Limitations of high intensity training

[BendtheBar]

When Mike's articles first started to appear in magazines I was enamored. It was so different than anything else, and I really wanted it to work for me.

[HITman_mark71]

May I ask what both of you think or the Colorado Experiment?

[kitarpyar]

Originally Posted by BendtheBar

I don't believe Reeves advocated failure, but I could be wrong.

Reeves didnt use the word failure. In his book he simply states, "increase the weight once you get all 12 reps". This leaves room for ambiguity.

Secondly, Reeves had a progression in # of sets too. Single sets for each exercise were just for beginners. For the more advanced trainee, his approach was more like Reg Parks, were he advocated 3 sets (after warm up sets). So this was not exactly HIT, Yates style.

[BendtheBar]

Originally Posted by HITman_mark71

May I ask what both of you think or the Colorado Experiment?

As long as no personal offense is taken.

Viator was juicing despite what Arthur Jones claims, and most of the gains were muscle memory, or a reclaiming of the muscle he lost during he weight loss the previous year. (Or whenever it happened, I can't recall the exact circumstances off hand)

[kitarpyar]

Originally Posted by BendtheBar

Viator was juicing despite what Arthur Jones claims, and most of the gains were muscle memory, or a reclaiming of the muscle he lost during he weight loss the previous year. (Or whenever it happened, I can't recall the exact circumstances off hand)

On top of that, Viator admitted to sneaking out to get in extra workouts and get in higher volume of work. So it wasn't as if he trained HIT exclusively.

[Rich Knapp]

Going to failure is so misunderstood. People think that is till you can no longer move the weight.

When in reality, when you need to take a pause get your breath or rest to drive another rep, you are at failure in a set. That little rest/pause is refilling the muscles glycogen.

I have had great results with high volume the last few years.

[BendtheBar]

Originally Posted by kitarpyar

Reeves didnt use the word failure. In his book he simply states, "increase the weight once you get all 12 reps". This leaves room for ambiguity.

Secondly, Reeves had a progression in # of sets too. Single sets for each exercise were just for beginners. For the more advanced trainee, his approach was more like Reg Parks, were he advocated 3 sets (after warm up sets). So this was not exactly HIT, Yates style.

I follow.

My main point, which I probably didn't state clearly, was that there are some programs out there that resemble HIT, or or not too far off from HIT, but that are not often viewed as being in the HIT family tree.

If we put the Reeve's beginner up with one working set and didn't attribute it to Reeve's, but instead called it a HIT workout and added failure, a lot of people wouldn't take it seriously because of the HIT Jedi hatred.

Referring to Fazc's post...some forms of HIT are exactly the same as a volume workout with diminishing reps and increased weight.

[Fazc]

There's a youtube video of one of Mike's conferences (i'll try and find it) where he actually sets out by saying something like 'I'll be using a lot of big words, so if you want to write them down and find out what they mean later, it would be useful to you'...

That comical over-importance is rampant throughout HIT literature and radiates when talking to die-hard HIT'ers.

When you tie all your self-importance to one ideal, it's hard to hear anything else.

[HITman_mark71]

Originally Posted by Rich Knapp

When in reality, when you need to take a pause get your breath

I take a breath in between every rep. I don't understand what you mean.

[Fazc]

Here we go...