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
DoggCrapp Philosophy
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

dcshores

California, USA

DOGGCRAPP Registered User Join
This was posted recently and I found it to be one of the best articles I have ever read. Read, enjoy and comment!



Date: Jun 2003Posts: 812

MY huge problem with that article and anyone who argues against heavy training is they think its about a certain rep range......HUH? Who made the law that heavy = anything below 6 reps?

Heavy can be as heavy as you can use for 8 reps, 10 reps, 12 reps, 15 reps, 20 reps.

I cannot stand the guys who need to put things in these neat little boxes in bodybuilding, heavy has to go here, HIT has to go here, volume has to go over there, etc etc etc.

My guys train heavy as a MF and you would probably be hard pressed to find many seriously advanced guys that go to failure anywhere before their 8th rep on the first rest pause.

Ive seen this repeatedly over the years where various people on the boards associate heavy with doing 2-3 reps......where did you get that idea? Thats your own idea of it.....and in my opinion its wrong!

If you are doing 405 for 20 in a deep squat.....thats downright heavy......if you are doing a 365 reverse grip bench press for 20 reps rest paused (12+5+3) thats downright heavy.....but alot less dangerous than some guy doing 375pounds in this forum for 7 reps to failure on the reverse bench press who thinks he is doing moderate reps.

I never have understood why people get so confused on what makes a person larger muscularly. Do you really think if Ronnie Coleman in his 4th week of lifting thought "hey this is pretty comfortable I think Ill stay with 185 benches, 225 squats and 185 deadlifts the rest of my career" that you would see this below in the black and white picture? If weight doesnt matter at all....then why the heck take a chance....take the EZ chair recliner route and lift comfortably.

Three bodybuilders with similiar genetics and roughly the same height....Flex Wheeler, Chris Cormier, Ronnie Coleman. And I would venture to say that Flex had the best bodybuilder genetics out of those three. Now what were they known for.
Flex = comfortable training and competed at 218 to 228 onstage with 236 I believe his highest ever

Chris Cormier = Heavy training with bigtime weights and even with a beginning silhouette like Wheelers he was able to compete at 240 to 258 onstage with 262 I believe being his highest. So he got onstage roughly 25-30 pounds more muscle mass past Flex Wheeler.

Ronnie Coleman = forkift training....strongest bodybuilder in the world, used training poundages that were ridiculous....competed at 302 pounds at the Russian Grand Prix and won Olympias at 296 and 287 pounds respectively.........you make the call.

I see guys on other threads saying various things about random bodybuilders "oh they should of trained like Shawn Ray or Flex Wheeler and gotten the classical physique".....what?!?! Please post your pic so i can see what that classical physique training is all about and we can as a forum make the decision that you now have a carbon copy physique of Flex or Shawn Ray.

Do you really think Markus, Nasser, Dorian, and others could possible change their genetics and create a wasp waist ala doing Flex/Shawn's training? Please.....

Mike Mattarrazzo and Mike Francoise are 2 prime examples of people who knew they didnt have the god given shape of Flex Wheeler and decided to go at him like a sledgehammer. Both those guys got so big that they made the judges decide to give them the call over Flex. Mattarrazzo at the USA's and Francoise later on at the Arnold Classic. Nothing they could of done training wise would of ever made them ever have the physique of Flex Wheeler so Francoise rack deadlifted and powerbuilt his way to a massive contest winning physique.

400 pro bodybuilders out there using the same drugs and all with god given genetics and who are the continual ones that rise to the creme of the crop in thickness? Power bodybuilders......Johnny Jackson, Branch Warren, the aforementioned Francoise, Coleman, Cormier, Ruhl, Yates, Dennis James. etc etc etc etc

Then you get the lone knight in the dark yelling the Paul Dillett and Vince Taylor card.......great lets hope you had the same mom and pop as Paul and Vince then because millions of people across America are taking the "comfortable training" route and they sure dont look like Paul or Vince.

I dont get why this is so hard......forever increase intensity? Ok today your going to do super sets....tommorow you need to beat that intensity to get better....what are you going to do four years from now? Giant sets that are rest paused, staggered and then drop setted and then forced reps and then partials followed by static holds followed by negative only reps? Youll be a psychotic mess trying to forever beat your last intensity session.

Increase the weight and beat what you did yesterday and you took care of the problem.

Its pretty darn easy to be honest with you this whole hypertrophy thing. If today in your first workout you can do (after warmups)

incline presses 135 x 12
military presses 95 x 12
reverse grip bench presses 95 x 12
barbell curls 55 x 12
reverse curls 20 x 12
pulldowns 110 x 12
deadlifts 135 x 12
squats 135 x 12
leg curls 90 x 12
standing calves 90 x 12

and you train for the next 5 years using intensity techniques and semi comfortable training and you see that your doing

incline presses 155 x 12
military presses 115 x 12
reverse grip bench presses 120 x 12
barbell curls 70 x 12
reverse curls 30 x 12
pulldowns 140 x 12
deadlifts 185 x 12
squats 185 x 12
leg curls 115 x 12
standing calves 110 x 12

You sure as hell aint going to be that big.

But if you went down a path of progressive strength training switching out exercises at plateaus and plotted out a gameplan of pushing yourself along with the proper eating and 5-6years later found yourself doing

incline presses 365 x 12
military presses 275 x 12
reverse grip bench presses 365 x 12
barbell curls 225 x 12
reverse curls 90 x 12
pulldowns 350 x 12
deadlifts 500 x 12
squats 500 x 12
leg curls 225 x 12
standing calves 450 x 12

You are going to be a big MF.

Almost seems to easy doesnt it to the chronic OCD overanalyzers that make up the majority of the bodybuilding world

I hate to be a dickhead and use one of my guys .......but for example im going to. Dusty Hanshaw ....heck when i first joined this board around 2004 or so, nobody ever heard of him. Do you know why? Because he was a ex hockey player just kind of getting into the swing of this bodybuilding thing and he was smaller than the majority of the guys on this board right now.
That guy has never used GH, has never used insulin, and a huge amount of ego's on this board would be red faced and embarrassed if they ever compared what they themselves do ergo wise to him.
What separated him from the pack to where he is one of the biggest of the big on these boards and his name is being mentioned now nationally?

He ate his way up progressively, and trained his way up progressively to become the big dog on the block and flew right by thousands of bodybuilders on these boards in doing so where he now shakes floorboards at nearly 300 offseason and walks onstage at 242-255 at 5'11"

http://www.chadnicholls.net/....ad.php?t=56653

It pains me to see the same guys on these boards year after year jumping around like a chicken with your head cut off when "how to get it fucking done and getting it fucking done" is right there in front of you.....yet it is a continual clusterfuck of mindgames of "is there a secret? Is that guy using a secret compound? He must be doing something secretive that I dont know about, he must be abusing himself because he used to be smaller than me and now he is 2x my size"

No he just stopped overanalyzing everything and got down to brass tacks. This endeavor is about beating today what you did yesterday and beating tommorow what you did today and being 2x better than you were last year at this time.....and if more people developed a gameplan about where you need to be next year on April 6th compared to where you were this year on April 6th......they would be alot more successful. But bodybuilders with the mentality they have dont think in that concept and think of todays workout only. You can mindmuscle connection 35 pound dumbells for 11 reps all you want till the cows come home....but ill give you some factual reality.......if in 10 years you are still mindmuscle connection repping 35 pound dumbells for 11 reps make sure you also make the connection of the tape measure around that bicep because its going to have the same reading it did a decade ago.

Thats my rant for the day......I cant get rid of this cough and im bitchy.
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

Exactly.
Open User Options Menu

dhitquinn

Great post
Open User Options Menu

dcshores

California, USA

Where are the dissenters?
Open User Options Menu

sgb2112

SSTF at it's best.
Open User Options Menu

Larry T

North Carolina, USA

sgb2112 wrote:
SSTF at it's best.


That's one way to look at it. You might also look at it as multiple sets with very short rest periods. But an effective system nonetheless.
Open User Options Menu

coach-jeff

Louisiana, USA

Larry T wrote:
sgb2112 wrote:
SSTF at it's best.

That's one way to look at it. You might also look at it as multiple sets with very short rest periods. But an effective system nonetheless.


What gets me is that DC training seems well respected, and nobody seems to disagree that it's producing some REAL big and strong dudes.

But it's nothing but a version of HIT!!!

I know, I know...Dante has very much distanced himself from HIT - and perhaps that's why he does not get the "dissenters" that HIT does - but to those who say HIT is not the optimum way to train for optimum results, then do you also feel DC training gives "sub-par" results?

Open User Options Menu

dcshores

California, USA

To me it is a variation of HIT. Some on this forum argue that strength and size are not related. However I think few would argue that when you add hundreds of pounds to the basic lifts, you will be bigger. There may be many paths to do this and Dante has found a very good method.
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

coachjeff wrote:
Larry T wrote:
sgb2112 wrote:
SSTF at it's best.

That's one way to look at it. You might also look at it as multiple sets with very short rest periods. But an effective system nonetheless.

What gets me is that DC training seems well respected, and nobody seems to disagree that it's producing some REAL big and strong dudes.

But it's nothing but a version of HIT!!!

I know, I know...Dante has very much distanced himself from HIT - and perhaps that's why he does not get the "dissenters" that HIT does - but to those who say HIT is not the optimum way to train for optimum results, then do you also feel DC training gives "sub-par" results?



High Intensity Training "IS" what produces results. However Dogg Crapp (as I understand it according to their site) is not SSTF based training, in fact it is just the opposite. It is multiple set training, mostly NTF.

Classical HIT, "IS NOT" the optimum training method for higher level strength and hypertrophy, and never has been, however HIGH INTENSITY applied to MSTF training can be. It is the "hardliner" HITTERs that cause the need for "distance" from other High Intensity Training Models.

There are many ways to train with High Intensity, that are not as restricted.


Open User Options Menu

coach-jeff

Louisiana, USA

BIO-FORCE wrote:
coachjeff wrote:
Larry T wrote:
sgb2112 wrote:
SSTF at it's best.

That's one way to look at it. You might also look at it as multiple sets with very short rest periods. But an effective system nonetheless.

What gets me is that DC training seems well respected, and nobody seems to disagree that it's producing some REAL big and strong dudes.

But it's nothing but a version of HIT!!!

I know, I know...Dante has very much distanced himself from HIT - and perhaps that's why he does not get the "dissenters" that HIT does - but to those who say HIT is not the optimum way to train for optimum results, then do you also feel DC training gives "sub-par" results?



High Intensity Training "IS" what produces results. However Dogg Crapp (as I understand it according to their site) is not SSTF based training, in fact it is just the opposite. It is multiple set training, mostly NTF.

Classical HIT, "IS NOT" the optimum training method for higher level strength and hypertrophy, and never has been, however HIGH INTENSITY applied to MSTF training can be. It is the "hardliner" HITTERs that cause the need for "distance" from other High Intensity Training Models.

There are many ways to train with High Intensity, that are not as restricted.




Can you be more specific about how you feel "DC" has an advantage over "classical HIT" in terms of methodology?

And you do agree that DC is at least in the HIT ballpark, right?

Open User Options Menu

simon-hecubus

Texas, USA

BIO-FORCE wrote:
High Intensity Training "IS" what produces results. However Dogg Crapp (as I understand it according to their site) is not SSTF based training, in fact it is just the opposite. It is multiple set training, mostly NTF...


Sorry, John but you apparently DON'T understand it. Time to revisit their site.

The work sets for most body parts consist of one exercise in 3 parts: 1 set to failure plus 2 rest-pause adders following a break lasting 10 to 15 deep (but not slow) breaths:
* 1 set of 6-9 reps TF
* 10-15 breath rest/pause
* 3-5 more reps TF
* 10-15 breath rest/pause
* 1-3 more reps TF. Done.
Note that each of those parts are done to failure, except the breathing ;-)

For heavy leg exercises like Squats or leg presses, the protocol is 1 low-rep set TF or maybe one-rep shy of failure, followed by a lighter 15-20 rep "widowmaker" with the same or different quad exercise.

The only NTF protocol prescribed are for ultra-heavy exercises like Deadlifts. For these 2 low-rep sets are prescribed.

IMO DC's creator has stated that his is not HIT training just to distance DC from the negative "Jedi" reputation that HIT has --- deservedly to some degree as we unfortunately know...

Rest assured that it IS one form of HIT though.

Scott
Open User Options Menu

simon-hecubus

Texas, USA

coachjeff wrote:
Can you be more specific about how you feel "DC" has an advantage over "classical HIT" in terms of methodology?

And you do agree that DC is at least in the HIT ballpark, right?


Not only is it in the HIT ballpark, it's inside the HIT diamond.

I'd probably call it Advanced HIT, since you need to be towards the right end of the bell curve to survive the protocol as written for any period of time w/o burning out.

But then again, I'm the 'heretic' who thinks that 5x2 and 3x3 protocols fit within the HIT ballpark too --- maybe out in left field somewhere. :-b

Regards,
Scott
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

simon-hecubus wrote:
BIO-FORCE wrote:
High Intensity Training "IS" what produces results. However Dogg Crapp (as I understand it according to their site) is not SSTF based training, in fact it is just the opposite. It is multiple set training, mostly NTF...

Sorry, John but you apparently DON'T understand it. Time to revisit their site.


Hi Scott, while I don't claim to be a DC expert, from what I can see, it is less restrictive than SSTF HIT and it may have 4 warm-up approach seats, as evidenced by this from Dante:

<<<<Warmups would be 135x12, 185x10, 250x 6, 315x4 (none of these are taxing--they are just getting me warmed up for my all out rest pause set)>>>>

The above would be a total of at least 4 sets of which 3 are NTF, and one is.

Maybe that has changed but that was my understanding. Here's more:

<<<<But you can come in and do 2-5 warmup sets up to your heaviest set and then do ONE working set (either straight set or rest paused) all out on that exercise then recover and grow and be ready again 3-4 days later. This kind of training will have you growing as fast as humanly possible.>>>>


simon-hecubus wrote:

The work sets for most body parts consist of one exercise in 3 parts: 1 set to failure plus 2 rest-pause adders following a break lasting 10 to 15 deep (but not slow) breaths:
* 1 set of 6-9 reps TF
* 10-15 breath rest/pause
* 3-5 more reps TF
* 10-15 breath rest/pause
* 1-3 more reps TF. Done.
Note that each of those parts are done to failure, except the breathing ;-)

For heavy leg exercises like Squats or leg presses, the protocol is 1 low-rep set TF or maybe one-rep shy of failure, followed by a lighter 15-20 rep "widowmaker" with the same or different quad exercise.

The only NTF protocol prescribed are for ultra-heavy exercises like Deadlifts. For these 2 low-rep sets are prescribed.

IMO DC's creator has stated that his is not HIT training just to distance DC from the negative "Jedi" reputation that HIT has --- deservedly to some degree as we unfortunately know...

Rest assured that it IS one form of HIT though.

Scott


I agree that it qualifies as High Intensity, but it IS NOT strictly SSTF only.

Beginners may be able to use a SSTF Model without warmups, but this appeals to the fellows who want to train BIG, and you don't just jump into those Heavy Loads with SSTF.

Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

coachjeff wrote:
Can you be more specific about how you feel "DC" has an advantage over "classical HIT" in terms of methodology?

And you do agree that DC is at least in the HIT ballpark, right?



Very simply it uses a standard NTF warm-up approach sets like many have used in the past, that builds to not only a STF, but a STF with R/P Set extensions.

As I said to Scott, I certainly would call it High Intensity, but NOT in the Classical HIT sense (due to the approach sets), and even the addition of a WIDOW MAKER set.
Open User Options Menu

Supersteve

BIO-FORCE wrote:
Classical HIT, "IS NOT" the optimum training method for higher level strength and hypertrophy, and never has been, however HIGH INTENSITY applied to MSTF training can be.


Interesting because according to you classical HIT is MSTF.
Open User Options Menu

Supersteve

coachjeff wrote:

Can you be more specific about how you feel "DC" has an advantage over "classical HIT" in terms of methodology?



Coach I apologise for butting in.
Must be the warm ups John, nothing at all to do with the SSTF plus R/P.
Open User Options Menu

Supersteve

coachjeff wrote:

What gets me is that DC training seems well respected, and nobody seems to disagree that it's producing some REAL big and strong dudes.

But it's nothing but a version of HIT!!!


IMO it is because the whole approach appeals more to the 'HARDCORE BODYBUILDER'(I use the phrase tongue in cheek) a lot of talk of steroids,supplements,large quantities of food etc.

Whereas the approach laid out by Dr Darden differs in those aspects. Anti steroids,very few if any supplements,sensible balanced diet etc.

That doesn't appeal to the bodybuider mentality.Many do not feel like bodybuilders unless those things are in place.

Also with Dr Darden's HIT there is an association with machine training,even though many are applying the principles to free weights.Again this isn't HARDCORE.

Closer inspection of the methods used will tell you it is basically a SSTF system with a few warm ups and set extenders with the R/P.
Open User Options Menu

coach-jeff

Louisiana, USA

simon-hecubus wrote:
coachjeff wrote:
Can you be more specific about how you feel "DC" has an advantage over "classical HIT" in terms of methodology?

And you do agree that DC is at least in the HIT ballpark, right?

Not only is it in the HIT ballpark, it's inside the HIT diamond.

I'd probably call it Advanced HIT, since you need to be towards the right end of the bell curve to survive the protocol as written for any period of time w/o burning out.

But then again, I'm the 'heretic' who thinks that 5x2 and 3x3 protocols fit within the HIT ballpark too --- maybe out in left field somewhere. :-b

Regards,
Scott


Ok...so there it is. DC is indeed SSTF (And beyond failure via RP reps) with a strong emphasis on strength progression and "eating big" enough to grow.

I don't see anyone disputing the efficacy of DC. But many dispute efficacy of HIT.

In fact, although I have never questioned HIT's strength building ability, I have questioned HIT's hypertrophy building abilities.

But in light of the results DC guys are getting, I'm now feeling kinda ashamed of myself. )<:

When I really analyze my recent struggles with hypertrophy I perhaps would be better to point the finger at...

- Lack of sleep since having kids
- Not as diligent about diet as usual
- Probably overtraining a bit

Hmm..this thread has sure got me thinking.

(Parenthetically, it should be noted that Dante does, I believe, recommend lifting FAST, and lowering slowly. This may possibly at least partially account for it's results. Or perhaps not. But it's at least worth considering.)
Open User Options Menu

Waynes

Switzerland

coachjeff wrote:
Larry T wrote:
sgb2112 wrote:
SSTF at it's best.

That's one way to look at it. You might also look at it as multiple sets with very short rest periods. But an effective system nonetheless.

What gets me is that DC training seems well respected, and nobody seems to disagree that it's producing some REAL big and strong dudes.

But it's nothing but a version of HIT!!!

I know, I know...Dante has very much distanced himself from HIT - and perhaps that's why he does not get the "dissenters" that HIT does - but to those who say HIT is not the optimum way to train for optimum results, then do you also feel DC training gives "sub-par" results?



It is nothing like HIT at all.

Wayne
Open User Options Menu

mpx

If I recall correctly it's an explosive rep cadence with multiple sets of rest pause to failure.

Not purposely slowing reps.
Not SSTF.
Mostly compound exercises.
A Split routine.
A target amount of reps 11-15 per exercise.
A "de-load" training phase.
Open User Options Menu

simon-hecubus

Texas, USA

BIO-FORCE wrote:
Hi Scott, while I don't claim to be a DC expert, from what I can see, it is less restrictive than SSTF HIT and it may have 4 warm-up approach seats, as evidenced by this from Dante:

<<<<Warmups would be 135x12, 185x10, 250x 6, 315x4 (none of these are taxing--they are just getting me warmed up for my all out rest pause set)>>>>

The above would be a total of at least 4 sets of which 3 are NTF, and one is
Maybe that has changed but that was my understanding. Here's more:

<<<<But you can come in and do 2-5 warmup sets up to your heaviest set and then do ONE working set (either straight set or rest paused) all out on that exercise then recover and grow and be ready again 3-4 days later. This kind of training will have you growing as fast as humanly possible.>>>>
.


Nice try, John. However, many of us HITers use warm-ups for SSTF HIT, especially on the heavier exercises.

I agree that it qualifies as High Intensity, but it IS NOT strictly SSTF only.

It's closer to HIT than the erroneous "mostly NTF" statement from your last post.

Beginners may be able to use a SSTF Model without warmups, but this appeals to the fellows who want to train BIG, and you don't just jump into those Heavy Loads with SSTF.

On that note you and I are in total agreement. I've listened to all the arguments on how its OK to jump right into the heavest set and none of them held any water AFAIC.
Open User Options Menu

simon-hecubus

Texas, USA

mpx wrote:
If I recall correctly it's an explosive rep cadence with multiple sets of rest pause to failure.

Not purposely slowing reps.
Not SSTF.
Mostly compound exercises.
A Split routine.
A target amount of reps 11-15 per exercise.
A "de-load" training phase.


Mostly right, except that a controlled negative of 2-4 seconds is specifically named in some explanations.

Waynes wrote:

It is nothing like HIT at all.
Wayne


For the most part, it is exactly HIT with two rest pauses adder for each TF sets.
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

Supersteve wrote:
BIO-FORCE wrote:
Classical HIT, "IS NOT" the optimum training method for higher level strength and hypertrophy, and never has been, however HIGH INTENSITY applied to MSTF training can be.


Interesting because according to you classical HIT is MSTF.


Such is the "inconsistancy" and confusion with the term SSTF. No one can say exactly what it means "except to themselves".
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

coachjeff wrote:

Ok...so there it is. DC is indeed SSTF (And beyond failure via RP reps) with a strong emphasis on strength progression and "eating big" enough to grow.


Actually it is not the classical or conventional SSTF model. It is a NTF escalating Intensity group of Approach Sets and a final Set to Failure (obviously NOT the only or Single Set).

There are several elements, of which the R/P is a significant contributor.

coachjeff wrote:
I don't see anyone disputing the efficacy of DC. But many dispute efficacy of HIT.


Classical HIT is considered a SSTF model via the fact that only a Single Set is performed to Failure.

If this is the only set for the bodypart, it causes serious restriction to the ability to "overload" that bodypart.

Why?

Because after you have reached a certain level of the Stimulus/Response Adaptive Cycle, you are unable to create the overload to cause further adaptation.

The only way to do so, is either through "set extensions" and or (additional) multiple exercises for the bodypart.

DC, as I see it, uses both the escalating intensity of the warm up sets, and the set extensions of the R/P to cause the further overload stimulus.

That is why it IS a HIGH INTENSITY training model, but does not "fit" the classical HIT application as such (No warm-up, SSTF, whole body 3 x a week, etc)

They are quite different, yet I believe still are both HIT.

coachjeff wrote:
In fact, although I have never questioned HIT's strength building ability, I have questioned HIT's hypertrophy building abilities.

But in light of the results DC guys are getting, I'm now feeling kinda ashamed of myself. )<:

When I really analyze my recent struggles with hypertrophy I perhaps would be better to point the finger at...

- Lack of sleep since having kids
- Not as diligent about diet as usual
- Probably overtraining a bit

Hmm..this thread has sure got me thinking.

(Parenthetically, it should be noted that Dante does, I believe, recommend lifting FAST, and lowering slowly. This may possibly at least partially account for it's results. Or perhaps not. But it's at least worth considering.)


There are many ways to use High Intensity. Depending on what they are, the adaptations will mirror the stimuli presented.

Open User Options Menu

coomo

BIO-FORCE wrote:
coachjeff wrote:
Larry T wrote:
sgb2112 wrote:
SSTF at it's best.

That's one way to look at it. You might also look at it as multiple sets with very short rest periods. But an effective system nonetheless.

What gets me is that DC training seems well respected, and nobody seems to disagree that it's producing some REAL big and strong dudes.

But it's nothing but a version of HIT!!!

I know, I know...Dante has very much distanced himself from HIT - and perhaps that's why he does not get the "dissenters" that HIT does - but to those who say HIT is not the optimum way to train for optimum results, then do you also feel DC training gives "sub-par" results?



High Intensity Training "IS" what produces results. However Dogg Crapp (as I understand it according to their site) is not SSTF based training, in fact it is just the opposite. It is multiple set training, mostly NTF.

Classical HIT, "IS NOT" the optimum training method for higher level strength and hypertrophy, and never has been, however HIGH INTENSITY applied to MSTF training can be. It is the "hardliner" HITTERs that cause the need for "distance" from other High Intensity Training Models.

There are many ways to train with High Intensity, that are not as restricted.



LISTEN stupid.We have seen your pathetic attempts at training.You expected members of this forum to congratulate you.What you got however, was a tyraid of abuse.Thats because what you do has NO RELATION TO HIT.What you do is what millions of other muscleheads around the world do.However they dont try and justify it,as an effecient training "model" Ive been donig this 18 months, and you what 45 years? and i train harder than you can imagine, or ever have.So stop undermining what you dont know, and cant experience.
Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Next | Last
Administrators Online: Mod Phoenix
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy