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
Heavy Duty Arms & Shoulders
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

Mega-duty

Here is some of Mike's old heavy-duty courses if someone is interested;).
I also want to ask from all of you what do you think,was Mike's original heavy duty more sensible than his ultra low volume stuff?

http://hardgainer-ectomorph.bl...
Open User Options Menu

Turpin

Mega-duty wrote:
Here is some of Mike's old heavy-duty courses if someone is interested;).
I also want to ask from all of you what do you think,was Mike's original heavy duty more sensible than his ultra low volume stuff?

http://hardgainer-ectomorph.bl...

more sensible ? .... No.

Mike advocated ultra low volume from studies of his personal training clients after careful monitoring of their exercise tolerance.
I tried the original heavy duty system back around 84-86` and still have my training records from it.
It was exhaustive !!

A split of legs/chest/triceps; mon & thurs

and back/shoulders/biceps ; on tues & fridays.

Far too much if each exercise is taken to failure.

T.

Open User Options Menu

Mega-duty

Turpin wrote:
Mega-duty wrote:
Here is some of Mike's old heavy-duty courses if someone is interested;).
I also want to ask from all of you what do you think,was Mike's original heavy duty more sensible than his ultra low volume stuff?

http://hardgainer-ectomorph.bl...

more sensible ? .... No.

Mike advocated ultra low volume from studies of his personal training clients after careful monitoring of their exercise tolerance.
I tried the original heavy duty system back around 84-86` and still have my training records from it.
It was exhaustive !!

A split of legs/chest/triceps; mon & thurs

and back/shoulders/biceps ; on tues & fridays.

Far too much if each exercise is taken to failure.

T.



Yes,that's too much with this training split.But,maybe amount of exercises is good/correct if some train only once or twice a week? His system was based to results of his clients,but most of them was phone clients. I mean they gained strength with his CR routines,but does that mean that they were growing bigger proportionally?
Many have said that they failed with his consolidation routines,including his biggest client.
Of course his CR build muscles but is it optimum to build every muscle group to its maximum?
Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

Mega-duty wrote:
Here is some of Mike's old heavy-duty courses if someone is interested;).
I also want to ask from all of you what do you think,was Mike's original heavy duty more sensible than his ultra low volume stuff?

http://hardgainer-ectomorph.bl...

I think his stuff from HDI and HDII was far more practical and productive.

Thanks for posting that though - first time I saw that.
Open User Options Menu

simon-hecubus

Texas, USA

There's a way nicer PDF version of all those original HD courses, though I do not remember where I got it from.

If you PM me, though, I'll be gald to e-mail it to you (~2 Megs).

Scott
Open User Options Menu

Turpin

Mega-duty wrote:
Turpin wrote:
Mega-duty wrote:
Here is some of Mike's old heavy-duty courses if someone is interested;).
I also want to ask from all of you what do you think,was Mike's original heavy duty more sensible than his ultra low volume stuff?

http://hardgainer-ectomorph.bl...

more sensible ? .... No.

Mike advocated ultra low volume from studies of his personal training clients after careful monitoring of their exercise tolerance.
I tried the original heavy duty system back around 84-86` and still have my training records from it.
It was exhaustive !!

A split of legs/chest/triceps; mon & thurs

and back/shoulders/biceps ; on tues & fridays.

Far too much if each exercise is taken to failure.

T.



Yes,that's too much with this training split.But,maybe amount of exercises is good/correct if some train only once or twice a week? His system was based to results of his clients,but most of them was phone clients. I mean they gained strength with his CR routines,but does that mean that they were growing bigger proportionally?
Many have said that they failed with his consolidation routines,including his biggest client.
Of course his CR build muscles but is it optimum to build every muscle group to its maximum?


Is there any routine that is optimal at building muscle to its maximum , moreso in a natural trainee ?

The CR ( & variation thereof ) has worked well for many over the years.

T.

Open User Options Menu

Mega-duty

HeavyHitter32 wrote:
Mega-duty wrote:
Here is some of Mike's old heavy-duty courses if someone is interested;).
I also want to ask from all of you what do you think,was Mike's original heavy duty more sensible than his ultra low volume stuff?

http://hardgainer-ectomorph.bl...

I think his stuff from HDI and HDII was far more practical and productive.

Thanks for posting that though - first time I saw that.


In my opinion HDII is definitive lower limit regarding volume of exercises.I also think that 3 set consolidation routine is maybe sligthly better than last 2 set version of it.
Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

Mega-duty wrote:
HeavyHitter32 wrote:
Mega-duty wrote:
Here is some of Mike's old heavy-duty courses if someone is interested;).
I also want to ask from all of you what do you think,was Mike's original heavy duty more sensible than his ultra low volume stuff?

http://hardgainer-ectomorph.bl...

I think his stuff from HDI and HDII was far more practical and productive.

Thanks for posting that though - first time I saw that.

In my opinion HDII is definitive lower limit regarding volume of exercises.I also think that 3 set consolidation routine is maybe sligthly better than last 2 set version of it.


If truly going to positive failure, HDII would probably represent the most I could handle training every 4-5 days. HDI would be another option.

If doing sub failure, then more volume and freq. tolerable, of course.
Open User Options Menu

Mega-duty

Turpin wrote:
Mega-duty wrote:
Turpin wrote:
Mega-duty wrote:
Here is some of Mike's old heavy-duty courses if someone is interested;).
I also want to ask from all of you what do you think,was Mike's original heavy duty more sensible than his ultra low volume stuff?

http://hardgainer-ectomorph.bl...

more sensible ? .... No.

Mike advocated ultra low volume from studies of his personal training clients after careful monitoring of their exercise tolerance.
I tried the original heavy duty system back around 84-86` and still have my training records from it.
It was exhaustive !!

A split of legs/chest/triceps; mon & thurs

and back/shoulders/biceps ; on tues & fridays.

Far too much if each exercise is taken to failure.

T.



Yes,that's too much with this training split.But,maybe amount of exercises is good/correct if some train only once or twice a week? His system was based to results of his clients,but most of them was phone clients. I mean they gained strength with his CR routines,but does that mean that they were growing bigger proportionally?
Many have said that they failed with his consolidation routines,including his biggest client.
Of course his CR build muscles but is it optimum to build every muscle group to its maximum?

Is there any routine that is optimal at building muscle to its maximum , moreso in a natural trainee ?

The CR ( & variation thereof ) has worked well for many over the years.

T.



Ok,maybe best possible then.
I think that genetics have a bigger role than we dare to recognize.Even without steroids Dorian Yates could have use any of these routines and looks unbelievable.
Open User Options Menu

simon-hecubus

Texas, USA

Mega-duty wrote:
In my opinion HDII is definitive lower limit regarding volume of exercises.I also think that 3 set consolidation routine is maybe sligthly better than last 2 set version of it.


Said it before and I'll say it again: Start with the 3-set version of the CR and add a rotating variety of 1 or 2 isos per workout and you have an ideal training regimen for many.
Open User Options Menu

sonny153

I know if you asked me 5 years ago and today what I thought was enough and what was too much, my answers would have been vastly different. Throughout the years in order for me to progress it has ALWAYS involved a reduction of exercises, sets and/or frequency of workouts. It seems to me that Mike and even AJ experienced the same thing. I have guys tell me all the time tell me "well I do 10 sets for bi's and I'm still growing" and my answer is always the same thing..keep doing it then! Why change if its working and frankly I don't really care..when progress stops then make some changes.
Open User Options Menu

pharaoh1063

simon-hecubus wrote:
There's a way nicer PDF version of all those original HD courses, though I do not remember where I got it from.
Scott


I got it.

http://www.fitwise.com/.../HD-courses.pdf

Pharaoh1063
Open User Options Menu

Lioncourt

My problem with the original Heavy Duty from the 70s is that after I train legs I am pretty much toast for the day. I mean if you put everything you have into training legs, do you really think you should have much left in the tank to do chest and tri's effectively?

I do much better splitting legs out to their own day and do upper body on a separate day.
Open User Options Menu

Mega-duty

simon-hecubus wrote:
Mega-duty wrote:
In my opinion HDII is definitive lower limit regarding volume of exercises.I also think that 3 set consolidation routine is maybe sligthly better than last 2 set version of it.

Said it before and I'll say it again: Start with the 3-set version of the CR and add a rotating variety of 1 or 2 isos per workout and you have an ideal training regimen for many.


Thats what i am doing now,i use two set consolidation routine with calf raises added to it and calves have grown better than ever before,i do them deadlift day.
I also think that three set version is maybe better because i always see improvement on my shoulders and even chest when i do behind the neck presses.
I also have found that i maybe get more beneft from calf raises,curls etc. if i do them after heavy movements.

Open User Options Menu

simon-hecubus

Texas, USA

Lioncourt wrote:
My problem with the original Heavy Duty from the 70s is that after I train legs I am pretty much toast for the day. I mean if you put everything you have into training legs, do you really think you should have much left in the tank to do chest and tri's effectively?

I do much better splitting legs out to their own day and do upper body on a separate day.


You could always do Legs last. At the frequency I train at now, "split" routines are not an option.

Scott
Open User Options Menu

rtnygren

Check out Dorian today without the huge amounts of chemical enhancement. He looks quite average. Legs still good but upper body looks like a different person. Palumbo had 12" arms as a track athlete. Later was a top national competitor. The "supplement" intake of the competitors today is staggering.
Open User Options Menu

rtnygren

As I have aged, I found I was shot after 1 max set to failure for legs. I must have had the shortest recorded workout at my gym. 1 short warmup of 6 reps, 1 set to failure (7 reps) leg press. Total time = 1 min. 10 sec. I went to the grocery store and felt faint.
Open User Options Menu

Mega-duty

rtnygren wrote:
Check out Dorian today without the huge amounts of chemical enhancement. He looks quite average. Legs still good but upper body looks like a different person. Palumbo had 12" arms as a track athlete. Later was a top national competitor. The "supplement" intake of the competitors today is staggering.


Dorian weighs 253 lbs.now and those who have seen him they say he looks pretty impressive and is very good condition at almost 50 years old.And he doesn't eat huge amount of food anymore but wants to stay in lean and good condition.
Open User Options Menu

DNAHelix

New York, USA

His old HD Routines look very interesting.
I have never tried his consolidated routine, so I can not say whether it is effective or not.
Open User Options Menu

rtnygren

Mega-duty wrote:
rtnygren wrote:
Check out Dorian today without the huge amounts of chemical enhancement. He looks quite average. Legs still good but upper body looks like a different person. Palumbo had 12" arms as a track athlete. Later was a top national competitor. The "supplement" intake of the competitors today is staggering.

Dorian weighs 253 lbs.now and those who have seen him they say he looks pretty impressive and is very good condition at almost 50 years old.And he doesn't eat huge amount of food anymore but wants to stay in lean and good condition.


All they need to do to get lean and smaller is stop the chemical intake and reduce food. Most do this in retirement.
Open User Options Menu

DNAHelix

New York, USA

I wonder though, why there is no mentioning of any abdominal exercises?

I would seriously like to improve the look of my midsection. MM had awesome midsection. What was his routine for that?
How often?
Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

kulitsa wrote:
I wonder though, why there is no mentioning of any abdominal exercises?

I would seriously like to improve the look of my midsection. MM had awesome midsection. What was his routine for that?
How often?


Abs get plenty of stimulation with other movements although I believe he included a set of ab work in his HDII Ideal routine for those who wanted it. Ab definition is largely a product of body fat levels.
Open User Options Menu

smanjh

The thing about HD that I do not think anyone understands at first is that it is a set of guiding principles. There is not a magical suggested routine for everyone, but what appears to be a process for figuring out how best to apply exercise to our own bodies.

I have mentioned many times that my most successful run with HD training was to customize the workouts down to just one set, and drop the 4th workout on these old routines.

I went in on MWF, and alternated the workouts. I burned out in about 5 weeks of it, and at this point would take a week off and then proceed back with the routine.

I have refined it down to every 3-7 days, doing pretty much two full body workouts, but they are emphasized in targeting different muscle groups. I do isolation work sometimes.

I crank up the stimulation or turn it down based on how my progress is. I deload, or cruise sometimes. This prevents having to go on a 1x every 10 day indefinite thing (which is not optimal for me).
Open User Options Menu

simon-hecubus

Texas, USA

kulitsa wrote:
I wonder though, why there is no mentioning of any abdominal exercises?

I would seriously like to improve the look of my midsection. MM had awesome midsection. What was his routine for that?
How often?


HeavyHitter32 wrote:
Abs get plenty of stimulation with other movements although I believe he included a set of ab work in his HDII Ideal routine for those who wanted it. Ab definition is largely a product of body fat levels.


I remember an article Mike wrote of Muscle and Fitness entitled: "The Abs - They're Muscles Too". The premise was that he said NOT to work abs like most guys of his day with endless high-rep sets, but just like you'd work other muscles in HD fashion.

This was the late 70s, so he was usually talking 4 HD sets per bodypart. I believe it was 2 sets of roman chair sit-ups: 1 holding a 45-lb plate, immediatly followed by one set with no weight. Then each side (obliques) were done in the same fashion, also done on the roman chair. The reps were in the 8-12 range.

Troy Zucholutto (sp?) always talked about his own "ravioli" abs, but they were strictly Chef Boyardee compared to Mike's!

Scott
Open User Options Menu

Lioncourt

smanjh wrote:
The thing about HD that I do not think anyone understands at first is that it is a set of guiding principles. There is not a magical suggested routine for everyone, but what appears to be a process for figuring out how best to apply exercise to our own bodies.


If Heavy Duty is not a set routine to follow, then it's really just an attempt to brand HIT under another name. Mike never sought to discredit the role that Arthur Jones played introducing him to the theory of HIT. Heavy Duty was him applying HIT theory into set routines that should help anyone achieve optimal gains with their genetics.

If you're not following Heavy Duty routines that Mike prescribed, then you're not doing Heavy Duty, you're doing HIT.
Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next | Last
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy