Ian Matthews - The New High Intensity.

[webmaster]

There are many theories on HIT, and many HIT workouts such as Max-OT among others, but I'm here to talk about a new HIT philosophy.

http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/ian5.htm

HOW TO REVIEW: Post Your Review Of This Article - CLICK ON POST REPLY BELOW! You do NOT need to be a registered member to post a reply in this section!

[BigKazWSM747]

"The set of 6 will tax the fast-twitch muscle fibers more than the set of 20, but the set of 20 will tax the slow-twitch muscle fibers, heart, and lungs more than the set of 6. So why is the set of 6 considered more intense than the set of 20. "

In the science of strength training intensity is the related to the percentage of one's maximal effort. That makes H.I.T. a bit of an oxymoron in itself since the reps are usually never very low. And when he promises great strength increases what exactly does he mean by strength? Endurance strength yes...but how will this favorably affect absolute strength, or speed-strength, etc.

This article doesn't seem very well done to me.

[Deception]

I really liked this article, but am still relatively new to the sport and am trying to learn, so please bare with me while I ask a couple questions regarding your post

Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
In the science of strength training intensity is the related to the percentage of one's maximal effort. That makes H.I.T. a bit of an oxymoron in itself since the reps are usually never very low.

Who decides what exactly intensity is? I believe it all depends on how your lifting. In this article Ian makes it clear that he believes a set of 20 can be just as intense as a set of 6.

YOU are the one who is saying that intensity is related to the percentage of one's maximal effort. HIT is only an oxymoron if you believe in your idea of intensity.

What exactly is the "science of strength training"? Who came up with the science and how does that relate to an article about HIT?

Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
And when he promises great strength increases what exactly does he mean by strength? Endurance strength yes...but how will this favorably affect absolute strength, or speed-strength, etc

I thought it was clear that he's PROPOSING his ideas, NOT PROMISING as you seem to assume so quickly. I gathered that Ian believes by practicing HIT in different rep ranges throughout a period of time that you will become stronger in all areas, decrease risk of injury, and spend less time in the gym which, I believe, helps a great deal with recovery time.

Why is that so hard to believe?

Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
This article doesn't seem very well done to me.

Maybe from a powerlifting standpoint, but for somebody who's looking for a variation of HIT from an experienced bodybuilder I think it makes a lot of sense. Personally, I think you have something against HIT in general I don't claim to be perfect, and everybody is entitled to their opinion so let me have it if I deserve it! I'd really appreciate it!!

Let me know buddy!!

[AMDEZ]

I completly disagree with Kaz...iv done volumetric style training up to 10-15 reps with hardly any muscle responce. Since then I changed it up at the last set its 4 reps. I haven't grown so fast in my life..its nuts.

[freaker]

Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
And when he promises great strength increases what exactly does he mean by strength? Endurance strength yes...but how will this favorably affect absolute strength, or speed-strength, etc.

This article doesn't seem very well done to me.

I've been training with the HIT methodology for years, and I've done pretty well with increasing strength, but when I changed up to this rep scheme, I got much better increases in strength then when I was constantly lifting in lower rep ranges, so when I'm talking about strength, I'm talking about how many reps can you do with 455 when you squat, basically how many repititions can you do with a heavy weight. Maybe this rep range thing won't work as well for everybody, maybe I get pretty good results with these higher rep ranges because I can handle a pretty good amount of weight for 20 reps. I'm just getting sick of these Max-OT guys like Skip LaCour saying that a particular rep range is the only one you should lift in. It's beyond me how these guys don't have joint or tendon problems constantly lifting in a 4-6 rep range.

it amazes me how many ppl still don't get that just because someone recomends smething that worked for them, neone who tries it and doesn't see results quickly jumps to assume that the methods or ideas are wrong. they're suggestions not answers, everyone is different and many things that work for me aren't going to work for you, and visa versa. or am i way out to lunch here?

[EricS]

It sounds like good ol Periodization to me. Planned variation in intensity and volume.

[freaker]

Originally posted by EricS
It sounds like good ol Periodization to me. Planned variation in intensity and volume.

Very short periodization cycles though. Most people who use periodization stick with a particular plan for longer than a week before changing it up. If I was as hardcore as I used to be, I'd probably be doing short-term periodization with my diet as follows: 9 day cutting diet(detailed in my 2nd article), all-juice day(read my 3rd article as to why), 6-10 days of 7000 calories a day(also detailed in my 3rd article), and 1-5 days of lowering my calories back to 9-day diet levels(~2500 calories a day). I really feel like I could get my arms up to 20"(18.5" now) in 4-6 months by doing this, but I really do not feel like eating this way day in and day out. Not only is food preparation time consuming, but I really hate being bloated the first few days at 7000 calories a day. It's enough to make me feel like I never want to do it again. Maybe my injury was a good thing, otherwise I probably would be trying to do this in an attempt to become the biggest natural pro ever. I think I'll just be satisfied being big, I'll leave the being the biggest natural freak to hit a bodybuilding stage to Layne, Derek, and Mitch.

[Beast]

Originally posted by freaker
It's beyond me how these guys don't have joint or tendon problems constantly lifting in a 4-6 rep range.

I'm sure it's easy when you get free AST proflex.

[freaker]

Originally posted by Beast
I'm sure it's easy when you get free AST proflex.

I take 3 times that much glucosamine sulfate, as well as MSM and gelatin. I used to think it was age because I never had these problems before I was 20, but Skip Lacour is almost 40. Now I'm beginning to think it's genetic as this guy who posts in the Contest Prep forum named Most Muscular follows Max-OT and he's 47 and huge. Maybe I'm just injury-prone. My knees and lower back have been bothering me recently. It's like I have to choose between heavy squating and sprinting(HIIT cardio).

[Cheese_Whiz_7]

This sounds like a slight variation of HST.

[freaker]

Originally Posted by Cheese_Whiz_7

This sounds like a slight variation of HST.

I just read the HST article and the change in rep ranges is definitely similar. However, I created this workout well over 3 years ago and I just read the HST article today. I'm not sure if HST follows the typical Mike Mentzer/Dorian Yates based HIT protocol, but the workout I follow does. In fact, interesting to note is that for the last 2 months I've been going 2 weeks in each rep range, but I am only training a body part once every 2 weeks. From what I read in the HST article it would seem that the 3 x weekly workouts were total body workouts. At the time I wrote this article Max-OT was very popular. I actually came up with the idea to switch rep ranges reasoning that the heavier the weight (and thus the lower the rep range) the more intense the workout and the more it impeded recovery. I then based the progression on the volume progressions that many power lifters use, but instead of changing the volume week by week, I changed the intensity but utilizing different rep ranges. It's basically a low-volume, train-to-failure approach (HIT), but it uses rep ranges in some weeks that aren't usually associated with HIT training. It also seems to work well for progression in terms of lifting more weight because the way the rep ranges change from week to week would naturally have one progressing to higher weights each week until after the heaviest week they switch back to the high rep range and thus lower weights (which will actually benefit recovery by giving the tendons a break and bringing more blood into the muscle).

[Cheese_Whiz_7]

...made you look! lol
I liked your article. I am actually planning a true HST cycle as we speak. One difference is the idea of "strategic deconditioning" (SD), which is laying off the weights for 2 weeks NOT for enhanced recovery. Rather just the opposite, to decondition the muscle so that a lesser stimulus (lower weight) will again induce hypertrophy.

This man obviously does not know what he is talking about when it comes to HIT (High Intensity Training). This man says that he believes that a set of 20 reps can be just as intense as a set of 6? Who is actually going to buy this crap? If the set of 20 was really as intense as the set of 6, then how come he is albe to DO MORE REPS?! The more intense an exercise is the less amount of reps you are going to be able to pump out. There are three general ways to increase intensity in a workout and this is straight out of the HIT book that was written by MIKE MENTZER (the real authority on HIT).

1. By progressively increasing the amount of weight you use.

2. By progressively decreasing the amount of time it requires to perform a certain amount of work.

3. By carrying each set to a point of total failure.

Does it say anywhere that increasing reps increases intensity? NO! Take for example the bench press. I hop on over to the bench press and pump out 20 reps with 200 lbs. Okay, that's pretty intense. My muscles feel taxed and I'm breathing a little heavy. Now let's load the bar up with 300 lbs. I lay down and pump out 6 INTENSE, GUT-BUSTING, BALLS TO THE WALL reps. Now you be the judge for yourself. Which set was more intense? All in all, I would recommend each individual go out and buy High Intensity Training the Mike Mentzer Way (can be found on his website www.mikementzer.com). Stop listening to the bull**** that this website puts out about to HIT. This guy obviously doesn't have a freaking clue what he's talking about. Go out and try it for yourself. Do an exercise with a amount of weight you can handle and pump out 20 reps. Now load 90% of your max on there and TRY to complete 6 reps. Which is harder? Judge for yourself. Don't listen to me, this Ian dude, or anybody else for that matter. We're all just stating our own opinions. Test it for yourself. Take what works for YOU and throw the rest of that **** that doens't work for you down the drain.