Thread: Interesting read

total bullshit in my opinion

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

total bullshit in my opinion

whats your opinion of High Intensity Training then?

You need a combination of both volume and intensity. Just like the question that always pops up, " Is it better to do 6 reps or 12 reps?" You need to do both for best results.

Good read. Both approaches can certainly work, but a program like HIT or HST that utilizes only one working set for each movement is an excellent way for those with limited time to make good strength and mass gains.

Originally Posted by soxmuscle

whats your opinion of High Intensity Training then?

I love it and do it all the time......but one set only....please

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

I love it and do it all the time......but one set only....please

What's wrong with only one set to total failure? There are multiple training protocols that call for such, and many have yielded positive results from them.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

What's wrong with only one set to total failure? There are multiple training protocols that call for such, and many have yielded positive results from them.

I think they work well for untrained people.................but for advanced people it is only good for a quick break in your training schedule......................don't recall the article talking about each groups training history prior to the experiments...

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

I think they work well for untrained people.................but for advanced people it is only good for a quick break in your training schedule......................don't recall the article talking about each groups training history prior to the experiments...

You're certainly entitled to your opinions, but plenty of people with decent training ages make gains using single set approaches.

Duncans Donuts, or old HIT promoting friend, is one such person that comes to mind. He had a completely sick squat. He rarely ever changed his routine, and performed only one set to total failure for each exercise.

Tough Old Man is another person that comes to mind. DC training calls for one set to total failure. From what I can tell, it sounds like the program is doing the job for him.

I also made gains using HIT-style training. Granted, I only have a couple years of lifting under my belt, but it certainly produced favorable results for me.

Tough doesn't do 1 set..............more like 12-20 sets

And for every person you name that had good results there about 100 who get better results from doing higher sets and training less frequently..................but that doesn't matter..

I got up to a 300+ bench training like an idiot........once you put in a few years and the magical gains slow down.....you begin to learn what works best for you.....and for me 1-4 sets per muscle group 2 or 3 times a week was a disaster....
And I don't know a single person who is very strong or big who trains that way....and that is over the last 25 years

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

Tough doesn't do 1 set..............more like 12-20 sets

If he is following DC training as directed, then he is doing 1 set per movement...

Originally Posted by CowPimp

If he is following DC training as directed, then he is doing 1 set per movement...

If he is then thats a first...................he built all his size and strength doing about twice the sets I do now..........He did 12-20 sets per muscle group twice a week for decades..................at his age and with all that muscle memory a lower set range will work wonders......but only to a point.

Well, if you don't have success with this type of training, then so be it. However, you can't argue that others don't. It is certainly a plausible training method, whether it did the job for you or not.

Bottom line is I don't see it working for very many people except beginners....
Most top Athletes do not use this method of training and there is a reason for that...

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

Bottom line is I don't see it working for very many people except beginners....
Most top Athletes do not use this method of training and there is a reason for that...

Most top athletes also use very high frequency routines the are only comprised of a small amount of weight training relative to skill-based work. Also, most atheletes have superior genetics, very regimented diets planned out by top dieticians, and a good number are also on the sauce. All of these factors contribute to greatly enhanced recovery.

None of this negates the positive results that many trained indivuals have experienced on routines consiting of only one working set per movement.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

Most top athletes also use very high frequency routines the are only comprised of a small amount of weight training relative to skill-based work. Also, most atheletes have superior genetics, very regimented diets planned out by top dieticians, and a good number are also on the sauce. All of these factors contribute to greatly enhanced recovery.

None of this negates the positive results that many trained indivuals have experienced on routines consiting of only one working set per movement.

I disagree 100%
Most top athletes do not train each muscle with weights 3x a week
Some have great genetics for strength and size some do not....
some juice some do not..
Most do not have regimented diets from top dietitians they follow.

Being a great athlete is only 0-10% weight training.....What makes them great is: dedication, heart, balance, speed, quickness, resilience to injury.....intelligence concerning the sports they compete in, great vision, practice, and many other factors....

Training a muscle with heavy weights once or twice a week is and has been the standard for decades..........

Fads come and go

Weight training is not the only form of resistance training there is. Plyometrics and skill-based drills both offer resistance. The point being that their bodies go through far greater stress than your average trainee, and for one reason or another, they are able to adapt where you average individual would probably die trying to adapt (Exaggeration obviously).

Anyway, this is getting off topic. I still say the one set approach can work because I have used it and seen it provide positive results for other individuals. I don't necessarily think it is superior to a higher volume approach, but it certainly works.

I agree it works....for beginners and also as a brief change of pace for an experienced lifter.

isn't this the type of training Dorian and Mark Dugdale do...the 6 sets on six exercises? They claim they can totally work out a large muscle (chest,quads,back) in only 6sets...

Personally I don't even get a pump until after at least 3-4 sets.

I cycle in a day of HIT training now and then where I just have one push, one pull and one leg exercise (all compound movements) for one set to all out failure. It works for me. By the way, this is how a lot of World Stronmen train since this is how their sport is based. Have you ever seen them train events? They aren't begniners at all and they are pretty much as big and as strong as you can get.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

You're certainly entitled to your opinions, but plenty of people with decent training ages make gains using single set approaches.

Duncans Donuts, or old HIT promoting friend, is one such person that comes to mind. He had a completely sick squat. He rarely ever changed his routine, and performed only one set to total failure for each exercise....

Yes, DD was quite a vociferous defender of HIT(one of the main sources of entertainment for me before I joined IM was reading his exchanges w/ Johnnny).

Personally, I could never find psychological satisfaction in the HIT approach. I believe in lifting to failure but I've always preferred multiple sets. I've tried HIT and I didn't care for it. DD had remarkable results though.

Originally Posted by Decker

Yes, DD was quite a vociferous defender of HIT(one of the main sources of entertainment for me before I joined IM was reading his exchanges w/ Johnnny).

Personally, I could never find psychological satisfaction in the HIT approach. I believe in lifting to failure but I've always preferred multiple sets. I've tried HIT and I didn't care for it. DD had remarkable results though.

I almost miss Johnnny now that you mention him. Haha. I had quite a few interesting exchanges with that fellow as well.

I understand your point about the HIT approach. I think it's cool to try different stuff all the time though. I'm thinking about implementing a routine at some point in the future that cascades from pure HIT to high volume over 3-4 weeks and repeats the cycle a few times before a deloading week.

I'm thinking of just doing my usual warm ups, then starting all movements from the bottom (I have sawhorses set up instead of a power rack), and finally maxing out each heavy day. I wonder how well this would work if I cycled it in for one week or so at random.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

I understand your point about the HIT approach. I think it's cool to try different stuff all the time though. I'm thinking about implementing a routine at some point in the future that cascades from pure HIT to high volume over 3-4 weeks and repeats the cycle a few times before a deloading week.

I really admire the plasticity of your w/o schedule. You seem to have no problem changing up your 'routine', even radically at times. I'm very regimented when it comes to organizing my w/o. In fact I consider it a major change when I add a new exercise.

HIT has the appeal of brevity but I never felt sufficiently 'warmed-up' to perform one very demanding set per body part.

Originally Posted by Squaggleboggin

I'm thinking of just doing my usual warm ups, then starting all movements from the bottom (I have sawhorses set up instead of a power rack), and finally maxing out each heavy day. I wonder how well this would work if I cycled it in for one week or so at random.

Heavy lifts involving only the concentric portion of the lift are great for improving the bottom portion of the lift as you have to generate all of the force without the aid of stored kinetic energy from the eccentric portion of the movement. Don't let the weight you use discourage you. You will have to use significantly less weight, but you should definitely reap the benefits.

I really admire the plasticity of your w/o schedule. You seem to have no problem changing up your 'routine', even radically at times. I'm very regimented when it comes to organizing my w/o. In fact I consider it a major change when I add a new exercise.

HIT has the appeal of brevity but I never felt sufficiently 'warmed-up' to perform one very demanding set per body part.

Thanks. I am just interested in trying the plethora of viable routines available. I have tried a good number thus far, including a couple I have just slapped together myself. I used to be more anal about it, but I have discovered that open-mindedness can lead to some favorable results.

I totally understand your qualms with HIT. However, I definitely make sure to warmup properly before each movement. For example, I did a 1RM of bottoms up squats this morning. I did no less than 6 warmup sets before attempting a new PR. I usually do about 3 warmup sets per movement when I'm working below 90% intensity. I also do a few minutes of cardio before I touch any weights.

Originally Posted by lnvanry

isn't this the type of training Dorian and Mark Dugdale do...the 6 sets on six exercises? They claim they can totally work out a large muscle (chest,quads,back) in only 6sets...

Personally I don't even get a pump until after at least 3-4 sets.

Dorian would do 1 or 2 sets to failure but would do a total of 9 sets per muscle group.....and he only trained a muscle once every 7-9 days.............so nothing like HIT at all.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

. . .
Thanks. I am just interested in trying the plethora of viable routines available. I have tried a good number thus far, including a couple I have just slapped together myself. I used to be more anal about it, but I have discovered that open-mindedness can lead to some favorable results.

I totally understand your qualms with HIT. However, I definitely make sure to warmup properly before each movement. For example, I did a 1RM of bottoms up squats this morning. I did no less than 6 warmup sets before attempting a new PR. I usually do about 3 warmup sets per movement when I'm working below 90% intensity. I also do a few minutes of cardio before I touch any weights.

That's interesting that you go as far as 6 warmup sets prior prior to your new PR. You've given me some things to consider, thanks.

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

Dorian would do 1 or 2 sets to failure but would do a total of 9 sets per muscle group.....and he only trained a muscle once every 7-9 days.............so nothing like HIT at all.

That's sort of how I do it, but at a much lower volume because I'm not juiced up and have merely average genetics. I do 1 set per muscle group per session, but a total of 3-4 sets over the course of the week. In reality, there is some crossover effect when I do "total body" movements like farmer's walks or Turkish getups.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

That's sort of how I do it, but at a much lower volume because I'm not juiced up and have merely average genetics. I do 1 set per muscle group per session, but a total of 3-4 sets over the course of the week. In reality, there is some crossover effect when I do "total body" movements like farmer's walks or Turkish getups.

So as an example you might do bench press on Monday 1 set only,
then on Wednesday 1 set of DB incline press and finally on Friday 1 set of decline press......and thats it for chest????
Or am I misunderstanding??

I do have a friend in Chicago who only does 2 total body workouts 2 times a week...........about 4 sets per muscle....very high intensity...
I actually trained with him using this workout back in 1998......