1. Have you installed the new JSF Mobile app? Check out all the details here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. One account & one avatar for all of JSF. Unified login and profile. Forum alerts on the main site, and more. Check out the details here: Forum & main site unified account feature is live!
    Dismiss Notice

How can it work?

Discussion in 'Weight Training/Bulking' started by doordude42, Jul 15, 2005.

  1. Timbermiko

    Timbermiko Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,404
    Likes Received:
    2
    You wanted pics, here you go....
    Drug free as well...if you want more info on these people, let me know.

    Remember folks, most drug free people have to use abbreviated routines as HIT, 2x6, 5x5 and for a lifetime.
    This is fact. I will go on a limb and say if these men were to use the conventional Mr. Steroid routine, they would have not been able to reach this level...
    Also, Mr. Tolbert has reportedly done, believe it or not, 600x30 in the Squat.
     
    #81 Timbermiko, Jul 17, 2005
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2005
  2. RTE

    RTE Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2004
    Messages:
    6,838
    Likes Received:
    4
    Darden wasn't on drugs by his word and that of others, plus look at that body, it is not a drug body. He build it like most did in 50s and 60s, without drugs. When you see him today at 62, he has the lat spread and peak in biceps, and knows how to do a vaccum and pose at same time. He likes to contribute body to genes.
     
  3. jsbrook

    jsbrook Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,237
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not exactly sure what your point is. HIT should be evaluated on its merits. Most of the top guys (though much less than as compared to now) were on drugs regardless of the training program.
     
  4. doordude42

    doordude42 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2005
    Messages:
    10,230
    Likes Received:
    0
    Definetly!!!!!!
     
  5. Timbermiko

    Timbermiko Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,404
    Likes Received:
    2

    R, drugs were in play already in the 50's and 60's. 50's I would think a lot did not train with help...the sixty's? it was starting to turn gray.
    If you want "true" drug free you will have to go back to the 20's.
    If Darden says he wasn't that's good enough for me.
     
  6. Timbermiko

    Timbermiko Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,404
    Likes Received:
    2
    For future reference.Anything I post on training , nutrtition and anything pertaining to, it is from a drug free background, and directed at the drug free athlete.
    Thanks
     
  7. jsbrook

    jsbrook Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,237
    Likes Received:
    0
    My point was simply that HIT or any other training program can't really be evaluated based on the results of the top guys (especially today) because pretty much all of them are on drugs. For a drug free trainer, it's necessary to look at how other drug free trainers responded to get a sense of the validity of a particular training program. Of course the best way is just giving it a go.
     
  8. RTE

    RTE Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2004
    Messages:
    6,838
    Likes Received:
    4
    In many ways it can, the use of drugs is so prevalent that all pros use them and many of your local high school athletes. So a large part of body building population can't be used as examples. Who can? Then the drug acceptance has gone so far that we question anyone except someone from the twenties.

    Darden reports the results he gets with subjects and everyone is accused of drugs and the results are questioned. Or Darden is accused of lying. He had a subject that he used in the New HIT book, David Hudlow, a chemistry major at U of Fla. In 6 months here are results:

    He began at 219 pounds. He lost 50 lbs of fat and build 5 pounds of muscle in 66 days. Next, he built 18 lbs of muscle in 14 days. Over the next 87 days, he gained 16 lbs of muscle and 6 lbs of fat. overall, he lost 44 pounds of fat and built 39 pounds of muscle. He ended the program at 215lbs.

    I will stand by to hear those that don't believe it and can't accept there weren't drugs involved. Or that Darden lied about results.

    The other variable is genes, how do you eliminate the genetically blessed?

    Darden has produced less spectacular results for hundreds in his other studies. But HIT isn't suppose to work.
     
  9. jsbrook

    jsbrook Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,237
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would tend to agree. There's no way to know for sure, but I find it very hard to believe that someone could gain over 1 lb of 'new' muscle per day. I too have put on massive amounts of muscle in an extremely short period of time. It happened after recovering from mono just from eating normally and getting back into lifting a little.
     
  10. Timbermiko

    Timbermiko Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,404
    Likes Received:
    2
    I'm in total agreement with you :tu:
     
  11. Timbermiko

    Timbermiko Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,404
    Likes Received:
    2
    A la John Christy... :tu:
     
  12. JoeSchmo

    JoeSchmo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2004
    Messages:
    4,018
    Likes Received:
    11
    I've often heard this bandied about here on the board -- that this mythical level of "intensity" is handed down from the gym gods to the specially-initiated among us with sufficient mental toughness, that leaves grown men collapsed on the gym floor in a pool of their own sweat and vomit, crying for mommy...and that most of us mere mortals will never taste true intensity, but must do penance for our mediocrity in the form of multiple sets.

    Now, to me, it is much simpler than this. You lift the weight until, try as you might, you can't lift it for another rep. That is as intense as it gets. There is no intensity beyond this ... not unless you are doing negatives or working past failure with a spotter. I don't see how anyone who believes in overload training could possibly reach a point to where they can do no reps whatsoever on a second set....unless you are using very near maximal weights (in the 1-3 rep range). The only way I see this happening is if you do drop sets, or cut your rest to about 30 seconds...both of which are antithetical to overload training.

    I think you can indeed work out long and also work out very intensely. Is it smart to do so? No, but you can do it. During my early days of training (before we had such luxuries as the internet to provide useful info), I worked out long and worked out very intensely ... did every set to failure. I quickly became overtrained however, so I can attest that this isn't the smart way of doing things, but it can be done.

    For the record, I also favor intense, low volume workouts with very heavy weight.
     
    #92 JoeSchmo, Jul 17, 2005
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2005
  13. RTE

    RTE Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2004
    Messages:
    6,838
    Likes Received:
    4
    Well, he might have done that, if so he has done it a number of times in his books. In his Massive Muscles in 10 weeks the subject gained 18 1/4 lbs of muscle in 10 weeks. In Big, the guy gained 14 1/2 in 6 weeks. In High Intensity Strength Training, the subject gained 15 1/4 lbs of muscle in 6 weeks. In Grow, the trainee gained 18 3/4 in 6 weeks. In Bigger Muscles in 42 days, one subject gained 29 lbs of muscle while another gained 22 1/2 lbs in 6 weeks. Pictures, measurements and etc.

    How do you think he does the weight loss? 50 lbs in 66 days! But he does weight loss by the dozens in A flat stomach ASAP, he had 41 men and 109 women for subjects. The flat stomach group used a low calorie diet and HIT exercises.

    The men had a average starting weight of 208.3 lbs, a height of 5' 10", at a age of 36.3 years. they lost 19.1 lbs in 6 weeks and gained 4 lbs of muscle. The men lost 4 inches in waist.

    The Women had a average weight of 156.5 lbs and a height at 5'4" with an average age of 37.4. The women lost 11.5 lbs and gained 3.5 lbs of muscle.

    Even the cuts on HIT looks good. I listed all of this for people that were unaware what Darden has done with his groups, there are more, all got the same results. Does he pick all his subjects, I don't know. He documents them, I believe him. I have seen people on the net that report similar results following his programs. And I am sure others have failed. None of this thread will stop the HIT bashers, it might cause others to seek information and even to try HIT. HIT sometimes seems like Atkins, people throw rocks at it but it has its supporters in numbers and even studies support it.
     
    #93 RTE, Jul 17, 2005
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2005
  14. jsbrook

    jsbrook Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,237
    Likes Received:
    0
    Is it really so hard to believe that the subjects he chose to feature were highly trained individuals who were detrained and/or purposely starved like Chris Mason said? I don't think so at all. I've DONE HIT. I'm not knocking it. It was the first program I used when lifting for strength and mass, and I had some very good results. Gained 12 lbs of muscle and 1 pound of fat in 2.5 months. However nothing about my own results NOR those of other real life people I've known nor those on the internet leads me to believe it's superior to other methods of training. I'm fairly certain that other methods of training have spectacular stories of natural gains like those reported by Darden, if only because they also used methods like those Chris Mason hypothesized. Studies like that mean very little to me whether for HIT or any other program. Even if there is no fishiness as to previous training experience, starvation diets prior, and the like, those outlying results don't say very much to me about how average people-even those with pretty good genetics-will respond to said program. What's much more impressive and indicative of a good training program (HIT or otherwise) are the impressive (but not outlandish) results of thousands who use it rather than the spectacular results of the few. From those I know who've used it and everything I've read, HIT is a very solid program for fat loss and muscle gain, at least up to a point. I personally think there are better ways to train after putting on some solid size and become a more advanced lifter. But that's besides the point. Although it means very little to me, if a study talking about someone gaining 18 lbs in 14 days gets someone to start lifting with HIT and they go on to put on that amount of muscle in 3 months, then GREAT. I guess it's done it's job. And that person is much better off! :)
     
  15. jsbrook

    jsbrook Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,237
    Likes Received:
    0
    I put very little stock in 'studies'. But I'm sure you've heard me recommend HIT to people on these forums inquiring about a solid program to get them started.
     
  16. ReTro2499

    ReTro2499 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Messages:
    138
    Likes Received:
    0
    This was the last post I read (Edit: Oh I was almost at the end anyway). I find it VERY hard to believe that someone gained 29 pounds of muscle in 6 weeks, even with "drugs"... unless the subject was a detrained athelete who relied on muscle memory to quickly gain his muscle back. During a 10 week cycle of AAS people are lucky to gain 20 pounds of muscle, I refuse to believe that change of workout routine can induce that much muscle growth, something is wrong.

    Sorry for my incoherent post, I am very tierd.
     
  17. 1FastGTX

    1FastGTX Elite Member
    Lifetime Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    Messages:
    9,201
    Likes Received:
    2
    You make great points Joe and I'd venture to say we have similar beliefs too perhaps. Still, the point is that there, apparently, IS "intensity beyond this" (as Chris was hitting on). There is a point further than where you cannot lift for another rep. Whether or not 1) us normal folks can achieve that "next level" and 2) whether or not it's even effective, are really different issues. Again, that is the whole point of it; if one does reach that point it would probably not be possible to continue beyond it with further sets, unless of course the trainee was to wait a very long time before picking the barbell up again.

    Of course all of this is subjective and only theory to me. I think I've gone beyond this "zone" a few times in my life, but it's not something I feel I can do on call whenever I want to. It's usually just something we read about in Mentzer's books. :) According to such theories, if you do reach that other level of intensity, further volume is impossible. It's part of the definition of that type of intensity if you will. (By the way, if none of you have read it, I do highly suggest picking up "High Intensity Training The Mike Mentzer Way." If nothing else it is VERY interesting reading. Say what you want about the guy, he was brilliant. The analogies alone are worth the money that the book costs.)

    When you get right down to it, who cares anyway? In all honesty the guys who are posting back and forth in this thread all sound very advanced to me, and all seem to be getting good results with his preferred method, set and rep ranges, intensity levels, etc. It's a fun and interesting discussion for sure, and I am enjoying reading all of your thoughts and personal experiences.
     
  18. 1FastGTX

    1FastGTX Elite Member
    Lifetime Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    Messages:
    9,201
    Likes Received:
    2
    It wasn't incoherent. :) I think I'm the guiltiest guy on JSF for giving incorherent posts; I'm always tired lately with this work schedule, lol. Sometimes I have to force myself NOT to post until I've had my coffee, cause I don't wanna sound like a moron!

    Of course studies and experiences like this seem odd and hard to believe, but I believe many of them. A friend of mine judged the BFL competitions 2 years in a row, and has trained a few of the top 5 finalists and one of the champions (Porter Freeman); his training theories are low in volume and high in intensity, and he has extraordinary results to say the least. Some people see his portfolio of 12-week before/after pics and read the stats, and think "Photoshop" or "B.S." or "steroids," but I know personally that it's just hard work and perfect diet and proper rest.

    In the case of the Colorado Experiment we're talking about a guy (Viator) with the genetics of .0001% of the population, such that the majority of the people in the world simply do not have. Combine that with the fact that he was sick (cut his finger, had an infection, I think, RTE can jump in here with the correct info probably), his muscles "shrank," and the results, while very impressive, do seem possible. There was a story on DaveDraper.com that told of Jones showing someone the difference in Viator's genetics compared to his; I'll have to search for that (it's a very interesting read).
     
  19. glenn_001

    glenn_001 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2004
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    0
    I dont believe this, if your talking long as in 1 hour, sure.
    2 hours? noway.
    The intensity level would be nothing compared to the first 30mins of the session.
     
  20. doordude42

    doordude42 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2005
    Messages:
    10,230
    Likes Received:
    0
    Again, the term "intensity" is relative. Intensity in my opinion cannot be measured as a whole but rather by the individual.
     

Share This Page