Muscle and Brawn Forums

Muscle and Brawn Forums (http://www.muscleandbrawn.com/forum/index.php)
-   General Board (http://www.muscleandbrawn.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=11)
-   -   Interview with Gordon LaVelle, Training for Mass Part 1 (http://www.muscleandbrawn.com/forum/showthread.php?t=683)

Iron Gladiator 09-13-2009 07:44 AM

Interview with Gordon LaVelle, Training for Mass Part 1
 
Gordon LaVelle is the author of 2 books: Training for Mass, and How to be Thin. He is proponent of High Intensity Training (HIT), and operates 2 websites: Training for Mass, and How to be Thin.Click here to read a sample chapter from Training for Mass.Muscle and Brawn: How did you catch the “iron bug”, [...]

More...

BendtheBar 09-13-2009 08:28 AM

I recently wrapped up an interview with a proponent of High Intensity Training (HIT), Gordon LaVelle. I wanted to share a few of Gordon's thoughts. Gordon is a published HIT author (Training for Mass), and has articles on BB.com as well.

Gordona LaVelle's approach to HIT looks more like a Dorian Yates style workout then a Mike Mentzer workout.

Interview with Gordon LaVelle

Please understand that these are not my words or views. I interview a wide spectrum of lifters, from Powerlifting fed presidents to natural Mr. Olympians.

----------------------------------------------------------

http://muscleandbrawn.com/wp-content...onlavelle2.jpg

Quotes from the Interview, Part 1.....

"The big change came in the mid-to-late 80ís when I read an interview of Mike Mentzer in one of the bodybuilding magazines. I canít recall which magazine it was. Of course he didnít outline the entire high-intensity training theory in the interview, but he mentioned a few reasons why a single set, performed with the highest level of intensity, will produce the same or better results than the typical volume-oriented bodybuilding workout. His rationale was too compelling for me to ignore. As a result, I began to ease into it. Because I had gotten decent results from doing lots of sets, I had a hard time letting go of that approach."

"I definitely belong more to the Yates school. His resembled more of a traditional bodybuilding workout: visiting the gym several times per week, training a few body parts each day, and performing two or more exercises per part."

"I seem to recall someone mentioning that HIT was put forth as a ripoff money-making scheme, and nothing more. I donít know where this big flow of money is, and I donít seem to recall ever spending any money on any HIT-related enterprise. I had a Mentzer book once that someone loaned me. As for my own book, I wrote it not expecting to make a red cent. What Iíve gotten out of using HIT, however, has been of immeasurable value: Better results, in less time, with no burnout and no injury."

"One thing you want to do with HIT is make each and every set as difficult as possible. You can accomplish this without using excessively heavy weights. Going slow and making every rep count, really feeling the weight, is important. If I were to name a single most-important beyond-failure technique, Iím inclined to say a slow negative rep at the end of a set."

"Regarding HITís detractors, the majority do not even know what the theory is. They just know theyíre against it. This makes the whole issue rather interesting. For example, Iíd be willing to bet most of these people couldnít describe what string theory is either. But you probably donít see them in Internet forums, railing against string theory and calling its supporters names. So obviously this touches a nerve. But why? No one is forcing them to do it. If someone goes in the gym, trains a certain way, and gets a certain result, why would you even care?"

bwys61 09-13-2009 03:09 PM

the time under tension and heavy negative, one set to failure exercises are what we base our personal training on for general fitness clients at Efficient Exercise

BendtheBar 09-13-2009 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bwys61 (Post 5022)
the time under tension and heavy negative, one set to failure exercises are what we base our personal training on for general fitness clients at Efficient Exercise

I like looking at TUT density...meaning that I view TUT divided by overall time in the gym. I don't like any individual set to stray too far past 60-80 seconds TUT. But I think your do about the same, from what I understand.

I know some guys focus on TUT, but then rest 5 minutes between sets. I don't care much for that approach.

bwys61 09-13-2009 07:05 PM

Rest, what is rest? We do <30 minutes sessions. One exercise to the other. Fatigue as quickly as possible and work through it

Quote:

Originally Posted by MuscleandBrawn (Post 5052)
I like looking at TUT density...meaning that I view TUT divided by overall time in the gym. I don't like any individual set to stray too far past 60-80 seconds TUT. But I think your do about the same, from what I understand.

I know some guys focus on TUT, but then rest 5 minutes between sets. I don't care much for that approach.


big valsalva 09-13-2009 09:42 PM

Most rightous interview, Steve. :rockon:

I realize that I need to ramp the intensity up on some of my work sets (i.e. add more weight).

The money in HIT was made (presumably) by Arthur Jones/Nautilus. Jones designed these machines and soon hundreds of these "workout factories" started littering the countrtyside. Thirty bucks a month for membership. Thirty minutes to work out. Three times a week. The notion was to get as many lemmings through the door as quickly as possible. I don't know if that's what Jones had in mind, but for a while it certainly worked from a marketing standpoint.

BendtheBar 09-14-2009 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by big valsalva (Post 5067)
Most rightous interview, Steve. :rockon:

I realize that I need to ramp the intensity up on some of my work sets (i.e. add more weight).

The money in HIT was made (presumably) by Arthur Jones/Nautilus. Jones designed these machines and soon hundreds of these "workout factories" started littering the countrtyside. Thirty bucks a month for membership. Thirty minutes to work out. Three times a week. The notion was to get as many lemmings through the door as quickly as possible. I don't know if that's what Jones had in mind, but for a while it certainly worked from a marketing standpoint.

Gordon LaVelle is more about Dorian Yates style training then Arthur Jones. In fact, I don't recall him mention Arthur much at all, if he mentioned him once.

big valsalva 09-14-2009 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MuscleandBrawn (Post 5079)
Gordon LaVelle is more about Dorian Yates style training then Arthur Jones. In fact, I don't recall him mention Arthur much at all, if he mentioned him once.

Right, but didn't he wonder where all the money was in HIT? Meaning that he's not in this to make a quick buck, he's in it because he belives in it. I don't think Arthur Jones made that much money off it either. The Nautilus franchises did.

Quote:

I seem to recall someone mentioning that HIT was put forth as a ripoff money-making scheme, and nothing more. I donít know where this big flow of money is, and I donít seem to recall ever spending any money on any HIT-related enterprise. I had a Mentzer book once that someone loaned me. As for my own book, I wrote it not expecting to make a red cent. What Iíve gotten out of using HIT, however, has been of immeasurable value: Better results, in less time, with no burnout and no injury.
My whole point is that, yes HIT became big money for somebody. Maybe not for you, or Gordon, or Mentzer, but somebody somewhere along the line once made a boatload of bucks off of it. I'm not saying this as a detractor. It is a sound concept in my opinion. But the schysters, they are everywhere. HIT ain't a money rip-off, but rip-off artists got involved. And maybe that's why some people feel the whole thing is tainted.

Just an observation. Good interview.

bwys61 09-15-2009 06:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by big valsalva (Post 5148)
Right, but didn't he wonder where all the money was in HIT? Meaning that he's not in this to make a quick buck, he's in it because he belives in it. I don't think Arthur Jones made that much money off it either. The Nautilus franchises did.



My whole point is that, yes HIT became big money for somebody. Maybe not for you, or Gordon, or Mentzer, but somebody somewhere along the line once made a boatload of bucks off of it. I'm not saying this as a detractor. It is a sound concept in my opinion. But the schysters, they are everywhere. HIT ain't a money rip-off, but rip-off artists got involved. And maybe that's why some people feel the whole thing is tainted.

Just an observation. Good interview.


From a business standpoint, it is very lucrative. However, from a training and scientific stanpoint, it is sound.

1. How long can your skeletal muscles and CNS handle High-Intensity exercise?
2. Testosterone Levels drop off about 30-45 minutes anyway

My personal workouts range around 30-60, but if I did HIT, I would only need about 20

BendtheBar 09-15-2009 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by big valsalva (Post 5148)
Right, but didn't he wonder where all the money was in HIT? Meaning that he's not in this to make a quick buck, he's in it because he belives in it. I don't think Arthur Jones made that much money off it either. The Nautilus franchises did.



My whole point is that, yes HIT became big money for somebody. Maybe not for you, or Gordon, or Mentzer, but somebody somewhere along the line once made a boatload of bucks off of it. I'm not saying this as a detractor. It is a sound concept in my opinion. But the schysters, they are everywhere. HIT ain't a money rip-off, but rip-off artists got involved. And maybe that's why some people feel the whole thing is tainted.

Just an observation. Good interview.

Sorry, I was rushing yesterday to do a last minute read through edit on some articles and didn't give this post the appropriate read.

I understand what you're saying. And I think we both hold similar opinions.

Some people rip Mentzer and Jones because they feel they profited off HIT. Every bodybuilder profits off something...personal training, supplements, whatever.

The heat on Mentzer and Jones is rather intense because HIT is sometimes elevated to near cult status. And with all religious figureheads, the general public likes to get hypocritical and rip apart their lives.

My point is that I think the "Jones made a boat load of money off HIT" argument is silly and hypocritical. The same guys are buying T-nation Biotest supplements, and applauding T-Nation for their awesome supplements only diet.

It's hard to find anyone in this industry that's not trying to get your cash.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:38 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.