 |
11-06-2009, 09:17 PM
|
#31
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: New York, New York, United States
Age: 37
Stats: 6'1", 224 lbs
Posts: 439
BodyBlog Entries: 0
BodyPoints: 3183
|
BritLifter (aka Natural1), when your health gets better you can try my HIT split.
It will work, I promise... JK.
I am not obsessed with the number of sets, there are warm-ups, work set(s).
I say do as many work sets as it takes, but try to accomplish what it takes with as few work sets as possible.
With higher frequency like Dardens 1 work set is plenty, with lower frequency 1-3 should do the job in most cases.
As far as what is HIT - the name means "going to failure training". Why should there be only one mold to fit all ?
As long as after warm-ups (that are done way too light to be effective in stimulation) you do ALL your work sets to failure - it is HIT.
.
|
|
|
11-07-2009, 06:27 AM
|
#32
|
|
Lifelong Nattie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: United Kingdom (Great Britain)
Posts: 4,334
BodyBlog Entries: 0
BodyPoints: 6915
|
Sometimes we have to use what knowledge we have and some basic common sense so I'll offer you my thoughts for what's its worth.
It's important to understand firstly that all a muscle fiber can do is contract/relax, nothing more nothing less. It doesn't know if it's being recruited in a failure rep or the first rep or on a 1 rep max or even throwing a light weight (stone) it knows nothing it can only contract in response to a degree of CNS output and relax.
Each contraction will contribute to the total amount of micro-trauma (protein degradation) which requires protein synthesis to be repaired (sarcomere hypertrophy)
The side effect of all this bio-mechanical work is metabolic fatigue (fuel/substrates etc) which contributes to the hypertrophy of the metabolic aspects of a muscle (sarcoplasmic hypertrophy)
By the time you're at the final rep in a failure set all available motor units/fibers have been recruited and the CNS is attempting to fire them at their highest firing frequency although due to actual fiber fatigue many will no longer be responding. In other words rate of contraction and protein degradation has gone DOWN while CNS effort and hence fatigue has gone UP.
Now nobody is saying don't train hard, nobody is saying don't ever train to failure. What I'm suggesting is to be aware of the relationships of tension and fatigue and the resulting stimulus and be aware of the potential of the constant use of failure training to limit actual muscular work.
|
|
|
11-07-2009, 08:55 AM
|
#33
|
|
Lifelong Nattie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: United Kingdom (Great Britain)
Posts: 4,334
BodyBlog Entries: 0
BodyPoints: 6915
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by NaturalHIT
As long as after warm-ups (that are done way too light to be effective in stimulation) you do ALL your work sets to failure - it is HIT.
|
Two examples.
Two lifters do 3 exercise and 3 sets per exercise = 9 sets.
Lifter A fails only on set 3 of each lift = 3 failure points.
Lifter B fails on all sets = 9 failure points.
MASSIVE difference similar volume.
Which is using HIT and which is using volume?
As a side note you will get a huge amount of HITers disagree with you that mulitple set training is HIT, the premise of HIT is VERY brief workouts not the use of 9-12 or more sets per body part.
One of the issues I have with HITers is their insistence to claim many training methods as HIT when it's not.
|
|
|
11-07-2009, 09:09 AM
|
#34
|
|
Lifelong Nattie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: United Kingdom (Great Britain)
Posts: 4,334
BodyBlog Entries: 0
BodyPoints: 6915
|
Another thing to consider. HIT advocates believe that it's hitting failure that triggers growth.
While a max effort attempt which includes both a 1 rep max or the last rep in a failure set does indeed have benefits in as much as it increases neural efficiency, it's completely irrelevant to significant hypertrophy.
If it was high CNS effort/output of that last failure rep that triggers growth the exact same trigger would occur during other times of high CNS activity which includes both a 1 rep max (ME) and moving a submax load as fast as possible (DE).
The fact which is supported in both science and empiricism is that it's the RE method of lifting that induces the most hypertrophy because of the extra workload (muscular). Whether failure (high CNS effort) is attained is irrelevant to this goal.
|
|
|
11-11-2009, 09:01 PM
|
#35
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kansas, United States
Age: 27
Stats: 5'11", 160 lbs
Posts: 12
BodyBlog Entries: 0
BodyPoints: 0
Rep Power: 0 
|
workouts have been giong good, think im still at 174lbs. Form is getting better, but I think that I am going to change things up a little bit and instead of just doing one weight, Im going to continuously move down in weight until I can't do anymore. Also I don't think that my form is that good and some of the exercises are hard for me to perform. Such as the single arm bent over lat raises. Here are the results of todays workout, I was rushed but still had a decent lift.
DB lat raises 8x15lbs
DB Bent lat raises 6x15, 3x10
DB Curls 30x6, 20x4
Tri Cable pushdowns 100x10 superset dips- 4
Decline situps with 25lbs x8 - form was way too much weight.
I think I'm going to switch a workout with the bent lat raises, my form is horrible. Any suggestions, and also what do you think of my instantly going down in weight and doing more reps a few times on my set?
|
|
|
11-30-2009, 11:28 AM
|
#36
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kansas, United States
Age: 27
Stats: 5'11", 160 lbs
Posts: 12
BodyBlog Entries: 0
BodyPoints: 0
Rep Power: 0 
|
So far the most I've weighed was 180 but I did some drinking this weekend and now im at 177.5, Still, thats around 15 pounds since I've started this thread, and to me, thats pretty impressive. Last Fridays workout -4 seconds up 4 seconds down on all exercises.
Leg extensions - 62.5 x 12 superset squats 155 x 9
Machine Inner Thigh 95 x 10 superset deep squats 70 x 8
Calf Raises holding a 25 lbs weight x 10.
I've been eating good, kinda getting a little chub though, suggestions on how to get rid of this abdominal fat or is that normal when your trying to gain weight
|
|
|
11-30-2009, 12:59 PM
|
#37
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: New York, New York, United States
Age: 37
Stats: 6'1", 224 lbs
Posts: 439
BodyBlog Entries: 0
BodyPoints: 3183
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BodyMonopolist
So far the most I've weighed was 180 but I did some drinking this weekend and now im at 177.5, Still, thats around 15 pounds since I've started this thread, and to me, thats pretty impressive. Last Fridays workout -4 seconds up 4 seconds down on all exercises.
Leg extensions - 62.5 x 12 superset squats 155 x 9
Machine Inner Thigh 95 x 10 superset deep squats 70 x 8
Calf Raises holding a 25 lbs weight x 10.
I've been eating good, kinda getting a little chub though, suggestions on how to get rid of this abdominal fat or is that normal when your trying to gain weight
|
I still do not get what routine you are following, I doubt even you know.
The goal is getting stronger, weight gain is a side effect.
You must objectively ask yourself: does my strength gain correspond to weight gain?
It is good that you are ABLE to put on weight, that shows you have digestive system capacity to utilize higher ammounts of calories.
That doed not mean you should be eating as much as you can.
As you get stronger and bigger you would need to be eating more and more, but not right now.
You just need to eat ENOUGH to allow steady strength increases.
.
Look into my routine, it is Mentzer inspired, but somewhat different.
.
__________________
.
Natural HIT
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=119915771
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Rate This Thread |
Linear Mode
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
Member Login
Sign in for more FREE features and tools!
|
|