It is critical to design all training elements into a cohesive program. Any element designed to elicit failure must compromise all other elements till recovery from that one is completed. The time lost by reaching failure grows as performance goes up. From a few days for beginners to 10 days to 2 weeks for top athletes- and that’s assuming nothing else goes wrong. Any other overtaxed element or any external stressor might well move the recovery period out so far that the entire training phase is lost.
This is why it is so important to design training sessions in all areas that are achievable within the capacity of the athlete. Former no1 Shotputter, John Brenner was interviewed after his best season. When asked how often he missed a lift in training, he said: “Not once in the last three years!” Now that’s good planning!
I believe that training to failure is just that, a failure. I don’t really see HIT as a system in that the programs I’ve seen don’t involve any real progressions. After blasting the body into submission after a week or two where does one go with the “program”?
Additionally, many, maybe not yours but many involve primarily machine training with an avoidance of free weights
Research has been done in more than a few studies showing the inferiority of single set training bouts vs. multiple set training. The multiple set training always elicits greater strength/power gains. Almost all HIT I’ve seen involves single sets of various exercises and then moving onto another exercise.
Of course some HIT is now moving to multiple sets so some HIT is not even maintaining the original HIT protocols.
Most HIT I’ve seen involves higher reps almost exclusively 8 to 10+ reps which will never, in the long term develop max./strength and power due to high rep ranges and accompanying muscular fatigue which will accompany such work. By avoiding work in the 2-5 rep range, high threshold motor units will never be properly recruited, thus limiting the effectiveness of such a program in developing max. strength/a key component of max. power.
I’ve actually tried HIT and have friends do the same(many years ago) and my legs were constantly fried-only trained two to three times a week with this method and it still did not seem to be enough. As Charlie has indicated the need for additional rest/recovery is usually going to be necessary to come back from a session where training to failure is a primary goal. Why train in a way which will compromise the other components of training to the degee that some components might have to be dropped entirely for a short period of time?
Like any program(definitely not the first time this has been said) it will work for a while but I feel that with HIT you will “hit” a wall very quickly and then where do you go?
It’s best to improve various physical capacities by nudging the envelope, but not by attempting to knock down a wall to achieve it. Hope that makes sense.
We will not see them because they, obviously, do not exist. Measuring improvement in strength and power by standards of fitness is what has been done here – clearly not something we, on this forum, find practical.
Pioneer,
Ok, definetly a sprinters standpoint…
I hear what your saying, but H.I.T was developed by a bodybuilder for bodybuilders, to whom the primary concern is developing what is aesthetically pleasing. How else can you explain the use of isolation machines and shite like triceps kickback?
When you mention that the “H.I.T crowd” have started doing two sets you wouldn’t question the validity of CFTS because some clowns who weren’t progressing decided to make “amendments” and you shouldn’t with H.I.T.
Whatever lack of progress someone experiences practicing any valid theory (maths,science or H.I.T) is down to not adhering to its fundamental principles.
Failure to do this is how you get frustration and comments like " I feel you’ll hit a wall." Properly conducted High Intensity Training knows of no such thing friend.
When it comes to loss of performance because of the additional recovery time, I refer you to my post " PB’s after a forced layoff."
The only time someone I have trained has lost strength even after a month of inactivity due to a family holiday was made clear when I asked “how much have you been drinking” ( H2o) to which he replied “I didn’t think I needed to, it was snowing”.
Sean Jos
What do you mean by that? He wasn’t drinking enough water and he lost strength? Just to make it clear…
Thanks!
The problem i’m having in trying to understand this debate is that is seems as though charlie and sean are talking about two totally different h.i.t. training methods. Charlie describes Mentzer’s methods while Sean seems to be describing a godsend ultimate training program/ Now i’m not trying to jump on the band wagon and insult anyone, but to be honest, Sean has yet to provide proof of his claims and it is now a thursday so he should have had access to his material for the past three days. I’ve given Sean the benefit of the doubt and I have to say that when I first began training i too made incredible gains, but that’s the thing i wasn’t a fit and strong athelete at that point in time. Also, i believe that by it’s very name the h.i.t. method of training is quite confusing. When i hear someone state “All atheletes should use high intensity training,” of course I agree because it makes sense, if you want to be good at anything you have to work hard at it be it sports, cooking, writing, acting, ect. Therefore, I feel that Sean needs to either provide proof of his claims or give up his arguement because we can argue his claims till we are blue in the face but that won’t stop him from posting rebuttles. Sean if your method is really that incredible i would love to see it, but because of your decision to withold your proof (at least up until this point in time) i cannot believe your statments.
Sean Jos
Seriously, how can you keep ducking posting the data you promised to present? It is now 4 days past the date you said you would have them on here. Along with the data, why don’t you provide us with an outline of the training program. Quit ducking everyone, it’s time to put up or shut up.
What do you mean by that? He wasn’t drinking enough water and he lost strength? Just to make it clear…
Yes, he thought the cold conditions meant he couldn’t be dehydrated, drank hardly and came back to his workout.
I dont know for certain if its the lack of water that caused it but this is the only person i’ve seen comeback weaker from a break, he was also the only one who didn’t pay attention to his water intake.
His journal read that on the leg extensions he had done 9 reps with almost the entire weightstack (230lbs) only to find he couldn’t complete a third positive rep this time. He had a look of disbelief which soon turned angry as I promised him he wouldn’t come back weaker.(I actually pulled a guy from his warmups to prove to him when he was out he came back stronger.)
SeanJos
Its fairly obvious.
He either
a - knows what he’s on about and having a good laugh trolling
b - has no idea what he’s on about.
I go with b. For god sake Leg extensions?? whats a positive rep? weighted dips and calisthenics? Utter tripe and plain annoying at this stage.
I thought power was too aggressive in his put down a few posts back. Now i think he was damn right…
Sean Joss as I’ve said in previous threads If HIT was the most efficient way to train don’t you think that the Bulgarians the greatest weightlifting nation would be doing it - I’ve just returned from San Francisco where I worked with Jim Schmitz who has been the coach for the US weightlifting team at 3 olympic games and he doesn’t use it and would laugh at the suggestion of such a training method! Why because it is an inferior training method to multiple set training regimes.
Having completed 2 internships at Westside with Louis Simmons and observed many workouts with lifters regularly squatting over a thousand pounds guess what they don’t use HIT. And, I can tell you that Louis Simmons is probably the smartest strength coach in the World and if one set of HIT worked all of Louis’s lifters would be doing it.
And last but not least I’ve used both methods myself and can clearly say I’m far more powerfull using the conjugated method than the single set to failure.
I go with b. For god sake Leg extensions?? whats a positive rep? weighted dips and calisthenics? Utter tripe and plain annoying at this stage.
What concerns me about posts like this is the hundreds of coaches/athletes/casual trainees; who visit these forums with the intention of learning and incorporating something useful into their training (as I did). They find themselves only to be discouraged reading sound proven FACT by a tool like joconnor.
When it comes to “ducking” I find it ridiculous that Joconnor-asbury park-lorien have 100+ posts and are in a position to be verbose, yet posess not even basic knowledge of the only valid theory that exists in exercise science !!!
These “magic numbers” you are expecting me to post are only what is to be expected from following a H.I.T program. I will NOT supplicate and cheapen these results just so you can shake your head in disbelief. YOU DON’T MEAN THAT MUCH TO ME.
The internet is full of success stories from athletes,actors and member of the public and their stories that make mine look sub par (I suggest finding about the actor David Paul of the Barbarian twins who is an advanced bodybuilder, increased his leg press superset 300% in two months.)
Power - I know of the benefits of O lifting (though not extensively) but H.I.T increases size greatly, which is not their interest. They are doing O lifts because they are O lifters.
Seanjos
There is no we. It’s just you, buddy.
There is no we. It’s just you, buddy.
LOL Spoken like a true parasite.
this is just a jumble of words. it makes no sense.
again this makes little sense but i presume you mean that HIT is the only valid theory that exists in exercise science. im just speechless if thats the case.
a usual story, you cant post results/proof/programs because you dont have any. my journal is there for all to see. i dont claim to be anything. You got lots of time to post something, anything that would help us understand your awesome results. You gave us absolutely nothing apart from a jumble of words like fact, undeniable and other “spin”. very little in the speed strength world is common from athlete to athlete. one program doesnt fit all yet you believe we should take you seriously when you blabber on wildly?
in case you havent noticed this isnt bodybuilding.com and your athletes in sale harriers are actually runners (i hope they are anyway)
I have yet to see a bodybuilder win a medal in anything outside of bodybuilding. its true that parts of their program can be used but a sprinters program will differ greatly from a BB’ers
if HIT increases size greatly will this not affect strength to weight ratio adversely?
Right enough time wasted on this troll. People must surely see he has no interest in learning/proving anything. He’s just here to elicit a response. Ignore and he will go away
The reason I mention Olympic Lifters and the Westside crew is that they are all about power which as joconnor say’s this site is all about. If you watch Ronnie Coleman train you will see how a body builder should train if he wants to gain size. And if you research Dorian Yates training you will see that he alway’s trained more than one set to failure even though he advocated that he trained this way.
Anyway that’s enough on this subject - for those interested I will post an article on why I feel the conjugated method is the training method which will give you excellent results.
Whatever.
Hypocrite.
Where’s the data (or beef)?
Where’s the beef?
Duh… at least I’ve been in a World Championship final – so I, at least, have a CLUE of what’s going on! There’s no THEORY on the highest level… there’s only results!
You talk the talk… but you sure can’t walk the walk. You’re talking about building skyscrapers while playing with Lego. Moreover, and trying to measure up to your splendid logic; since when has the number of posts become a measurement of validity, especially, and still trying to follow your argument, when no verification or falsification of any theory has even been subjugated to scrutiny in our writings? Nevertheless, I give you this: I’m definitely wasting my time on this post!
If you really want to talk about progression, have your athletes train for a minimum of 6 months, then have them taper properly and do some serious testing – not some fitness bullshit! Yeah, a 0.37s improvement in 40yd:s is most probably fitness-related. Then, compare that to the next 6 months and you have your first (still unreliable), baseline. Your first true parameter will come 6 months after that; no sooner than now, can you measure the effectiveness of your training regimen. And please, if you have a 220% improvement in absolute strength then (I’m not even mentioning speed here), do report to us and you’ll be our god!
Ready for “da BOMB”?
There is no Sean Jos certified by NSCA.
http://www.nsca-lift.org/trainers/locator/
Nuff said…