Hit
- Thread starter dfresh88
- Start date
dfresh88
New member
not light weight, enough you can get 8-12. couple warm up sets then ONE set to complete failure
Jacked27
New member
I trained this way for a while about a decade ago and have also done the HIT/Dorian Yates method. They both work for strength, but true size/hypertrophy requires MUCH greater volume for most guys.
If you thrive off all out effort, skip the forced reps and negatives and just do 2 straight work sets per movement to positive failure. MAX-OT is the same way, but I like to vary my rep ranges more than their dogmatic 4-6 stipulation. Nothing at all wrong with higher reps for building muscle. Especially for body parts like back and legs.
If you thrive off all out effort, skip the forced reps and negatives and just do 2 straight work sets per movement to positive failure. MAX-OT is the same way, but I like to vary my rep ranges more than their dogmatic 4-6 stipulation. Nothing at all wrong with higher reps for building muscle. Especially for body parts like back and legs.
GOING TRAINING
New member
I have tried it but not a fan of it each to there own but i feel there is more of a chance for injury with HIT i like to really warm up the body before going all out so volume training for me is better with HIT it felt like i just started training when a body part finished
Try it might work for you real well good luck
CHEERS GT
Try it might work for you real well good luck
CHEERS GT
dfresh88
New member
Yea ive been doing the volume thing for a while. Think its time for a change
dfresh88
New member
yea im ready for some new growth, especially in my chest
IronReps
Ology Apprentice
If anyone wants to seek more knowledge regarding HIT training, I suggest reading High Intensity Training by Mike Mentzer. It really puts things into perspective on how the body requires time and energy to recover, as well as the reasoning behind the 1 set to failure deal.
Jacked27
New member
Actually mentzers book is one step shy of pure retardation.
brb lifting 2 sets every 5 days because I'm so advanced. No, actually you are just unfit and untrained so any stimulus makes you worthless for days.
I love real HIT, mentzers version is nuts. HIT was 3x full body lifting at first, now it's more Yates style, which also works But the 2 movements for one set, once every 4-5 days? Get real.
brb lifting 2 sets every 5 days because I'm so advanced. No, actually you are just unfit and untrained so any stimulus makes you worthless for days.
I love real HIT, mentzers version is nuts. HIT was 3x full body lifting at first, now it's more Yates style, which also works But the 2 movements for one set, once every 4-5 days? Get real.
frazier512
New member
5x5 increasing 5lb/week works great for my chest, been hitting it for about 5 weeks now and i love it!! i
IronReps
Ology Apprentice
You obviously have no grasp of MENTZER's philosophy of bodybuilding.
First off, the amount of working sets depends on the body part. For example the bicep is such a small muscle that is will require less to be completely fatigued in comparison to the legs. Once the muscle has been fully exhausted, any more exercise isn't just useless, it's counterproductive because it uses up the body's "fuels" to complete the exercise when it needs those fuels to repair the muscle.
Second, being advanced has nothing to do with anything. The reason the breaks in between are so long is because when you TRULY exhaust the muscle, it takes nearly 2 weeks for it to completely repair.
Unfit and untrained? Sounds like a baseless accusation to me. Mentzer was a advocate for cardio, as it would make your recovery time in between sets faster.
You don't like Mentzer's HIT? That's cool man. But your facts are wrong.
Jacked27
New member
My facts are not wrong. I own the book. Mentzer doesn't even recommend biceps curls, so you are in fact, wrong.
Talk to me when you've been there, done that. 12 years ago.
As stated, HIT works, in the right formulation. NO ONE agress with Mentzers abbreviated HIT routines....not Yates (shit, Yates doesn't even like being associated with crazy Mentzer....look up his comments on him).
That was a nice, long paragraph though. Too bad your grasp of HIT is incorrect. It was Arthur Jones and Dorian Yates, and a bit of MAX-OT that has it straight, not Michael Mentzer and his Ayn Rand batshit crazy ramblings.
IronReps
Ology Apprentice
There are so many things wrong in this statement. Considering that you've proven that a) you claim to have read "mentors" book, yet you continuously put out facts that are incorrect, and b) you lack the ability to have an intelligent conversation, I'm going to leave this alone. Obviously with your extensive 12 year experience, you have an indisputable array of knowledge. More power to you.
Similar threads
