUFFOLK wrote:

The 10x20 is easier to relate to for most.


This is certainly true. People don't know the meaning of "failure". They can't grasp the concept until you demonstrate it to them either by pushing to the edge of "failure" or by you doing it yourself with them as spectators.

...is running up and down stairs 30 times difficult? Will it build muscle mass? NO

Yes, without a doubt. If you have the genetic traits that build large muscles that is. Hell, guys like Arnold would have gained muscle from a stroll in the park if it constituted a greater stress to their body than did their every-day-life.

"Easygainers" doesn't have to push them selves to failure to gain mass. Hardgainers do.

In my case it probably wouldn't result in a mass gain since I'm a hardgainer. I have to push myself so much harder than does the average man in order to make my muscles gain even an ounce of mass.

In my line of work I've seen quite a few people with more than average mass in their thighs that has just been jogging for a few years. They haven't pushed them selves to a point even near failure, but they have gained a lot more in ounces and pounds compared to me and my genetics. Compared to their own genetic ability they haven't gained much though. What they gained from a couple of years of jogging they would have gained from doing heavy leg presses twice a week for a couple of months or less.

When it comes to Serge Nubret I'm convinced that he would have reached his genetic limitations way sooner had he used HIT. My guess would be that he did his low weight/high rep training to failure or somewhere it and therefore he gained from it. Slowly.

Regards,
Matt
Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Next | Last
Administrators Online: Mod Phoenix
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy