I have helped people that looked like you get into shape...we're talking major makeovers...I think that speaks for something.
-
Comment -
shit High you shred like lettuce, whats your routineComment -
.....
Comment -
can't leave her man, i would have to take sick relatives with me, and can't do that. i can perhaps next july. I'll get back to you then.
Yes i just trained 11 people and came home and at 6 kitkats. Still doesn't take away my knowledge of anything even if i do gain fat from todays workout.Comment -
HEAVY DUTY™ - Is it Really Based on Science?
Shane Provstgaard, Masters Degree in Exercise Science
(17 Years Experience as a High-Intensity Trainer)
HEAVY DUTY™, High-Intensity Training, Mike Mentzer -- Say any of these names in the presence of any seasoned strength trainer, and you will undoubtedly get a strong response. While the opinions - either for or against - run deep, what can be said of the science that backs High-Intensity Training? Is there enough to lend any support to Mike Mentzer’s claims of brief and infrequent training? Is there any research that supports the need of training to failure, of doing only one set per exercise, of backing off the frequency of training in accordance to the intensity of the muscular contraction? Much research has been done over the last several decades in the realm of strength training. Does any of it support HEAVY DUTY™?
One of the first and most controversial aspects of HEAVY DUTY™ training is its emphasis on single sets of each exercise. Volume proponents decry the low volume of training prescribed by HIT in general and HEAVY DUTY™ in particular. Because of the popularity of volume training, many are swayed to believe that the methodology of more is better must be correct. After all, the muscle magazines and the champions espousing these claims can’t be wrong can they? What does the research say? In study after study, one set of exercise taken to momentary concentric failure has been shown to be as productive or more productive than training with multiple sets of the same exercise (Carpinelli and Otto, 1998; Ostrowski, K.J., et al., 1997; Fincher G. E., 2000; Hass, C. J., Garzarella, L, de Hoyos, D., & Pollock, M. L., 2000; Fincher, G. E., 2001; Wolfe, B. L., Vaerio, T. A, Strohecker, K., & Szmedra, L., 2001; Journal of Exercise Physiology online, 2004). This is not to say that there has not been research to back multiple sets, but in many cases, the research has been poorly run or had confounding variables that brought the results under scrutiny (Journal of Exercise Physiology online, 2004). This being the case, most of the credible research points to the superior efficacy of a high intensity routine based on single bouts of exercise taken to momentary muscular failure. As one of the main premises of HEAVY DUTY™ is the tightly regulated use of set volume, HEAVY DUTY™ is backed by science. Mike Mentzer believed that the greater the volume of sets in a workout, the longer it would take just to recover from the exercise leaving less of the body’s resources for growth. A study ran in 2001 found this to be true, finding that multiple sets carried to failure can result in extended recovery times of 96 hours or longer just to recover to pre-exercise strength (McLester, J. R., Bishop, P, Smith, J., Dale, B., & Kozusko, J., 2001). Some of the participants in the study had not recovered pre-workout strength even at the last testing of 96 hours (4 days) post-exercise session. It seems that the more sets added to the routine, the longer the window for recovery. This study also found that people recovered at different rates. Mike Mentzer was aware of this and HEAVY DUTY calls for the regulation of volume, frequency, and intensity of training based on each person’s innate response to exercise.
Another controversial issue when dealing with HEAVY DUTY™ is the frequency with which it is carried out. Mike Mentzer was a staunch advocate of doing not less, not more, but the precise amount of strength training needed to elicit the maximum physiological response. Research on this aspect of strength training has been sorely overlooked by the exercise science community. What little that has been done has shown that a frequency of once to twice per week, or less, was as effective as training for three or more sessions per week. Studies regarding the muscles of the lumbar area (lower back) have shown that training frequencies of once per week to once every other week were as productive in the acquisition of lumbar muscle strength as training frequencies of 2 to 3 times per week (Carpenter et al., 1991; Graves et al., 1990). Once the strength of these muscles improved, the increased strength could be maintained with but one set of 8 to 10 repetitions every two to four weeks (Tucci et al., 1992). The muscular rotators of the hip area have shown similar strength gains when training at 2 days per week as opposed to 3 days per week (DeMichele et al., 1997). Training once per week with one set also resulted in impressive gains in muscular strength for the cervical spine (Highland, R.H., Vie, L. L., Dreisinger, T. E., Russell, G. S., 1992). Research carried out by the MedX Corporation on quadriceps training via a leg extension machine showed a 60% to 80% increase in quadriceps strength with training frequencies of once per week or less (Jones; et al., 1993). The take home message of all of this research is that even with one set of one exercise once or twice per week participants were able to gain strength and hypertrophy. In older adults training just once per week with a single set high intensity routine resulted in the same strength gains as training twice per week (J DiFrancisco-Donoghue, W Werner, P C Douris, 2007).
With HEAVY DUTY™ high-intensity training, the frequency of training is adjusted to the individual. Again, as with the other precepts of HEAVY DUTY training, the research bears this out. A study carried out at Nautilus North in Bracebridge, Ontario, Canada found that although it took the average trainee seven days to recover and grow from a single session of high intensity exercise some participants required nine to eleven days to recover and grow from one training session (Little, 2006). This study backed up the findings from the previously cited study (McLester, J. R., Bishop, P, Smith, J., Dale, B., & Kozusko, J., 2001) showing that the optimal recovery interval between hard training sessions is much longer than previously thought and that people recover at different rates, some taking much longer than others.
HEAVY DUTY™ also calls for the judicious use of advanced high-intensity techniques and then only within the parameters of a tightly regulated routine. Full negative training is one such form of advanced HEAVY DUTY training, and the research regarding its use has shown that extended periods of recovery are necessitated following its use. Howell, Chleboun, and Conaster, (1993) found that recovery following a single bout of three sets of full negative training for the biceps muscles required over 6 weeks! Once recovered, the biceps for all participants averaged a 5% increase in strength at a full twelve weeks post training session. Full negative training is thought to be much more intense than standard strength training causing a deeper inroad into the body’s limited recuperative resources necessitating longer recovery times. Further research into the effects of multiple sets of extremely intense negative contractions noted similar decreases in strength following the training session with the corresponding exaggerated recuperative times (Jones, Newman, Round, and Tolfree, 1986; Newman, Jones, and Clarkson, 1987; and Ploutz-Snyder, Tesch, and Dudley, 1998). Because of the extreme nature and inroading of advanced HEAVY DUTY™ methods, such as full negative training, Mike Mentzer only allocated their use for advanced HEAVY DUTY™ practitioners that have mastered the fundamentals of HEAVY DUTY and that are reaching the end of their genetic potential.
Another study employing a single set of concentric/eccentric (negative) or concentric/ accentuated eccentric (negative) training for the knee extensors found that two sessions per week for 10 weeks resulted in roughly a 100% improvement in strength (Godard, Wygand, Carpinelli, Catalano, and Otto, 1998). Keep in mind that was one total set of exercise per workout twice per week. Judging from the aforementioned research, multiple sets even for different body parts would likely add to the time necessary for full recuperation from the training session, as the added volume would cause deeper inroads with each successive set. It might seem from the above data that training with less intensity, but with more volume may allow for a more frequent and productive routine, but the research supports intensity, leading to muscular failure, above all else when it comes to producing strength and hypertrophy (Bigland-Ritchie, Furbush, & Woods, 1986; Rooney, Herbert, & Balnave, 1994; Drinkwater et al, 2005). As a case in point, the above cited research involving concentric/eccentric training noted a 100% or greater increase in strength over 10 weeks, whereas a review of 12 other studies employing less intense but more frequent modalities of strength training noted only a 7% to 71% increase in strength over a period of time ranging from 8 to 24 weeks of training (Fleck & Kraemer, 1987).
Another factor affecting the amount of force production produced by the muscles contractile components (muscle fiber) and therefore, the intensity of each exercise, is the rate of speed with which the weight is actually lifted. HEAVY DUTY training calls for the execution of each repetition in a slow controlled manner. Biomechanists have found that the only time a muscle builds maximum contractile force is at zero velocity (Hamill & Knutzen, 1995). Further research has found that lifting at high velocities (explosive lifting) did not result in higher levels of muscle fiber recruitment (Burhle, Schmidtbleicher, and Russel, 1983), but can precipitate the onset of spondylosis as well as expedite bone and joint damage (Dangles & Spencer, 1987). Research has also found that lifting at slow speeds, or with minimal movement (isometric training), results in greater strength and muscle mass gains than standard lifting techniques or even other high-intensity techniques (Westcott, W. L., Winett, R. A., Anderson, E. S., Wojcik, J. R., Loud, R. L., Cleggett, E., & Glover, S., 2001; Little, 2006). Because force production and intensity of muscle contraction are dictated by slow controlled movement, it is imperative, as Mike Mentzer stated, that any exercise carried out for the purpose of safe maximum muscle contraction should involve slow controlled lifting speeds consisting of a 4 second concentric phase, a 2 second pause in the fully contracted portion of the exercise, and a 4 second eccentric phase.
From the overwhelming amount of research, Mike Mentzer and his HEAVY DUTY™ style of high-intensity exercise established safe effective guidelines for those seeking a stronger, more muscular, fit body. The foundation of the HEAVY DUTY™ training system is to train intensely, slowly, and with good form, while keeping the volume of training low, which means doing no more than one set per exercise. He also realized that the strength training process is tri-phasic in nature, meaning you must first stimulate the muscle to grow, then you must recover from the training bout, which can take anywhere from 24 to 264 hours or more to accomplish, and only then can your body actually strengthen and grow from the training session. The recovery rate or period of time between training bouts is highly personalized, meaning you should not let gym dogma and custom dictate your training program. Remember, as per Mentzer, that training before you have recovered fully will not allow you to actualize the growth production stimulated from your training routine. Also, remember that the frequency of training can change as you get older, the intensity of your training goes up (which could be related to you getting stronger [more muscle mass being recruited] or adding intensity variables), or any other number of innate or external influences. You should not get caught up in training a certain number of days per week, but instead should be tracking your strength gains with a log book and adjust your frequency of training until strength gains are noted on the exercises you are performing. Again, the research has shown that exercise should be looked at in terms of performing the minimal dose to achieve the maximum benefit. This will limit the wear and tear on the body, allow for maximum recovery, and this, when combined with a proper diet and sleep will result in the greatest strength and hypertrophy gains allowed by your individual genetics.
--- M. Shane Provstgaard, M.Sc.
[Ed.: Shane Provstgaard is a trainer specializing in High-Intensity Training. He holds both Bachelors and Masters degrees in Exercise Science and has 17 years experience training a wide variety of clients ranging from teenagers looking to improve their sport to post-stroke patients looking to regain the strength and fitness necessary for everyday life.]Comment -
Comment -
Quantity vs. Quality of Effort--
Where does one launch an investigation aimed at discovering the type of effort responsible for stimulating growth? The most likely place to start is by looking at one of the more readily observed qualities of the things that exists in reality; namely, quantity. The growth stimulus cannot be directly related to quantity of exercise effort or bodybuilders would see better and better results for every additional hour they spent training.
Since it obviously is not the quantity of effort that's important, there is but one place left to look - the quality, or intensity, of the effort. If a person could curl a 100 pound barbell for 10 reps to failure which rep would be more productive in terms of stimulating an increase in strength and size, the first, the least intense, or the last, the most intense? Obviously it is the last. Do you see where it stands to reason that if the last rep is better than the first, it will be better than the second, third, fourth and so on? That is irrefutable proof that it is the quality of the effort, not the quantity, which is responsible for growth stimulation. Quantity of effort is important only for building endurance, not strength and muscle mass. Don't confuse training long with training hard. Training hard, intensely, is what is required to build muscle mass.
Reserve Ability--
Executing that last, almost impossible, rep causes the body to dip into its reserve ability. Since it only has a small amount of this reserve to draw upon before depletion occurs, the body protects itself from future assaults upon its reserves by enlarging upon its existing ability through the compensatory build-up of more muscle mass.
Only high-intensity effort can force the body to resort to its reserve ability sufficiently to stimulate an adaptive response in the form of a muscle mass increase. Repeating tasks that are within your existing capacity do nothing to stimulate growth, there's no need. Ending a set before failure, just because an arbitrary number of reps have been completed simply will not induce growth.
A Second Set?
On occasion, I will have a phone client ask, "Mike, you make such a big deal about doing only one set per exercise. Would it really matter if I did a second set?" Having stimulated the growth mechanism by going to failure on the first set it is neither necessary nor desirable to do a second set; not just a waste of time, but counterproductive. Going from one set to two is not just a mistake: it is the biggest mistake possible because going from one set to two represents the biggest increase possible. It is not merely a linear increase of one unit; it represents a 100 percent increase in the volume of exercise; which is a negative factor.
Look Deeper
I find it curious that the great majority of bodybuilders, knowing that overtraining means something decidedly negative, never look into the issue more seriously. The term is always used in a negative context. In fact, try using the concept in a positive light, and you'll quickly realize it's impossible. By definition, overtraining means performing any more exercise than is required in terms of both volume and frequency than is minimally required to stimulate growth.
Effort and Pride
An individual's self-esteem stems from a sense of control over reality. Whenever we carry out a conscious effort, such as, completing a record Bench Press, an A+ in school or writing a book, we feel a specific power rising, a sense of will. The abundant self-esteem associated with successful people flows from their having achieved goals by exerting the proper effort - long range. People are not successful due to an accident of birth; they took the time and expended the necessary effort to develop their self-respect. They sufficiently value life and happiness to exert complete effort. As a result, they experience what Aristotle referred to as the "crown of all virtues": Pride
Not often - (but enough to be remarkable) - while I am explaining the role of genetics in bodybuilding at a seminar or to a phone consultation client, someone complains, refusing to accept the fact that the extent to which muscles can be developed is strictly, inherently limited. And, while most bodybuilders today are at least aware of the issue of genetics, very few know precisely how crucial a role it plays, or much about specific, phenotypic (i.e. genetic materials' physical) expressions.
As a youth, walking the main streets of my small hometown of Ephrata, Pennsylvania, I would regularly see non-trained women who exhibited ordinary muscular development otherwise, yet had calves on par with those of an advanced bodybuilder. Not much later, while in Air Force boot camp, I encountered two different individuals on separate occasions with muscular physiques. Upon asking each how he trained, both responded in essentially the same fashion, "Everyone thinks (I) am a bodybuilder; but I've never worked out in my life."
The Fog Grows Deeper
Bodybuilders whose thinking is thusly restricted usually resort to a type of "Russian roulette," where they move anxiously and uncertainly from one training approach to the next, hoping that someday they luckily happen upon one that works. Or, having sacrificed individual judgment and personal sovereignty entirely, fearing that he - and he alone - suffers a nameless deficiency, many opt to conform to the herd, and blindly follow the other sheep by adopting the training program that has the most adherents in their gym. Little does he suspect that the others are doing the same thing. Like him, they think the others must know what they're doing; after all, how can the majority be wrong. In fact, the entire world can be wrong and one man right. Remember that even though for thousands of years millions of people thought the earth was flat, such didn't make it true.Comment -
I am a strength and conditioning coach for a high school. Are you recommending only doing one set to failure per lift?Comment -
one set to failure after warmups
You can't make an injury better by ignoring the pain. It just gets worse. Also, if you lay off, the pain just "sits there." The method that seems to works best is... to get circulation into the injured area without causing extra pain. I mean any pain.
Because...
If you grit your teeth and put up with even a little bit of pain, the injury doesn't go away. It just gets worse. The exercise has to be totally pain free.
That's why "Slow Rep Speed" is perfect for detecting exactly where and when the pain is coming. As the exercise is done very slowly you can detect exactly when the pain occurs and can then move the elbow, the wrist, or change the body position whatever it takes to get rid of the pain. In this way, you can still do the exercise and rehabilitate the injured joint at the same time.
Once you've got the "pain free" track nailed down, you're on your way to rapid healing.
"What If The Pain Still Won't Go Away?"
Sometimes the pain is persistent and won't go away even with this "Slow Movement" type of exercise therapy. If the pain persists, follow these rules and your recovery should be much faster.
Rule #1
Once you get injured... everything changes. Forget about your current rate of progress. Your new goal is to heal the injury. Focus all your attention on getting better.
Rule #2
Don't lay off... It doesn't help. The pain just stays with you... It doesn't seem to matter how long you lay off. You must actually work the injury out of the joint. Which leads to the next rule...
Rule #3
Find exercises that cause no pain. This is important! When I say no pain, I mean no pain. Not pain that is tolerable or less than it was. I mean no pain. Simply put... pain sets up a histamine reaction which causes swelling and blocks circulation just like your nose plugs up with allergies...That's why you take anti-histamines to reduce the swelling. Using pain-free exercises gets circulation into the injured area.
Note: the exercise has to be pain free even before you warm up the joint. Not after.
Rule #4
Don't be fooled by Endorphin release. It will mask the pain. Even if you can't feel it... the injury is still taking place. You must find exercises that don't cause pain without any warm-up. This will accelerate the healing tremendously.
Rule #5
After you have found pain-free exercises, continue to work the area using the very slow rep speed method. It will stimulate circulation and sweep out all the accumulated toxins.
Rule #6
Ice the injured area each night until it goes numb. Your body will sense the cold and send more nutrient rich blood to the injured area. Be careful you don't overdo it and get frostbite.
Rule #7
Take aspirin about every three hours. It is a mild anti-inflammatory and allegedly thins the blood to aid in penetrating the swollen tissues. Don't take it before workouts as it will mask pain. You need pain to tell you when you are re-injuring yourself.
Rule #8
Don't ignore the first signs of pain. Be alert on every exercise. If you feel a little tinge of pain, either make adjustments in your exercise form or stop the exercise and go to something else. Most of the damage can be avoided if you're alert to the very first signs of pain. (Joint pain, not the lactic acid pain associated with muscles working.)Comment -
How many REPS? How much WEIGHT? Would you believe me if I said, "Unless you are an absolute beginner, DON'T be overly concerned about it."
Experienced Gym Go'ers can STOP counting REPS, STOP filling out workout charts, and STOP getting overly concerned with how HOW MUCH WEIGHT to use. Okay, it’s easy to be thinking, “Yeah, but how do I know if I am performing the correct number of reps?” Or, “How do I know if I am using the correct weight?”
To this I would reply, first define “correct number?" Or, define “correct weight?”…
The truth is, science and the experts have NEVER figured-out the “exact number” of reps, or the “exact weight” we should all be using…and they probably never will. There are just too many variables existing from person to person. Instead, the experts agree on “parameters”. In other words, they agree that it’s somewhere between “here” and “there”…and there’s a lot of latitude, which makes the so-called targeted number (of reps and weight) pretty easy to hit. The real purpose of repetitions is to allow a targeted muscle to perform physical work continuously for an optimal amount of time to stimulate an adaptive response (get bigger and stronger). That amount of time is between 40-seconds and 90-seconds, depending “which” expert you ask. In terms of “reps”, these time parameters equal somewhere between 8-20 strict repetitions being the targeted number. Again, that’s a wide and therefore pretty easy target to hit.
The thing ALL qualified experts DO agree on is that the 2 MOST IMPORTANT criteria to increasing strength or stimulating muscle growth are:
1 - Reaching a high level of intensity of effort or maximal exertion during exercise.
2 - Exercising in a manner which is made progressively more difficult to perform and therefore challenges you current maximum capacity to perform work.
So, “how” does this all apply to never having to count reps, or, get overly concerned about choosing the correct weight, or not having to write down the weight and/or reps? Easy…
Say, you are on vacation and decided to hit the weight-room at your resort. Again we’re talking about a person who’s been working out with weights for a reasonable amount of time. You walk over to (say) the Lat-Pulldown machine. Not knowing the machine, most experienced lifters would just arbitrarily select a weight, and then perform a “test rep” or two. Based on your experience and knowing your own body, you would probably be able to immediately (and intuitively) assess if the weight was a bit too light, a bit too heavy, or just right....
Now, after making a weight adjustment, let’s say you then strictly performed as many repetitions as physically possible. Because you performed the exercise to a point of momentary muscular familiar, it’s then a certainty that you reached an appropriate level of “intensity”, and performed the work to the limit of your own physical abilities. Therefore the exercise would be “both”, intense enough and progressive enough to produce an adaptive response within the working muscle. As long as the weight wasn’t ridiculously too light or too heavy, does it really matter how much weight you used, or how many reps you performed? Not really. Again, it’s because the target number of both is wide, therefore pretty easy to hit.
In Summary: The next time you go to the gym, instead of using a machine you are familiar with - try a new one. Make an educated guess at the starting weight, try a test rep or two to confirm, make the adjustment (or not), and then perform - in strict form - as many reps as physically possible. If you do this, there’s 99% chance that you will have met ALL the criteria to make that muscle grow and become stronger. Using this training protocol, you will continue to get stronger, and experience a variety in training that will help you avoid staleness or training plateaus. Give it a try!
~Franny GoodrichComment -
tt what is the best carbs for losing weight????Comment -
W W, we're just a few week from "next July" you better have that hotel booked and paid forComment -
sign me up for the seminarComment
)
