HIT
I spent some time in 1987 with Nautilus before they were sold. They tried every version of HIT training you can imagine, and never got much in the way of results for bodybuilding. They then used this "Superslow" idea on a bunch of osteoporosis patients - most of whom were senior citizens - got some results in a group of people who'd never trained, and then tried it on bodybuilders with no results. At least one very promising pro almost had his career destroyed trying El Darden's training ideas. Not one pro who tried Jones' workouts stayed with them.
I know, what about the famous "Colorado Experiment?" Casey Viiator had been working for 2 years on an offshore oil-drilling rig and not training at all. He'd dropped from around 220, to about 160, then got injured, and was hospitalized, reducing his weight further. Jones then took him back to training, loaded him up with all the gear and food he could stuff into him, and lo and behold, Casey regained muscle he'd ALREADY HAD ONCE. This version is, of corse, not the one written in the HIT lore!
Along comes Mike Mentzer (whom I also knew). He takes this whole "HIT" notion to its logical, yet ridiculous conclusion, by having people train 2 sets every 2 weeks! Peolpe weren't getting gains at all, and of course not - they were DE-conditioning!
In reality, Dorian used something like Mike's 1970's version of HIT. This involved something like 3 exercises, 2 sets each, for chest, and maybe 12 total sets for back, while doing similar numbers of sets for other bodyparts. These numbers do NOT include warm-up 3 or more sets. Beginning to sound familiar? This is also NOT how he built his physique in the first place.
Someone in an earlier post above mentioned CNS exhaustion. This is precisely what you'll get, as well as adrenal exhaustion, with a steady diet of HIT. Since muscle fibres will recover in days, but CNS and endocrine recovery takes as much as weeks in some cases, you'll never be "in sync" on your recovery. Toward the end of his life, even Mike Mentzer was beginning to concede that "training to failure" may not be necessay for gains, but rather balancing training with recovery. His comment to me, off the record of course, was "It's all about recovery." This was not the stance he took in public, though. He had too much invested in all the years he'd promoted HIT to change anything.
Most HIT proponents blame the fact that they are "not training HARD enough" on their lack of gains, so they try to find ways to increase the "intensity." The fact is that few of the people who originated HIT had any understanding of basic physiology, were openly distainful of medical science and research, and created theories which remain unproven.
If I sound somewhat bitter, it's because of my personal experience, as well as that of hundreds (yes, hundreds!) of bodybuilders I've talked to who've been frustrated by a lack of progress while trying to use a flawed methodology. What's even worse is that they blame themselves as though it's some character flaw on their part which keeps them form training "hard enough." When I returned some years back to more conventional training, my progress resumed, and I gained back all of what was lost in the "HIT years."
Sorry for the rant, and thanks for your patience!
.gif "IP Gear")
