At 10:24 AM 08/31/2000 -0500, you wrote:
>I've met several people who employ a 6 day per week volume routine, are drug
>free, and have made excellent gains. In my gym there's one 40yr old man
>who's drug fee and trains 6 days per week. He's a powerlifter and squats
>500lbs at a bodyweight of 165lb. With this level of strength, I don't
>consider him to be overtraining.
Some have one lift they are really proficient at. Is he strong
at the
other 2 lifts? I really doubt that he is drug free. It's a possibility
but
I doubt it based on my experiences.
I suppose some might have superior drug free recovery ability
but this
doesn't mean they couldn't do better. I stayed with 5 master world
champion
powerlifters in Maine last month. All have been training between 25
and 40
years. One trained 4 days a week but has stagnated and is going to 2-3
days
a week. The others have gotten down to training only the powerlifts
and
maybe one movement like rows. Their frequency ranged from 1-2x's a
week. I
often have the opportunity to pick these types brains. An unwavering
theme
is reduction in frequency of training and increases in intensity to
facilitate gains in size and strength. Those these "old guys" may not
be
big and freakish as the drugged up muscle mag poster boys they have
awesome
physiques and strength that is 99.99% above the average for their age
and
weight.
>
>Arnold used a volume routine with great success. Mentzer used a HIT system
>with great success too. There have been hybrid methods employed by such
>champions as Lee Labrada. Many HIT trainees think Arnold's method only
>works with sterids. But Mentzer used steroids too, so this could go both
>ways.
It's possible to overtrain even on steroids. I have yet to see
critics
take Mentzers suggestions in a continuos fashion and repeatedly reduce
volume and frequency to what might appear to be a ridiculously low
level
but this is where progress lies. How many do you know will train
brutally
hard and reduce training to once every 2-4 weeks? Most stop for fear
that
they are under training but are more than willing to criticize a
technique
they haven't truly implemented. It might take as much as a year
training
this infrequently to have the benefits come to full fruition. Much the
same
happens with a paleo diet. Some "try" it for a month and felt better
but it
was too hard for them to stay on. This is the problem with doing
something
for the purpose of treating a condition instead of incorporating
principles
learned from a philosophy into a lifestyle.
>
>I personally use my own variation of HIT. I like to do 2-3 progressive warm
>up sets and 1-2 failure sets per workout. I use a upper body day 1 day per
>week & lower body 1 day per week training split, slower rep cadence, but not
>super slow. It has worked well for me, and I've made gains. I tried the
>volume method and the hybrid method with minimal success. They don't work
>for me, I overtrain, I feel sick, and I lose muscle. But I know several
>people who train naturally and have success with a volume routine. Some of
>them will work out 6 days per week. They typically use more sets (very
>rarely do they go to failure), higher reps (12-15), and a faster rep
>cadence.
Ask to look at their training journals. Did they really make
progress?
>
>At times, the discussion among the different training camps (volume vs. HIT
>vs. hybrid method) has detracted from the sport. Rather than discuss the
>routines in a detailed manner, it usually comes down to a battle of catch
>phrases. Some HIT trainees throw out terms like recovery ability, yet most
>of them have not even read The Classic Collection by Arthur Jones so they
>don't even understand the foundation of it.
Read it.
> Others quote Mentzer along the
>lines of doing more than 1 failure set is counterproductive and say the only
>reason Arnold was a success was due to steroids.
Of course this isn't true but do you think he could've have
reached the
level he did without them? Nothing in a living being can be reduced to
a
single factor.
> Yet Mentzer himself used multiple failure sets and took steroids just
like Arnold. Casey Viator,
>another HIT champion, was similar to Mike Mentzer in that they were often
>caught in the gym doing volume routines on ocassion.
I've seen both train in their hey days. Mentzer would every
once in a
great while do some volume training for one session or so but not as a
regular part of training. Casey on the other hand would always be
doing
volume training after leaving the Jones camp especially before a
contest.
Volume training is not how they made their best progress though.
If you eat paleo and your friends know this they will forever
rag on you
if you eat pizza, ice cream or something. Does this mean this is what
got
you to the point your at? I would say that what you do the majority of
the
time is what counts because it is part of your lifestyle. A diversion
every
now and then does not negate the principles you've built your life on.
> The volume types are guilty too. They criticize the HITers for not
doing direct arm work (even
>though direct arm work isn't necessary - see The Classic Collection by
>Arthur Jones at http://www.cyberpump.com).
>
>It all comes down to what works best for your lifestyle, your genetics, your
>recovery abililty, and other factors. Implement a plan. If it isn't
>working, then modify. You can do this with both weight and nutritional
>programs.
>
>Take my suggested cutting diet for example. For cutting, I think a high
>protein, low fat, low carb approach with lots of cardio works wonders,
>especially if a high carb day is thrown in when the muscles start to look
>excessively flat. It's worked well for me and several of my friends.
You are pretty young aren't you Justin? You may see things
differently
because of your age. No slam intended because you are much more
focused,
intelligent, and inquisitive then most twice your age but do you think
that
everyone's physiology is that different? Though we all lose and gain
bodyfat in varying degrees we all function under the SAME
physiological
principles. No calorie deficient no BF lost. I happen to believe it
more
efficacious to implement a lifestyle change than to implement a short
term
aerobic or dietary program.
>But Will Brink and Lyle McDonald (both of them are very knowledgable about
>nutrition and I read their material religously b/c I find it useful) believe
>my diet doesn't work, causes thyroid dysfunction, and is basically a joke.
If it works it's because there is a calorie deficient. What
program can
you make part of your lifestyle for say at least the next 20 years and
have
your health remain or become optimal because of it?
>
>Take Philip's diet for example. High fat, high protein, low carb. I don't
>think it's a very good diet for maintaining low bodyfat, but it has
>obviously worked damn good for Philip b/c he is maintaining a 8-9% bodyfat
>level with it. So who am I to argue with such results.
>
>In bodybuilding, there's polarization in all the issues, especially training
>and diet. Pick a traing philosophy (hell, it doesn't even have to have a
>fancy designation like volume or HIT, just make up your own routine) and
>pick a diet. Try it for a few weeks. If you're pleased with your results,
>then stick with it. If you desire improvment, then start manipulating
>different variables.
>
>People respond differently to individual foods. Some are allergic to dairy
>(I know I am), but others are not and respond well to a good whey protein
>supplement. Some are allergic to bananas, but I certainly seem to respond
>well to them. We are all genetically different.
Genetic code is not self expressive. We actually vary very
little
genetically. The driving force of genetic expression is lifestyle.
Mental,
physical, and chemical forces are what drive genetic expression not
some
uncontrollable invisible force.
> Thus, we all will not
>respond to the same training routine and diet.
>
>Justin Hasselman
No but we will all respond to the same principles at varying
rates.
Dave
|
