Lee Labrada's take on HIT training......

[RazorCuts]

The Volume VS. HIT debate never seems to end, and this is good because it promotes healthy discussion and enhances our understanding of the science of training and muscle growth.

The HIT system is a product of the late Arthur Jones and was made popular by the late Mike Mentzer, myself and by Dorian Yates – a Mr. Olympia against whom I competed. There’s no doubt that the HIT system works – but it doesn’t work as advertised. Let me explain.

Whereas volume training involves doing one warm-up set and then 3 or 4 working sets, with the final working set going to failure (point at which you cannot perform another unassisted repetition), HIT advocates claim that HIT requires only one set to totally fatigue your muscle fibers – but this just isn’t true.

The HIT system does include performing some sets that are not taken to failure – about 3 or 4, just as in volume training – but the 3 sets before the final working set are “warm-up” sets, and according to the HIT system, do not constitute “sets.” Of course, this is simply a play on words. Everyone knows that if you’re lifting a weight, even if it’s for the purposes of warming up, it constitutes a set.

Scientific studies have shown that doing multiple sets may actually increase hormone levels more than just doing one set. The important thing is that you are recruiting more and more muscle fibers with each succeeding set, until virtually ALL fibers are recruited in the final set. This is where REAL results come from. For most people, it takes them 2-3 sets to get to the point where they can finally recruit all the fibers in the muscle group they are training. This point is called the “growth threshold” and is discussed on page 112 of the Lean Body Promise (www.leanbodypromise.com )

Hope that helps! Happy Lifting.

-Lee

 

[badman]

Lol... If my warm-up sets are not taxing how is it going to build muscle? I think its just to promote his products and business.

RC did you get my email also?

 

[RazorCuts]

Lol... If my warm-up sets are not taxing how is it going to build muscle? I think its just to promote his products and business.

RC did you get my email also?

Sorry bad i did get it but something is screwed up. I swithched from a PC to an Apple and transfered the e book over. Everything reads fine when i send it it looks like the script is in alien. Crypt wanted one also but i can not seem to figure it out.
I may have to rewrite it on the Apple.
Ill keep you posted.

RC

 

[badman]

Lol I know how you feel. I was using a new version of word. Then at home I use the very first version of it. Lets just say it came out in a bunch of random signs §╩± Like those.

 

[Ashop]

Trainining is very individual. Routines that work for some, may not work for others. There are many effective ways to train.

 

[terryd5150]

Trainining is very individual. Routines that work for some, may not work for others. There are many effective ways to train.

That sums it up best...

 

[cryptasm]

That sums it up best...

nuthin works forever

 

[Dave_19]

I have always preferred HIT training over high volume. But I don't see why you have to choose one or the other. I mostly use a HIT routine for my chest, but for arms its more high volume then HIT although I start off with kind of heavy sets. They both work in different ways, if your the type of person who doesn't require a very routine life, you could probably benefit from switching it up every 2 week's, alternating the styles of training.

 

[Vespa103]

Dave I do the same sort of Chest is definately lower reps heavier weight, where as legs are higher reps more sets.

When ligaments, joints etc feel a little beat up go more volume if they are feeling stronger I go less

As far as HIT its just a marketing term

The main thing is to train keep training consitently and eating and you grow there is no secret training program

I actually find another theory more appealling these days SFW I would like to see a long winded article on that one

 

[bgmke7]

i beleive its all about overtraining(and alot of people do it).once you find your threshold of training verses overtraining and consistenetly dont overtrain you will ultimatley grow.H.I.T just makes overtraining less of a factor in someones training because you are doing less sets.DOGGCRAPP,S ideas have brought me a long way since mentzer but mentzer did have the right idea.just look at dorian yates

 

[Tough Old Man]

I have always preferred HIT training over high volume. But I don't see why you have to choose one or the other. I mostly use a HIT routine for my chest, but for arms its more high volume then HIT although I start off with kind of heavy sets. They both work in different ways, if your the type of person who doesn't require a very routine life, you could probably benefit from switching it up every 2 week's, alternating the styles of training.

Hell I don't even work arms. I let all the compounds take care of them. I may work arms once every three weeks for one or two sets.

 

[Leviathan]

I'm wondering...

With all the talk about hit, everyone talks about things in terms of SETS as a measure of volume as opposed to REPS as a measure of volume. I think we should be basing volume on number of reps performed as opposed to sets performed.

As an example: How is 6 sets of ten different than someone who does 3 sets of twenty? At first glance, we see that both equal 60 reps total volume. So the question is: which is better for producing results?

Opinions?

As posted on another board, they used Casey Viator's famous leg routine under the supervision of Arthur Jones, and pointed out that he performed

1 set of leg presses, 22 reps immediately followed by
1 set of leg extensions, 25 reps imm. followed by
1 set of squats, 17 reps

This was completed in tri set fashion, one after the other, and on PAPER, it looks like he only did 3 sets, or just one set if you count it all as one triset. Yet, look at the volume of rep work completed: 64 REPS!!!

So, this begs again the question: what's more important for inducing growth: volume as judged by number of sets, or volume as judged by number of reps?

 

[Brute Force]

A lot of bodybuilders tend to think in absolutes. Most top bodybuilders use both techniques and develop a high volume, high intensity routine ala Jay Cutler. I actually rotate between high volume days where I just do three straight sets at 75, 85, and 95% of ORM, going to failure on the last set, and high intensity days where I cut it to two sets at 75 and 85. On the last set, I go to failure and then implement techniques such as drop sets and semi-stretched overload partials. I also have a high rep/active recovery day where I do two sets at 65 and 75%.