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
Darden Actually Coined The Acronym HIT?
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

coach-jeff

Louisiana, USA

I'm starting a blog on HIT. Written not as a HIT guru wannabe, but rather as a longtime HIT enthusiast. Acting more as a reporter than pontificating as an expert.

My first article for the blog is a several thousand word piece on "What is HIT?"

In that article I explain that although Jones initially popularized HIT, it was Darden who actually coined the term and the acronym. (If my memory serves me correctly?)

Accuracy is extremely important to me, so I was hoping you (Ellington) could point me to an already existing article on your site which details the day you came up with that exact term?

I seem to recall you came up with it somewhat "on the fly" during a college lecture you gave, with Jones watching you from the audience?

Or perhaps I actually read that in one of your books?

Anyway...even a one paragraph synopsis of the day you coined the term would be helpful.

Thanks!
Open User Options Menu

Ellington Darden

I tell the story of how I came up with the acronym HIT on pages 30-35 of my book, "The New High Intensity Training." It was in November 1975 at Duke University in a Nautilus Seminar.

Indeed, it was an off-the-cuff, written-on-a blackboard heading that I did in a quickly prepared summary of High Intensity Training. Arthur had used the words "intensity" and "high intensity" many times in his writings and talks, but he never wrote or said "high intensity training."

Soon thereafter people started talking about High Intensity Training and HIT.

Ellington
Open User Options Menu

coach-jeff

Louisiana, USA

Thanks for the reply! That was more or less the way I recalled it, but had to make sure. Would hate to write about something as a historical fact if it didn't actually occur.

Must also say that, as cool sounding as the phrase "High Intensity Training" is, you really knocked it out of the park with the acronym HIT.

Although, much to my chagrin, far too many people are using HIT and HIIT interchangeably. Even Google and YouTube get the distinction wrong.

Thus if you do an online search of HIT related topics, you get mostly a bunch of videos of crappy HIIT workouts that involve a lot of bouncing around like a chimp on crack.

Which is partly what motivated me to start a HIT oriented blog. To do my tiny part to hopefully counteract such nonsense.

When someone does an online search for HIT, I want them finding actual HIT related information, rather than videos of girls doing high-impact, high intensity interval training workouts.
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

== Scott ==
I?m just wondering what could be talked about on HIT that hasn?t been said on here 10,000 times?? Let?s see, fiber types, studies, reps sets, fast ?slow, Jones, Viator, cardio or not,,,,,,,,,
Open User Options Menu

Resultsbased

entsminger wrote:
== Scott ==
I?m just wondering what could be talked about on HIT that hasn?t been said on here 10,000 times?? Let?s see, fiber types, studies, reps sets, fast ?slow, Jones, Viator, cardio or not,,,,,,,,,



And yet you still comment...

Coach-Jeff,

I look forward to your new blog. Please let us know when it's active.
Open User Options Menu

coach-jeff

Louisiana, USA

entsminger wrote:
== Scott ==
I?m just wondering what could be talked about on HIT that hasn?t been said on here 10,000 times?? Let?s see, fiber types, studies, reps sets, fast ?slow, Jones, Viator, cardio or not,,,,,,,,,


Probably nothing if my target audience were HIT Forum veterans. But most people who've "heard" of HIT haven't heard about all those details. Also, forum posts don't generally appear very high in Google search results. I'm semi-good at getting articles to rank highly in Google, so I think I can reach a lot of people in a way that forums posts never will.

Plus I find that blogging about things which interest me (such as time efficient exercise that doesn't get people injured) helps me solidify my own thinking on the topic.

Open User Options Menu

1958

Texas, USA

What is the Internet address for your blog?
Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

entsminger wrote:
== Scott ==
I?m just wondering what could be talked about on HIT that hasn?t been said on here 10,000 times?? Let?s see, fiber types, studies, reps sets, fast ?slow, Jones, Viator, cardio or not,,,,,,,,,


curious what posts you do like? With all due respect, you seem to hate all posts on HIT or any study.. or any routine...or nutrition.. or.... what's left to talk about on ELLINGTON DARDEN'S forum?

I see nothing wrong with his idea on a blog, why not put info. in order, and in an organized way if he wants? Sure someone can spend 4000000 hours trying to sort through posts on here.....I'm all for blogs, more books from Dr. Darden and others... it's cool to see things like this still talked about.
Open User Options Menu

coach-jeff

Louisiana, USA

1958 wrote:
What is the Internet address for your blog?


I don't want to use the forum to link to my blog, nor do I think it's allowed. Plus I don't quite have my first article even completed yet. Literally just started this project 3 days ago.

The goal is to post at least one 1,500 to 3,000 word article per week. Google favors long articles in search results over short, little 600 to 800 blog posts. So, my natural inclination to write long, in-depth stuff will hopefully work out. At least once the new blog gets through the 5 to 8 month "Google sandbox" almost all new blogs must go through. (Google doesn't trust brand new websites)

I will say, if it's ok with Dr. Darden, that the name of the Blog is "High Intensity Training Nut"...me being the nut.





Open User Options Menu

Bill Sekerak

California, USA

Resultsbased wrote:
entsminger wrote:
== Scott ==
I?m just wondering what could be talked about on HIT that hasn?t been said on here 10,000 times?? Let?s see, fiber types, studies, reps sets, fast ?slow, Jones, Viator, cardio or not,,,,,,,,,


And yet you still comment...

Coach-Jeff,

I look forward to your new blog. Please let us know when it's active.


Maybe he will post something of value , for a change, on his blog.
Open User Options Menu

Equity

Thus if you do an online search of HIT related topics, you get mostly a bunch of videos of crappy HIIT workouts that involve a lot of bouncing around like a chimp on crack.

Which is partly what motivated me to start a HIT oriented blog. To do my tiny part to hopefully counteract such nonsense.

When someone does an online search for HIT, I want them finding actual HIT related information, rather than videos of girls doing high-impact, high intensity interval training workouts.[/quote]

You're not the only one who gets annoyed by this; it gets my back up too. As far as I know H.I.I.T. only started getting a mention in the last 20 years or so. Perhaps Dr. Darden should've copyrighted the H.I.T. term as like you say some internet sites use both terms interchangeably; confusing the young and the ignorant and giving the wrong impression of what actual H.I.T. is.

Regards.

Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

Nwlifter wrote:
entsminger wrote:
== Scott ==
I?m just wondering what could be talked about on HIT that hasn?t been said on here 10,000 times?? Let?s see, fiber types, studies, reps sets, fast ?slow, Jones, Viator, cardio or not,,,,,,,,,

curious what posts you do like? With all due respect, you seem to hate all posts on HIT or any study.. or any routine...or nutrition.. or.... what's left to talk about on ELLINGTON DARDEN'S forum?

I see nothing wrong with his idea on a blog, why not put info. in order, and in an organized way if he wants? Sure someone can spend 4000000 hours trying to sort through posts on here.....I'm all for blogs, more books from Dr. Darden and others... it's cool to see things like this still talked about.


==Scott==
What do I like on here, that's a really good question which lately I'm not sure I have an answer for. I love Darden, I love Nautilus and hearing about it's stories and history. I really like to see people in action doing what they say they do, which is rare. I like to hear from people who can be honest about HIT and say what about it works and what doesn't instead of constantly exclaiming it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. Lately this site is packed with blow holes who spout off about how something works great for them with nothing what so ever to back it up in the way off proof, It's also more filled than ever with pencil pushers who probably never touched a weight who are constantly quoting some study why someone should do x instead of z because it works some type of muscle fiber or whatever when most likely they've never even tried it.I mostly don't like the BS I see on here and lately it's packed with it and when I see it I'm going to call it out.Maybe this blog can eliminate some of that?
Open User Options Menu

oldbutsteady

Science is empirical i.e. observed and verified. Proof can be confirmed by conducting the same experiment repeatedly which will produce the same results without exception. An example, gravity, if a person drops a ball from their hand it will always fall downward due to gravity. No matter where on Earth or how many times you repeat this ball drop experiment, it will always go down. That is science, it is can be observed, verified, and is repeatable, therefore, a scientific fact.

What I constantly see posted on this forum are educated guesses, dogma, and statements such as "current" science indicates blah blah blah. If a "scientific fact" changes it wasn't science or fact. I'm not sure why or how science became "what we know currently". As I stated, educated guesses, opinion, and dogma are not science. Dogma is an issue that IMO that has held back HIT for decades. Most HIT acolytes can't accept much of what they believe is not science but dogma and usually refer back to theories AJ promoted as proof. This doesn't support your argument but proves you have nothing but dogma.

I'll point out the recent thread on Cardio and the "Rush Factor". Rush factor was pure marketing BS, by rushing people from station to station at commercial gyms more people per hour could be trained and in theory Nautilus machines were better at producing revenue. End of that story. To the best of my knowledge no VO2 testing was ever performed to confirm the effectiveness of the Nautilus Rush Factor, and IMO, because it would prove it was adequate at best or useless at worst. Remember you can learn as much from what is NOT tested as what IS tested. Better to pretend you're are correct than to know you're wrong especially when you are selling something.

Lastly, I know this is going to generate much hate towards me on this forum from the pseudo scientists that litter this board but I'm a big boy, have at it. Give me a list of your flawed, short term studies and ramblings from AJ as proof. It should be fun.

OBS

P.S. High intensity training was around many decades before AJ arrived on the scene, it was just how the Golden Age lifters trained, they didn't need a phrase to train hard, they just did. Also, let me add AJ himself was the worst possible spokesman for HIT ever and all you need to do is watch any seminar or interview he gave on HIT to see it. He had the worst social skills I've ever seen in a person.
Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

entsminger wrote:
Nwlifter wrote:
entsminger wrote:
== Scott ==
I?m just wondering what could be talked about on HIT that hasn?t been said on here 10,000 times?? Let?s see, fiber types, studies, reps sets, fast ?slow, Jones, Viator, cardio or not,,,,,,,,,

curious what posts you do like? With all due respect, you seem to hate all posts on HIT or any study.. or any routine...or nutrition.. or.... what's left to talk about on ELLINGTON DARDEN'S forum?

I see nothing wrong with his idea on a blog, why not put info. in order, and in an organized way if he wants? Sure someone can spend 4000000 hours trying to sort through posts on here.....I'm all for blogs, more books from Dr. Darden and others... it's cool to see things like this still talked about.

==Scott==
What do I like on here, that's a really good question which lately I'm not sure I have an answer for. I love Darden, I love Nautilus and hearing about it's stories and history. I really like to see people in action doing what they say they do, which is rare. I like to hear from people who can be honest about HIT and say what about it works and what doesn't instead of constantly exclaiming it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. Lately this site is packed with blow holes who spout off about how something works great for them with nothing what so ever to back it up in the way off proof, It's also more filled than ever with pencil pushers who probably never touched a weight who are constantly quoting some study why someone should do x instead of z because it works some type of muscle fiber or whatever when most likely they've never even tried it.I mostly don't like the BS I see on here and lately it's packed with it and when I see it I'm going to call it out.Maybe this blog can eliminate some of that?


Ok fair enough :)
Open User Options Menu

coach-jeff

Louisiana, USA

Several of the comments here somewhat echo my own thoughts...

- I'm a HIT enthusiast but not a dogmatist. I've long disagreed with the assertion, made by some HIT followers, that higher volume training with a bit less effort on each set doesn't work. It clearly does work for many people. In fact, I just wrapped up almost a year of "cumulative fatigue" type training a few months ago. Then went back to HIT, like I always have after an experiment with other training protocols. I always go back to HIT because I find it the most overall efficient way to train for the goals of most people.

- I follow science, but also realize science still has much to learn about exercise, diet, etc. I also value real world results too. Even if they fly in the face of what science says. After all, science, for many years, assured us that margarine was healthier for us than real butter.

- Regarding the current mass confusion over HIIT vs HIT...I've often thought the term High Efficiency Training might've been more marketable to the masses. Though not as "cool sounding" as HIT is to people who are more "hardcore" about their training. Plus, HET just sucks as an acronym.

- HIT forums aren't what they used to be...I have no problem with people disagreeing with the idea that HIT is the ONLY way to get good results, but it seems HIT forums are often populated by people who don't even like HIT. Almost an anti-HIT vibe...on a HIT forum. Of course this happens in lots of forums...I've seen some low carb forums get partially taken over by people who don't even like low carb diets. Which can really demotivate people who were looking into HIT, low carb diets, etc.
Open User Options Menu

coach-jeff

Louisiana, USA

entsminger wrote:
constantly quoting some study why someone should do x instead of z because it works some type of muscle fiber or whatever when most likely they've never even tried it.


You'd probably love some of what Adam and Damon Hayhow talk about. Two New Zealand HIT kinda guys. Damon in particular talks a lot about the problem with prioritising siencetic theories over actual real world results, then making adjustments based upon what's happening to YOUR body in the real world. They both seem to be a bit anti-machine, which I strongly disagree with, but still really like their hardcore, no nonsense approach.

Why Perform Only One All-Out Set?

https://www.youtube.com/...h?v=s0vh5Xnb8Q8

Open User Options Menu

oldbutsteady

I agree Coach J. Believe me I'm not anti HIT, one must train hard to build or maintain muscle, I'm just anti BS.

OBS
Open User Options Menu

ATP 4 Vitality

oldbutsteady wrote:
Science is empirical i.e. observed and verified. Proof can be confirmed by conducting the same experiment repeatedly which will produce the same results without exception. An example, gravity, if a person drops a ball from their hand it will always fall downward due to gravity. No matter where on Earth or how many times you repeat this ball drop experiment, it will always go down. That is science, it is can be observed, verified, and is repeatable, therefore, a scientific fact.

What I constantly see posted on this forum are educated guesses, dogma, and statements such as "current" science indicates blah blah blah. If a "scientific fact" changes it wasn't science or fact. I'm not sure why or how science became "what we know currently". As I stated, educated guesses, opinion, and dogma are not science. Dogma is an issue that IMO that has held back HIT for decades. Most HIT acolytes can't accept much of what they believe is not science but dogma and usually refer back to theories AJ promoted as proof. This doesn't support your argument but proves you have nothing but dogma.

I'll point out the recent thread on Cardio and the "Rush Factor". Rush factor was pure marketing BS, by rushing people from station to station at commercial gyms more people per hour could be trained and in theory Nautilus machines were better at producing revenue. End of that story. To the best of my knowledge no VO2 testing was ever performed to confirm the effectiveness of the Nautilus Rush Factor, and IMO, because it would prove it was adequate at best or useless at worst. Remember you can learn as much from what is NOT tested as what IS tested. Better to pretend you're are correct than to know you're wrong especially when you are selling something.

Lastly, I know this is going to generate much hate towards me on this forum from the pseudo scientists that litter this board but I'm a big boy, have at it. Give me a list of your flawed, short term studies and ramblings from AJ as proof. It should be fun.

OBS

P.S. High intensity training was around many decades before AJ arrived on the scene, it was just how the Golden Age lifters trained, they didn't need a phrase to train hard, they just did. Also, let me add AJ himself was the worst possible spokesman for HIT ever and all you need to do is watch any seminar or interview he gave on HIT to see it. He had the worst social skills I've ever seen in a person.


@ OBS


Great post!
Open User Options Menu

ATP 4 Vitality

entsminger wrote:
Nwlifter wrote:

==Scott==

Lately this site is packed with blow holes who spout off about how something works great for them with nothing what so ever to back it up in the way off proof,




Where is your proof blow hole?


It's also more filled than ever with pencil pushers who probably never touched a weight who are constantly quoting some study why someone should do x instead of z because it works some type of muscle fiber or whatever when most likely they've never even tried it.




It is also filled with idiots like yourself who assume!



I mostly don't like the BS I see on here and lately it's packed with it and when I see it I'm going to call it out.Maybe this blog can eliminate some of that?


If that was true, quit being the site custodian, and furnish your own proof/ case study. Right now, all you are is a grouchy ole geezer.
Open User Options Menu

hit4me

Florida, USA

its amazing that a legit thread was created and its being hijacked by a few angry individuals

can't wait to read your articles
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

oldbutsteady wrote:
I agree Coach J. Believe me I'm not anti HIT, one must train hard to build or maintain muscle, I'm just anti BS.

OBS


== Scott==
I?m not anti HIT either, in fact I?ve probably trained HIT longer than most of you have been alive ( see my Scott report thread on here of me in action) but I am anti BS and there are quit a few BS artists like the Turban wearing one who does nothing but spout BS.
Open User Options Menu

1958

Texas, USA

= = Scott= = ruins every thread he comments on.If ,as he proclaims,he's been doing HIT since before time began,then at least he'd be able to do a few chin ups!!
Open User Options Menu

Equity

Isn't it 50 years ago that Jones unveiled 'The Blue Monster' in Culver City?

Half Centuries are usually celebrated maybe this should be one too.

Regards.

Open User Options Menu

ATP 4 Vitality

Love to see a high intensity HDTV channel. With the plethora of free HDTV channels to be had for free now, a exercise channel for high intensity would be neat. Of course high intensity cardio would be the backbone, as true high intensity training needs all elements of conditioning emphasized.
Open User Options Menu

Equity

Equity wrote:
Thus if you do an online search of HIT related topics, you get mostly a bunch of videos of crappy HIIT workouts that involve a lot of bouncing around like a chimp on crack.

Which is partly what motivated me to start a HIT oriented blog. To do my tiny part to hopefully counteract such nonsense.

When someone does an online search for HIT, I want them finding actual HIT related information, rather than videos of girls doing high-impact, high intensity interval training workouts.

You're not the only one who gets annoyed by this; it gets my back up too. As far as I know H.I.I.T. only started getting a mention in the last 20 years or so. Perhaps Dr. Darden should've copyrighted the H.I.T. term as like you say some internet sites use both terms interchangeably; confusing the young and the ignorant and giving the wrong impression of what actual H.I.T. is.

Regards.



Message to Dr. Darden,

Contact Oxford, Collins or Penguin and have H.I.T. defined as a resistance training system once and for all. I believe Jones', Yourself's, the Nautilus and H.I.T. legacy deserves a written in stone definition not to be confused with something else.

Regards.


Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next | Last
Administrators Online: Ellington Darden
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy