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
End of Set Effort?
1 | 2 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

entsminger

Virginia, USA

I was on Youtube recently looking at videos of many big name giant bodybuilders doing their "intense" workouts and was supprised to see very few of them actually ending a set with an effort to crank out one more rep. It seems like most of the time they end their set with out pushing for one more rep? Seems like they could have done one more but they just stop?

The last rep appears to be an effort very similar to a rep or two before the last rep? I rarely ( not always) saw an attempt at pushing for one more rep and only making it half way or pushing it till the bar could not be moved much, as I ocasionally try and do.

I was also amazed at the sloppy form which seemed consistant among some of these big fellows. For example, swinging up the dumbells at the beginning when doing laterals and doing them very quickly. They almost look like they are trying to flap their wings and fly like a bird rather than work the delts? Putting lots of body swing ( cheating) into other exercises is constant.

When rowing or doing pulldowns only pulling back or down partially and not using as full a range of motion as possible? They just don't seem to be using correct style or effort on last reps as I'd expect to see from a champion bodybuilder yet they are huge.

Maybe it's because they do multiple sets and save some effort for the set one we don't see, are genetically gifted and as usual and they use steroids to allow they to recover from most any type workout they do, be it 10 or 30 sets? Makes one wonder? What do you guys think about this?

Anyone have a good link to a video of someone of name doing all out ball busting HIT rows or other exercises the way one should do them using HIT methods?

Scott
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

entsminger wrote:
I was on Youtube recently looking at videos of many big name giant bodybuilders doing their "intense" workouts and was supprised to see very few of them actually ending a set with an effort to crank out one more rep. It seems like most of the time they end their set with out pushing for one more rep? Seems like they could have done one more but they just stop?


NTF (not to failure) reps are quite common and while less efficient for Fitness Bodybuilding, they allow greater efforts and loads on multiple sets. This then causes more high tension stimulus to the muscle, meaning MORE reps under greater weightloads. For pure higher level bodybuilding this is a good method. If your interest is in the maximum result in the least time, then the MSTF model will be more to your liking, but it will always be a trade off.

entsminger wrote:

The last rep appears to be an effort very similar to a rep or two before the last rep? I rarely ( not always) saw an attempt at pushing for one more rep and only making it half way or pushing it till the bar could not be moved much, as I ocasionally try and do.


This has a tendency to reduce CNS fatigue and allows those secondary sets and the greater number of high tension stimuli I mentioned.

entsminger wrote:

I was also amazed at the sloppy form which seemed consistant among some of these big fellows. For example, swinging up the dumbells at the beginning when doing laterals and doing them very quickly. They almost look like they are trying to flap their wings and fly like a bird rather than work the delts? Putting lots of body swing ( cheating) into other exercises is constant.


While not a popular viewpoint to some of the hardliners here, FORM is a function of the goal of the exercise. It is not a function of a way to look on camera. Form should be safe, and create the load to the body the trainee is looking for.

That said, these fellows are skilled and advanced trainees and know their limitations and what creates those loads. Beginners and even intermediates should not use unsafe form.

The body action is another way to maximize the load and tension to the muscles and or allow the use of heavier loads not available without it. For example many might cheat the dbs up on laterals and focus on the heavier eccentric portion to a good result. But again, these should be considered advanced techniques.

entsminger wrote:
When rowing or doing pulldowns only pulling back or down partially and not using as full a range of motion as possible? They just don't seem to be using correct style or effort on last reps as I'd expect to see from a champion bodybuilder yet they are huge.


FROM (full range of motion) is not a requirement to load the muscles and or stimulate growth. Additionally training the Midrange of an action again many times allows the use of higher loads and this higher multiple tensions, and recruitment.

entsminger wrote:

Maybe it's because they do multiple sets and save some effort for the set one we don't see, are genetically gifted and as usual and they use steroids to allow they to recover from most any type workout they do, be it 10 or 30 sets? Makes one wonder? What do you guys think about this?


Few train with 30 sets in a WO. Most split their routines and likely do on the lower end of 10 - 15, but that will vary to the individual.

entsminger wrote:

Anyone have a good link to a video of someone of name doing all out ball busting HIT rows or other exercises the way one should do them using HIT methods?

Scott


Don't think any "name" trains that way.
Open User Options Menu

Hitit

NTF (not to failure) reps are quite common and while less efficient for Fitness Bodybuilding, they allow greater efforts and loads on multiple sets. This then causes more high tension stimulus to the muscle, meaning MORE reps under greater weightloads. For pure higher level bodybuilding this is a good method. If your interest is in the maximum result in the least time, then the MSTF model will be more to your liking, but it will always be a trade off.

Was wondering what your opinion was regarding using HIT (one set to failure) techniques as a regular routine style for all weight lifting workouts? I mean this as a life long practice for health and strength. I was asking because you had mentioned about using this style for gains in short periods of time. Is this a style too intense to regularly use for exercise and health throughout their life or only for short periods of time. I don't expect you may have the "right" answer, just want your opinion as I enjoy the challenge of the 1 STF technique and I can appreciate switching things up, but again I like pushing myself to the max.
I welcome your thoughts - thanks!
Open User Options Menu

MotorFed

California, USA

i feel the same way you do about finding something on the internet of someone actually going to all-out failure on a set with a gut-busting end of set effort.

the closest ive ever come to seeing anyone do a real balls-to-the-wall set would have to be john heart's video. it's on his website for purchase, but pretty good stuff. john was natural mr. universe.

never really ever seen someone of olympia caliber going to all-out failure. i ordered 'a week in the dungeon' with mark dugdale being trained at dorian's temple gym. have not seen it yet. hope it shows some good training. will report back when it arrives.

peace
Open User Options Menu

Bill Sekerak

California, USA

It is a combo of genetics and drugs that allow these knotheads to " coast ".

Kinda of like Shaquile O'neal at the start of his career.
Isn't a Shaquile some kind of squid ? I wonder if his parents got his name out of baby book of names.
Probably right next to Sam.

But I digress,

Open User Options Menu

barrage

Hawaii, USA

you can see it for free on the internet

in its entirety at megavideo and in portions on youtube.

MotorFed wrote:
i feel the same way you do about finding something on the internet of someone actually going to all-out failure on a set with a gut-busting end of set effort.

the closest ive ever come to seeing anyone do a real balls-to-the-wall set would have to be john heart's video. it's on his website for purchase, but pretty good stuff. john was natural mr. universe.

never really ever seen someone of olympia caliber going to all-out failure. i ordered 'a week in the dungeon' with mark dugdale being trained at dorian's temple gym. have not seen it yet. hope it shows some good training. will report back when it arrives.

peace


Open User Options Menu

hiong3.eng5

Try...

http://www.youtube.com/PureHIT...
Open User Options Menu

pharaoh1063

entsminger,

It is interesting that you noticed that, because I looked at several and came to the exact opposite conclusion--at least regarding pushing to failure on the last set of an exercise.

I found validation of the "to failure" principles in many that I saw. If you watch Kevin Levrone's Maryland Muscle Machine videos,
http://www.youtube.com/...eature=related, you will see him hitting failure at the end of his heaviest set of Smith machine presses and needing assistance with a forced rep.

If you watch Dexter Jackson's Titans Two video, http://www.youtube.com/...?v=WrCeYzi_v1I, you will see about 3 minutes in that Dex does 405 on the bench to failure and gets a forced rep with the help of his partner.

Obviously you know that all the Dorian Yates videos show him going to failure. I know that there are several others out there and I'll talk about them in a second.

Bill is right to bring up genetics and drugs. There are a few other factors involved as well.

1. First we have to consider genetics. These guys are the genetic freaks of the world, at least in terms of bodybuilding. To say that their bodies are probably more responsive to the least amount of stimulus is perhaps an understatement.

2. Juice. Do we even need to go into it? GH, insulin, test, AAS make their bodies even more responsive to any stimulus as well. I've even heard of a bodybuilder implored to not train too hard and "just let the GH do the work!"

3. Here's where it gets more complicated. Look at the video and its title, or look at the introduction. Many times I have noticed that these guys do a video when the look their best.

When's that? Right before or after a show. I know that Shawn Ray's were done that way; Porter Cottrell's were also, as was Victor Martinez, Jay Cutler and all of them in the BFTO series.

This, of course, means that their sets were high, their poundages were low and they were depleted and weak. Few do photo shoots or videos when they are bulked and training heavy.

4. Which bodyparts did you watch being trained? If you saw a pro train his strongest bodyparts he won't be using the heaviest weight so as to prevent it from growing any further and spoiling his symmetry. What you'd want to see is a pro training his weakest parts.

5. Constant competition. There's a new situation now. I think you may be used to the old yearly schedule of bulk and cut.

With the structure of today's bodybuilding, it is the strategy of most to attain a certain level of mass, which will let one compete in several shows of the same caliber, each of which will qualify him for higher-level shows and then take some time off and gain the mass needed for the new higher level of competition.

At each tier he will take some time off to gain the mass needed. Once a sufficient amount of mass is attained, it is best for him to enter every contest that he can on his particular level until he wins one, so that he does not wait another whole year to return to the same contest.

If he does not win in one national qualifier and yet was big enough, why not diet better, get sharper, and enter another national qualifier 2 months later instead of waiting another year for the same contest?

This situation repeats itself on every level, causing the bodybuilder to have long periods when he is not capable of, nor is he trying to gain mass, hence the light weights and sub-failure training that you see.
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

Hey thanks Pharoah for the links. Yes I have seen Dorian Yates videos of him in actual workouts and he does go to failure but he seems to be the exception rather than the rule. The video of Kevin Levrone does show him going all out on the smith machine presses but when doing the other exercises like laterals he doesn't seem to push it like I would expect one of his caliber would? He also swings the weights up and down and does his reps much faster in a manner contrairy to what I feel is a good rep form, that being a medium paced controled up and down rep.

I've always felt that if I wasn't pushing to the limit I was wasting my time and anything less was just for wimps. I guess I've always been under the impression that I had to go all out to make progress and now I may be finding that going all out on a regular basis can inhibit progress more than promoting it!

Taking one or two easy workouts between hard workouts is something I may have to come to grips with but it's definately a foreign thought for me. Maybe, (or maybe not), my lack of consistant progress is due to the fact that I work too hard all the time and my body can't recover from it consistantly? Working out with less than full intensity really isn't fun though so I have alot of thinking to do.

Thanks guys for your answers
Scott
Open User Options Menu

Bill Sekerak

California, USA

entsminger wrote:
Hey thanks Pharoah for the links. Yes I have seen Dorian Yates videos of him in actual workouts and he does go to failure but he seems to be the exception rather than the rule. The video of Kevin Levrone does show him going all out on the smith machine presses but when doing the other exercises like laterals he doesn't seem to push it like I would expect one of his caliber would? He also swings the weights up and down and does his reps much faster in a manner contrairy to what I feel is a good rep form, that being a medium paced controled up and down rep.

I've always felt that if I wasn't pushing to the limit I was wasting my time and anything less was just for wimps. I guess I've always been under the impression that I had to go all out to make progress and now I may be finding that going all out on a regular basis can inhibit progress more than promoting it!

Taking one or two easy workouts between hard workouts is something I may have to come to grips with but it's definately a foreign thought for me. Maybe, (or maybe not), my lack of consistant progress is due to the fact that I work too hard all the time and my body can't recover from it consistantly? Working out with less than full intensity really isn't fun though so I have alot of thinking to do.

Thanks guys for your answers
Scott


That is a real possibility. Maybe you do need more time to recover and a routine that consists of a day or two of working to a couple reps shy of failure minght work. Although I would first try a mid week NTF routine, before going to NTF twice a week.

Arthur Jones always said " if in doubt do less " .
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

Hitit wrote:

BIOFORCE wrote:
NTF (not to failure) reps are quite common and while less efficient for Fitness Bodybuilding, they allow greater efforts and loads on multiple sets. This then causes more high tension stimulus to the muscle, meaning MORE reps under greater weightloads.

For pure higher level bodybuilding this is a good method. If your interest is in the maximum result in the least time, then the MSTF model will be more to your liking, but it will always be a trade off.




Was wondering what your opinion was regarding using HIT (one set to failure) techniques as a regular routine style for all weight lifting workouts?


The standard perceived HIT protocol of using only one set per exercise or one set per bodypart will not be applicable to "ALL" weight lifting or weight training workouts.

It is best applied to beginning and intermediate level programs were the loads are not large enough to require a warm up, and the trainee is not advanced or seeking competitive goals.

Hitit wrote:

I mean this as a life long practice for health and strength. I was asking because you had mentioned about using this style for gains in short periods of time. Is this a style too intense to regularly use for exercise and health throughout their life or only for short periods of time.

I don't expect you may have the "right" answer, just want your opinion as I enjoy the challenge of the 1 STF technique and I can appreciate switching things up, but again I like pushing myself to the max.

I welcome your thoughts - thanks!


In fact, I think for most fitness and fitness bodybuilding/strength building, the Intensity level of Classical HIT is perfect. I don't think you need be too concerned about "overtraining" if you space your training and recovery sessions well.

I do believe that care must be taken to either select the proper exercise order, or involve a light warm up for seniors who use the system.
Open User Options Menu

Bill Sekerak

California, USA

Bio wrote [ qoute ] " It is best applied to beginning and intermediate level programs were the loads are not large enough to require a warm up, and the trainee is not advanced or seeking competitive goals. "

Opinion , not fact .
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

Good observations and well spoken post entsminger. i've found it counterproductive and prematurely tiring to "strain my guts out" on each final rep.

Don't misunderstand i go to COMPLETE FAILURE on each and every set (to do less is for pussies) but now i just don't make real ugly faces and contract every muscle in my body trying to complete that last rep.

I focus on contracting hard the muscle or group of interest and relatively relax others. Although some contraction of other groups will occur and is necessary but too much i've found drains me of vital resources for rest of workout.
Open User Options Menu

Bill Sekerak

California, USA

HIT guidelines call for mmf ( momentary muscular failure ) meaning that you reach a point where the movement arm begins to move very slowly in spite of your best effort ( without cheating ) to move it as fast as possible. When you cannot move the resistance any further you will reach an isometric contraction , which you then hold for at least two seconds all the while doing all you can ( without cheating ) and that is mmf. Then you can to continue with the set by cheating or using other set extenders. However you should only cheat as little as needed to finish one or two extra reps. Extenders such as cheating , drop sets , forced reps etc. should not be used very much and certainly not for every workout.
Open User Options Menu

Nautilus1975

I don't know how many of you have actually ever had huge bulging muscles like we are talking about here....

It is a completely different feeling than the average or "classic" style physique....each range of motion feels different, the pump is tremendous, the limbs and body parts actually bind and rub against each other - it is a different world.

The last forced rep probably hurts a lot more at that point too because your arms or legs feel like they are going to explode and it is very easy to just stop at that point.

This also explains the form - your armpits bind and rub, your chest is so pumped full you have to kinda reach around it, your back is so pumped full it is pushing your shoulders forward, etc....

The pain and mainly burning like fire sensation in your lower back from that type of leg work especially calf work usually puts an early end to heavly lower body stuff

I think probably only a smaller number of posters on here can relate first hand to these types of experiences
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

Bill Sekerak wrote:
HIT guidelines call for mmf ( momentary muscular failure ) meaning that you reach a point where the movement arm begins to move very slowly in spite of your best effort ( without cheating ) to move it as fast as possible. When you cannot move the resistance any further you will reach an isometric contraction , which you then hold for at least two seconds all the while doing all you can ( without cheating ) and that is mmf. Then you can to continue with the set by cheating or using other set extenders. However you should only cheat as little as needed to finish one or two extra reps. Extenders such as cheating , drop sets , forced reps etc. should not be used very much and certainly not for every workout.


Bill you hit nail right on the head!

Nice post!
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

Nautilus 1975 wrote:
I don't know how many of you have actually ever had huge bulging muscles like we are talking about here....

It is a completely different feeling than the average or "classic" style physique....each range of motion feels different, the pump is tremendous, the limbs and body parts actually bind and rub against each other - it is a different world...........

The last forced rep probably hurts a lot more at that point too because your arms or legs feel like they are going to explode and it is very easy to just stop at that point.........

I think probably only a smaller number of posters on here can relate first hand to these types of experiances......

===Scott===
Unfortunately I'm sure alot of us haven't had such experiances as explained by 1975 but then how many of us are a Sergio Oliva type with arms bigger than than the height of their head? I'm guessing that 1975 is of that type and has experianced what most of us will only dream of? Lucky man! That being said ( sometimes I'm a little slow at grasping ideas?)I'm trying to figure out how this distinction between the average and elite bodybuilder relates to the observation that not alot of really big guys ( with the exception of a few like Yates) don't seem to push to what I call real failure but rather stop short of it in many YouTube videos.

Scott
Open User Options Menu

pharaoh1063

Entsminger,

Sub-Failure Training

A few more thoughts. Bodybuilding as a whole, suffers from an orientation toward elite competitors and pre-contest routines. I don't know why. This just is. I have never understood why M&F would blast on its front cover, "Mr. Olympia's Pre-contest Routine for Arms!" Why? I don't know. I have always asked that question. When I think back to old Muscle Builder/Power magazines that I used to get when I was a kid, all I can remember was Arnold's 20 set routines for biceps. Gradually, I began to ignore the magazines. I wasn't until recently that I actually found Arnold's off-season mass-building routine which, incidentally, only has him doing about 5 sets of 2 exercises for biceps. That said, I believe that there is a bias across the board towards showing routines of people who already have built their mass and are not seeking more. Look at the video of Levrone. He didn't get any bigger at any time in his career than he did in the video. From that we must conclude that he built all the size he needed. So extremely heavy training to failure was not needed. What we really need is a series of videos made by bodybuilders who are not yet big enough, maybe those who are amateurs, who are still trying to grow. There are some good ones over at Muscular Development website. Look for the "In the Trenches" series. But, you will have to search through them because many are pre-contest stuff.

So if Levrone and company are not training heavy for mass, what are they training for that could explain sub-failure training? Look to the Shawn Ray/Dorian Yates controversy. In Dorian's last Mr.O he competed with a torn bicep, among other things. Ray's criticism questioned how anyone with an obvious physical imperfection could win a title that is supposed to reward perfection? Ray thought of himself as a Maserati to Yates' Mack truck. This led Ray to his training philosophy. Ray, like a lot of champs today train towards that elusive goal that HIT, in particular, has denounced--training for muscle shape. Ray trains with moderate weights--never going too heavy. He and others believe that they can sculpt biceps into higher peaks with concentration curls, elongate calves by stretching them, and widen pecs through exercises like wide-grip bench presses and flyes. They believe they can bring out striations through high-rep cable crossovers. They talk constantly about using a weight light enough to "feel" the movement so as to develop the "details." Naturally, this leads them to lighter weights and less mass as the end result. So what happened? Shawn Ray never wanted to get bigger and never got bigger. Dorian Yates, who being influenced by HIT, did not labor under such delusions, trained heavy and got bigger every year thereby setting new standards for mass in the late 90's.

Loose Form

On this issue, I think I have an idea. I have reason to believe that experienced bodybuilders have the ability to regulate the relative intensity of each rep based upon how the set "feels." You know how a very strict set of 10 reps feels? In order to perform strictly, the very first reps are going to be quite easy while the last ones will be hard. Let's assign a value to each of these reps according to their difficulty with 1 equaling "1" and rep 2 equaling "2", etc. on up to 10=10. In this set, there would be one "1" and one "2" and so forth, up to 10. I wonder whether the pros cheat with a weight that is 10-20 heavier so as to create a set in which rep 1 is a "3", cheat some more and make rep 2 a "3" also. Make reps 3 and 4 into "5s" and so on. At the end, they could make reps 8,9 and 10 all into "9s" or "10s" and thereby construct a set that is, on the whole more strenuous. And because of all the swinging and cheating, by observation, we could not tell exactly when exhaustion was reached .

Just some random ideas.
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

Ok, I re-read what 1975 said and I think I see his point that the really big guys pain at the end of a set can be more extreme than for the rest of us, thus it is easy for them to quit a set before failure and I guess they are so genetically gifted that they grow easily either way.

Scott
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

pharaoh1063 wrote:
Entsminger,

Sub-Failure Training

A few more thoughts. Bodybuilding as a whole, suffers from an orientation toward elite competitors and pre-contest routines. I don't know why. This just is. I have never understood why M&F would blast on its front cover, "Mr. Olympia's Pre-contest Routine for Arms!" Why? I don't know. I have always asked that question. When I think back to old Muscle Builder/Power magazines that I used to get when I was a kid, all I can remember was Arnold's 20 set routines for biceps. Gradually, I began to ignore the magazines. I wasn't until recently that I actually found Arnold's off-season mass-building routine which, incidentally, only has him doing about 5 sets of 2 exercises for biceps. That said, I believe that there is a bias across the board towards showing routines of people who already have built their mass and are not seeking more. Look at the video of Levrone. He didn't get any bigger at any time in his career than he did in the video. From that we must conclude that he built all the size he needed. So extremely heavy training to failure was not needed. What we really need is a series of videos made by bodybuilders who are not yet big enough, maybe those who are amateurs, who are still trying to grow. There are some good ones over at Muscular Development website. Look for the "In the Trenches" series. But, you will have to search through them because many are pre-contest stuff.

So if Levrone and company are not training heavy for mass, what are they training for that could explain sub-failure training? Look to the Shawn Ray/Dorian Yates controversy. In Dorian's last Mr.O he competed with a torn bicep, among other things. Ray's criticism questioned how anyone with an obvious physical imperfection could win a title that is supposed to reward perfection? Ray thought of himself as a Maserati to Yates' Mack truck. This led Ray to his training philosophy. Ray, like a lot of champs today train towards that elusive goal that HIT, in particular, has denounced--training for muscle shape. Ray trains with moderate weights--never going too heavy. He and others believe that they can sculpt biceps into higher peaks with concentration curls, elongate calves by stretching them, and widen pecs through exercises like wide-grip bench presses and flyes. They believe they can bring out striations through high-rep cable crossovers. They talk constantly about using a weight light enough to "feel" the movement so as to develop the "details." Naturally, this leads them to lighter weights and less mass as the end result. So what happened? Shawn Ray never wanted to get bigger and never got bigger. Dorian Yates, who being influenced by HIT, did not labor under such delusions, trained heavy and got bigger every year thereby setting new standards for mass in the late 90's.

Loose Form

On this issue, I think I have an idea. I have reason to believe that experienced bodybuilders have the ability to regulate the relative intensity of each rep based upon how the set "feels." You know how a very strict set of 10 reps feels? In order to perform strictly, the very first reps are going to be quite easy while the last ones will be hard. Let's assign a value to each of these reps according to their difficulty with 1 equaling "1" and rep 2 equaling "2", etc. on up to 10=10. In this set, there would be one "1" and one "2" and so forth, up to 10. I wonder whether the pros cheat with a weight that is 10-20 heavier so as to create a set in which rep 1 is a "3", cheat some more and make rep 2 a "3" also. Make reps 3 and 4 into "5s" and so on. At the end, they could make reps 8,9 and 10 all into "9s" or "10s" and thereby construct a set that is, on the whole more strenuous. And because of all the swinging and cheating, by observation, we could not tell exactly when exhaustion was reached .

Just some random ideas.


You are using some very creative thinking and making progress toward a more complete understanding. While you don't have it nailed just yet, you are wiping the mud off the windshield, and can finally see the road.


Sub-Failure Training

All training sets are performed for their "stimulus" values. The right package or amount of stimulus will stimulate an adaptive response (strength and growth)

For the most part we have two primary stimuli; Tension, and Fatigue. These stimuli over a set of reps determine the total stimulus package to the muscle.

Shorter not to failure sets can create HUGE levels and amounts of Tension Stimulus, but do not generate large Fatigue levels.

Longer sets to failure create lesser Tension stimulus and greater Fatigue.

Both can in varying combinations can cause adaptive responses in strength and hypertrophy.

You will find the shorter and heavier styles lime 3 x 3 and 5 x 5 will cause large strength increases without the need for failure in a single set.

The longer and lighter sets will produce the fatigue necessary to stimulate larger degrees of hypertrophy, but it is the "proper combination" that is important.

Loose Form

Form is a "FUNCTiON" of the goal and NOT a goal in itself. That is, your thoughts are correct. Instead of making some specific cookie cutter rep form "the goal", you make producing the desired stimulus on each rep, the goal. This is what advanced level trainees learn to do. They learn when and how to create the load on each rep that they want and need to the muscle or body area.

There is no "bad" form except that which does not help you use the load to achieve the rep by rep stimulus you are after.
Open User Options Menu

pharaoh1063

I always hope that I am capable of thinking creatively. It's partly because I don't believe we really can take anything too dogmatically. I'm just enough of a Kantian to believe that when we take ideas, even those so strongly presented as Jones', we all process the ideas, if only subconsciously, and make them our own, adding subtle interpretations to the original idea.

I am quite conscious of intentionally doing this. When I do so, I test the idea for myself and see how it works. For this reason, I have not posted that much on this board as I only post what I know in the context of the question that was asked. And everything that I know is not necessarily reflected on this board.

So while we can't talk about how much I don't have nailed or whether or not any mud is on my windshield, I agree that we all should be striving towards a more complete understanding. I would be the last person to say that I know everything!

(...that's unless I'm hanging out on Saturday night with my buddies. Then, they'll tell you that I think I know everything...)

But since we are on the subject of form. Here's what happened to me many years ago. I curled 70 pounds for 7 reps in one workout. Adhering to the requirements of relentless weight increases for growth, I constantly strove to add reps and then, weight to my sets. Soon, I did 8 and then 9.

I worked my way through the progression and increased the weight. Over the next weeks, I did 75, then 80 and finally 85 lbs. When I got to 85, though, I noticed that my form had changed from the strict form I used on the first workout with 70x7 many weeks ago. So, I made a point to go back to 70 just to see how many I could do, returning to the same strict form that I used before.

Guess how many reps I got. I only got 7. I had gotten no stronger with all of this training. I was so discouraged from the above example that I quit lifting for several years!

From this I could only conclude that each workout I had relaxed my form ever so slightly so as to get the weight up. And I must have used the relaxation of form to actually take force/stimulus OFF of the muscle, though it didn't "feel" that way at the time.

The progression of change in form must have been so subtle that I didn't notice until it was markedly different from where I started. I could only conclude from there that form should be consistent, IF one is to compare one workout to the next. It seems that if "varied form" (or do you prefer "stimulus-specific form?") is used, it has to be the same from workout to workout or, at least, the same in the workouts that are to be compared.

While there may by many more aspects to the subject of form, this the is one that affected me directly.
Open User Options Menu

gmlongo

Connecticut, USA

BIO-FORCE wrote:
The standard perceived HIT protocol of using only one set per exercise or one set per bodypart will not be applicable to "ALL" weight lifting or weight training workouts.

It is best applied to beginning and intermediate level programs were the loads are not large enough to require a warm up, and the trainee is not advanced or seeking competitive goals.


Give it a rest.
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

gmlongo wrote:
BIO-FORCE wrote:
The standard perceived HIT protocol of using only one set per exercise or one set per bodypart will not be applicable to "ALL" weight lifting or weight training workouts.

It is best applied to beginning and intermediate level programs were the loads are not large enough to require a warm up, and the trainee is not advanced or seeking competitive goals.


Give it a rest.


I might offer a suggestion.

When you see my posts, just skip over them if they stimulate you too much.

Open User Options Menu

gmlongo

Connecticut, USA

BIO-FORCE wrote:
I might offer a suggestion.

When you see my posts, just skip over them if they stimulate you too much.


The problem is, your posts continue to clutter every interesting thread on this forum. You write the same thing in every thread...it doesn't seem to matter to you if it is relevant to the topic.

I have no problem with you not agreeing with every HIT principle, but you like to post your opinions as if they are fact. Saying that a HIT routine is only sufficient for beginner/intermediate trainers or people with no competitive aspirations is nonsense. And in fact, by continuing to do so, you are intentionally insulting people on this site.
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

gmlongo wrote:
BIO-FORCE wrote:
I might offer a suggestion.

When you see my posts, just skip over them if they stimulate you too much.


The problem is, your posts continue to clutter every interesting thread on this forum. You write the same thing in every thread...it doesn't seem to matter to you if it is relevant to the topic.


The "problem" is you feel an opinion other than yours is not valid. It is good that you noticed I maintain congruency to the things I post. Relevance is a decision I will make. As I said, if you feel it is not relevant then ignore it.

gmlongo wrote:
I have no problem with you not agreeing with every HIT principle, but you like to post your opinions as if they are fact.


Obviously you understand them to be opinions, but feel the need to protest regularly. It might be more valuable to simply provide substantive comment rather than wasting keystrokes with you self-imposed forum moderation.

gmlongo wrote:
Saying that a HIT routine is only sufficient for beginner/intermediate trainers or people with no competitive aspirations is nonsense.


I didn't say it wasn't sufficient for those levels. I suggested what it is BEST for. The comments I made are accurate and exact. If you have a differing opinion then post it, and why.

gmlongo wrote:
And in fact, by continuing to do so, you are intentionally insulting people on this site.


I have insulted no one. Offering advice and opinion on exercise has no "insulting" properties or abilities. It is only when one takes exercise philosophy to the point that it "adds self worth" is that possible.

Just as I don't take your difference of opinion personally, you should have no trouble accepting those same differences from others.
Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | Next | Last
Administrators Online: Mod Phoenix
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy