Who's Tried HIT?

[BuffButterfly]

Who here has tried the HIT program for building muscle mass? I am considering giving it a try but wanted to hear some feedback.

[Sunshineslynn]

never tried it for building mass. I usually use it when I am trying to slim out a bit and kick my heart rate up a notch. I would not think it would build that much since the rest times are alot less and you lift alot less doing it which = less mass. To build mass IMHO you should do high weight low reps with atleast min. or more in between when lifting heavy.

[jackfast1]

i made that mistake way back when mentzer still had some rep going in the bodybuilding world...

there are many arguments pro and con regarding this type of training.
for me, oddly enough, it boils down to fun... that type of training; mind blowing, muscle destroying,vein popping,overtraining intensity is not enjoyable! simple as that!

[Defiant1]

Originally Posted by BuffButterfly

Who here has tried the HIT program for building muscle mass? I am considering giving it a try but wanted to hear some feedback.

It is a logical argument based on a false premise.

The premise is that exercise "effort" (they incorrectly call it "intensity") is the singular cause for muscular response.

It isn't, and in fact the whole idea was derived from the desire to MEASURE effort (only full effort can really be measured).

There are SO MANY incorrect ideas with HIT, it is not even funny.

Think about it for a second: this has been around since 1970. If training 2x per week TOTAL for 10 or so sets was the BEST for building MAXIMUM size, don't you think everyone would be doing it?

The bottom line is it is similar to ANY kind of program that promises MORE for LESS. It is going to attract fanatic rationalizers. Which it has.

And lol at the suggestion that "it is so hard people are afraid to do it". TRUST ME, my "HIT" workouts done 3x per week for 12 "all out" sets (which is MORE than they recommend now) was NOTHING compared to my 20 set per bodypart, 2-3 bodyparts per day, 2x per week workouts. NOTHING.

Don't waste your time.

[Sunshineslynn]

Originally Posted by Defiant1

It is a logical argument based on a false premise.

The premise is that exercise "effort" (they incorrectly call it "intensity") is the singular cause for muscular response.

It isn't, and in fact the whole idea was derived from the desire to MEASURE effort (only full effort can really be measured).

There are SO MANY incorrect ideas with HIT, it is not even funny.

Think about it for a second: this has been around since 1970. If training 2x per week TOTAL for 10 or so sets was the BEST for building MAXIMUM size, don't you think everyone would be doing it?

The bottom line is it is similar to ANY kind of program that promises MORE for LESS. It is going to attract fanatic rationalizers. Which it has.

And lol at the suggestion that "it is so hard people are afraid to do it". TRUST ME, my "HIT" workouts done 3x per week for 12 "all out" sets (which is MORE than they recommend now) was NOTHING compared to my 20 set per bodypart, 2-3 bodyparts per day, 2x per week workouts. NOTHING.

Don't waste your time.

CLap Clap....very well stated as always.

[BuffButterfly]

Thanks for the insite. Right now I am training: Mon - Legs, Tues - Chest/Bi's,
Wed-Abs, Thurs - Back/Tri's (Fri - Family night). I have cut my cardio down to 20 minutes in the am X5.

[kariev34]

Originally Posted by jackfast1

i made that mistake way back when mentzer still had some rep going in the bodybuilding world...

there are many arguments pro and con regarding this type of training.
for me, oddly enough, it boils down to fun... that type of training; mind blowing, muscle destroying,vein popping,overtraining intensity is not enjoyable! simple as that!

this is how i feel about it as well.

[power44]

Mike Mentzer drank his own piss. HIT SUCKS. Try DC