Later in my "wisdom phase" of IM, I decided quite adrently that HIT was not the end all solution. I promoted CHANGE OF VARIABLES - time under tension, rep cadence, exercises, exercise order, time between exercises, use of exceptional modifications (super sets, half reps, negatives), hand position, et al. I have always done low volume (now I'm at 2 sets of 5 exercises) - but during certain phases (the Johnson coined "Blitz") I go to the opposite end of the spectrum. Such that I do high volume, high reps, lower pauses, and more extraneous techniques to draw up a temporary imposition on my body. Of course I only do that for maybe a week, in which I'll work out every day - all in a row.
It's not fun and it's very draining, I'm convinced doing it for longer than 10 days would probably blow your mind.
Of course, fitting HIT into this scheme is very easy, but it has to be done cautiously. I made great strides in my gains on HIT but I figured out eventually that change is the most important factor in maintaining positive results.
And, on the topic, I think I have pretty big legs. Since I've been doing bottom-pause squats (the pause is in the BOTTOM segment of the squat) my quad size has gone to nearly 30 inches. I work out with 345 for 12 doing this. I can squat "regular style" much better and lower because of this technique.
Beginners, HIT is probably the best, in my opinion. HIT in it's strictest form for intermediates and above should be utilized on a temporary basis (BUT NOT DISCARDED!) That would be my personal recommendation. I really consider what I do now a logical progression of HIT, where the volume is low but the relative imposition & intensity on the body is always high - thanks to the changing variables. So technically I consider myself a HIT advocate; but it is certainly not a traditional Mentzer HIT.
My 2 cents
