"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.
don't vansih into the vast swamp of mediocrity by believing maturity is gained by abandoning one's ideals, values, and goals, and ultimately, losing self-esteem. Hold onto that noble vision, don't betray that fire; give it shape, reality, and purpsose." - Mike Mentzer
Trying to pull from memory of the Underground Seminar:
"I had a client ask me, 'what about concentration curls for the lower, inner 3rd of the bicep?' And I tell him, 'but sir, there are a thousand exercises you could do, but where do you stop? Why don't you build a 20 inch arm first, then worry about what shape it is?' "
Not exact, but you'll get the gist:
(from one of his tapes, I believe)
Smartass at the Gym: "Hey Mentzer, you really like those machines, don't you?"
Mike: "Yes I do, in fact I drove to the gym in a machine. This morning, I made my coffee with a machine and I often watch shows and movies on a big machine in my living room. I can't think of many things that machines won't improve!"
Rico McClinton "Mentzer you really still believe that one set is all it takes to stimulate growth dont you?"
Mentzer "Well Rico...it only took one sperm from your Daddy to stimulate the growth of your mothers egg into a baby.
One sperm, literally, to stimulate the growth of your bones, skin, organs, teeth, namely you etc..."
Classic if you know who Rico, Flex and that whole gang were.
Another fav quote of Mentzer comes old audio tapes interview where he says....
"This is the type of person that you can draw something simple on a chalkboard that a blind person or an idiot can understand, but this poor son of bitch just turns his head."
I don't have exact quotes, but these were very important to me...
...he stated clearly in M&F in the late 70's that his arms measured 18 5/8ths inches. This was an incredible breath of fresh air coming from the rag that permitted its contributors to lie, claiming 22" and 23" arms. Finally someone told the truth.
...any quote which he said that in order to get bigger you must get stronger--simple, effective good reasoning. He talked about all the people in Gold's whom he observed, who never increased their weights and henceforth never grew from year to year. Before Mentzer, articles I read talked about muscle growth as if it occurred by some sort of magic.
he said that in order to get bigger you must get stronger--simple, effective good reasoning.
To a point ...
I used to believe in that too and still do but not to the extent I did. I've seen too much of guys being way stronger than they looked and other who looked much stronger than the actually were.
Dr. Ken squatting 407 X 23 at 165 lb is being a great example.
The famous quote from Jones " .. when you can squat 400 lbs for 20 reps , curl your body weight for 12 and over head press 1 1/2 X your body weight for 12 , you'll be as big .... " blah, blah blah.
Sounds great , might be true and that quote certainly pumped me up and fueled many years of my HIT workouts but very few will ever reach that strength level. Does that mean if you could only worked up to curling 120 for 10 reps you arms are as large as they'll ever get ? How many guys here can curl their body weight even for one rep ? Not very many I'm willing to bet.
There are many other ways to increase muscle size other than just getting stronger after you've worked many years in doing just that. It took me way too long to admit it and get away from trying to get bigger just by increasing the weights and decreasing volume to ridiculous levels like three sets done six time a month.
Don't get me wrong, I really like Mentzer and his ideas, same with Leistner, Jone, etc ... I just now realize just because 'my guys' say something doesn't make it the only way to the results you seek.
I'm so glad I'm not as bull-headed as I used to be ...
To a point...There are many other ways to increase muscle size other than just getting stronger after you've worked many years in doing just that.
I didn't mean for that quote to be interpreted as a be all and end all for everyone. I thought it helpful for beginners with 14" arms to give them (and particularly me) a general sense of direction in training.
I should also contextualize Mentzer's statements. He came one the scene in '75 or '76, and at that time many beginners were reading that if "10 sets didn't work then do 20." I think that this is the sentiment that he was addressing.
It took me way too long to admit it and get away from trying to get bigger just by increasing the weights and decreasing volume to ridiculous levels like three sets done six time a month.
I understand. Some of Mentzer's ideas I don't find quite right for me, at least not at this stage. I know, from my results when I have missed workouts, that 3 days rest is about as much as I need. If I'm off more than 5 days, I lose a rep.
Don't get me wrong, I really like Mentzer and his ideas, same with Leistner, Jones, etc ... I just now realize just because 'my guys' say something doesn't make it the only way to the results you seek.
I'm so glad I'm not as bull-headed as I used to be ...
You're advocating not being dogmatic in ones thinking. I agree. In fact, personally, I find it hard to be dogmatic. I believe that when I take ideas, I find that I always interpret them, personalize them, to the point that they work for me. So I think people should take the ideas of Mentzer, and anyone for that matter, as general concepts, subject to their specific needs.
Everything you said is right on ... and my post was too long - as usual.
My mistakes in almost everything I got into ( and not just training ) was I'd get locked into one way of doing things or thinking and block everything else out. In my training , for about 12 years if it wasn't something Dr. Ken would normally advocate, I thought it was shit. I was wrong.
It's funny , being this way seems to be very common in people who are devoted to HIT... and it's the exact way most HIT people claim others are when HIT training is suggested to them, LOL.
... quote for athletes who imagine they can build muscle on a diet:
"You can't build new muscle mass out of thin air; certain nutritional and caloric values are required."
... quote for athletes who claim to only get stronger on consolidation training but not gain any mass (however there is no applicable quote for the ones who claim they get stronger while getting smaller on CT because these athletes actually train in Wonderland with Alice; by the time they are squatting 400x20 their legs have dwindled to nothing and they can literally slip through the looking glass):
"Prior to my emphasizing the caloric dimension of nutrition to my clients, most would grow stronger, but didn't gain the mass and bodyweight they desired."
... In the context of realistic goals for natural athletes, here is an interesting quote on the Colorado experiment regarding Jones assertion that Casey's caloric intake did not account for all of his gains, specifically that he converted 17 lbs of fat into muscle:
"While there may be some truth to this claim, I am skeptical. I suspect that either Jones' calculations were skewed, even if only a bit, and/or he really believed that Casey wasn't on steroids at the time, which he was.
Steroids are extremely potent chemical agents that dramatically alter the body's bio- chemistry in many ways, two of them being that protein syn-thesis and glycogen/water storage inside the muscle are greatly enhanced. So while stolen calories may account for some of the lean mass buildup, I believe that the steroids helped, too."