| Casino Classic Best Online Casino! Get $500 free on the house! | Shared Movies Over 80 Million Movies and TV-Shows No Charge per movie, No download limit! | Weight Loss Supplements Natural supplements that burn body fat, suppress appetite and support a healthy diet. | Antidepressant Medications Handle stress, elevate the mood, treat anxiety disorders. |
|
Posted at November 27, 2014, 1:19 pm: Without a doubt, no other man in bodybuilding has ever created such a stir as Mike Mentzer. His crusade against illogical traditionalist methods, and the dogma instilled within the fitness industry, has made him the quintessential spokesman for meaningful exercise. Brian: You have often stated that exercise is a science, and, as such, there can be only one valid method, or theory, to guide one's efforts in achieving optimal increases in strength and size. Please explain. Mike: First of all, one must understand what is meant by theory. A theory is a set of abstract principles which claims to be a correct description of some aspect of reality and/or a guide for successful human action. And, now, the main point: Since there is only one reality, there is and can be ONLY one correct description of any aspect of it, including bodybuilding exercise; and it just so happens to be the theory of Heavy Duty, high-intensity training. What is most curious here, Brian, is that, the theory of high-intensity training is the only theory of bodybuilding exercise that exists qua theory, i.e., as the term theory is actually defined. Those who advocate the blind, non-theoretical, volume approach to training are not even dimly aware of any of the requirements of a philosophic-scientific approach to productive bodybuilding exercise. If one were to reflect for a moment -- none of the training articles in their magazines contain any logic. Such articles consist of nothing more than a series of arbitrary, biblical-like injunctions akin to: "Thou shalt train six days a week. And thou shalt perform four sets of this exercise and five sets of that one." Why? Blank Out! No reason, no logic. Essentially, do it because I tell you to. Even a brief, logical analysis reveals that the volume approach is antithetical to a rational, scientific approach, since it is based on the arbitrary and the traditional. Why do they advocate that bodybuilders train six days a week? Because in our culture it is traditional to work six days and take the seventh day - (the Sabbath) - off for rest and religious observance. Very scientific! And why should bodybuilders do four set of every exercise? This one is so vague it almost defies comprehension. It seems to flow from the notion that 'more is better'; and since they believe that one set can't be enough, why not do four, instead? Indeed, why not? To advocate the number four here is essentially baseless; therefore, an arbitrary assertion. And, as I've stated in numerous of my articles, there is no room in science for the arbitrary or the traditional. There is no evidence that the volume of exercise is the essential ingredient, the stimulus responsible for triggering the growth mechanism into motion. In fact, all evidence points to the fact that the issue of volume in high-intensity, anaerobic bodybuilding science is a decidedly negative factor. (I ask the reader to reflect on his own experience as he considers the next point.) Whether one performs one set or 100 sets, the issue of volume is a negative; insofar that one performs any sets at all, even one, such as a negative influence for the more sets that one performs the greater the inroad into his limited reserve of physical resources, or recovery ability. Now, to understand inroad, think of it as the term clearly suggest -- an "in" into the road, or - a hole being dug into your body's limited resources. In other words, you perform one set you dig a small hole, a second set and the hole gets deeper, a third set and the hole becomes even deeper, a fourth set deeper still, and so on. That is a 'negative' phenomenon, for the deeper that hole gets the more of your body's resources have to be used - or wasted! - afterward merely in the attempt to fill the hole, which is what recovery is, leaving much less left over, or available, for building the mountain on top, i.e., the muscle. Of course, one must perform at least one set to have a workout. Ideally, one would stimulate growth with zero sets; that way none of the body's resources would be wasted on recovery; they'd all be utilized for growth production; and the individual would grow so fast it would be incredible. But, I must say, at this point in time, I haven't yet figured out how to stimulate growth with zero sets. With low-intensity, aerobic exercise the issue of volume is a 'positive' of sorts as the goal with aerobic activity is to increase the volume of work that one is able to perform. With high-intensity, anaerobic exercise, the purpose of the activity is merely to stimulate growth, not improve endurance. So, the purpose of a bodybuilder is not to go into the gym to discover how many sets he can do or how long he can endure. Bodybuilding is not aerobic. A bodybuilding workout is not an endurance contest! The purpose of a bodybuilder is to intelligently do what nature requires merely to activate the growth mechanism; then get the hell out of the gym, go home, rest and GROW! Before I conclude on this issue, I will state unequivocally that the growth stimulus is related to - not volume, but - the intensity of effort. The closer that the trainee gets to 100 percent intensity of effort, where he is exerting himself maximally and barely completes the rep, the greater the likelihood that he will stimulate growth. Brian: Considering the popularity and effectiveness of high-intensity training, why do you suppose so many other leaders in the fitness industry still don't embrace or endorse it? Mike: That is because they possess a different 'sense of life' than you or I, Brian; and, therefore, they have a different explicit philosophy. A person's sense of life is his subconscious, emotionally integrated view of existence; it represents his basic, early value integrations; and such is what determines his adult - (i.e., conscious, explicit) philosophy of life. Very few of these individuals ever learned early on to properly value truth, knowledge, science, ethics and justice. As a result they've wrecked the functioning of their cognitive mechanism; which means, simply, they can't properly identify or evaluate the facts of reality, i.e., they can't think. These individuals are primarily motivated by the irrational desire to project and protect an image of incontestable superiority and, even, god-like omniscient infallibility; which serve, of course, only to make them appear ridiculously pathetic. They just can't admit that after all the years of endorsing the non-theoretical, volume approach that maybe, just maybe, they made a mistake. They've never granted any slightest plausibility to the theory of high-intensity training, and, instead, continue to evade the issue involved and/or resort to unwarranted impeachment of the moral characters of those who advocate high-intensity. For instance, high-intensity can't be valid because "Arthur Jones is insane" or "Mike Mentzer is an alcoholic," or whatever. Brian: There are those who have tried high-intensity, and have claimed that it did not make any noticeable difference. What do you suspect could be the problem, and what recommendations do you suggest? Mike: Because of the universality of the theory of high-intensity, it is not difficult at all to uncover the cause(s) of failure to make meaningful progress. All one has to do is check the individual with regard to his application of the theoretical fundamentals. First of all is the principle of intensity. Is he training to a point of momentary muscular failure? Most bodybuilders don't have difficulty here, although I have had a number of phone clients over the years visit me in Los Angeles for hands-on supervision who I found were not training to failure, either because they misunderstood the concept and/or because they were afraid to train at that level of intensity. Usually, after I explained that the last rep of a set is the safest rep, safer than the first so long as they retain use of proper form throughout the set, their fear vanishes. If a given individual is carrying his sets to failure and he's not making progress, then you check him on the next two fundamentals, namely, volume and frequency of exercise. More often than not, those failing to realize satisfactory progress with high-intensity training are performing too much exercise both in the way of volume and frequency. In such cases, the first thing I do is recommend a two week layoff so that their bodies have the opportunity to overcome the exercise inroad into its recovery ability, then regulate their volume and frequency downward until progress is forthcoming. How much downward regulation is necessary or possible? I have one client, possibly my best gaining client ever - he's gained 135 pounds of almost all muscle in four years! Original of the message was taken from http://forum.bodybuilding.com/ Replies:Brian:Periodization (altering work loads and training styles) is a pop...How many times are they going to dig this poor man up and make him wri... Dude get it through your thick head , its not about mentzer . who are you? Sorry, but modifying Mentzer's work means you are doing something comp... you have no idea what he means by only one correct way, kid. He is Kingfish3 - a Mentzer Man who really doesn't seem to know anythi... "continuing the Mike Mentzer legacy" dang. empty post yeah. The more people i see "dislike" Mentzers training, it puts a... There is a thin line between insanity and genius i haven't read much about mentzer to be honest. Mike Mentzer was obviously a bit insane. I have read many many books and I to thought like you until i put it t... Go look at the entire body of literature on the subject and actually r... "And if we need 8-10 reps or whatever, why can't we break it into... That's actually the kink right there, he's so focused on sets. they use the excuse of his bad back or whatever IMO he obviously di... Look its like walking into a room and flicking the light on, now what ... your a F_AG! What is it about HIT that engenders itself to people who can't spell? ... It's a simple system for simple people who prefer dogma over analytica... I like to compare HIT to communism. It's kinda sad though, because there do seem to be some good points in... yep. the bad thing about Mike is pretty obvious. Was this english? Ah. And how is it like that? Nothing that I or anyone else knows about hy... I've got this one, HIT guys. that is an outstanding way to describe HIT. So the trick is to do an odd number of sets when the door is closed. *claps hands* another great description! *smirk* hope you didn'... what's so wrong about hit? I think that its actual a valuable way to t... No one would argue that. Let me compare HIT to a Summer's day. I believe I got this from Vikingman Welcome to the HIT gym pass o... I wonder who achilles really is, maybe another alias of kingfish? Volume is a parameter, nuff said. you said you like it when you see people hating on mentzer, sorry dude... madcow just to note. I think you just proved my point even though I had trouble understand... Yup, that was me. You cannot be this delusional. so you wont post what you did. Why not 1 rep? oh my god, you just proved your an idiot. I am volume troll #2 I am going to start a new way to swing a gol... I wish Mike Mentzer would have been that way. Is the answer because hitters can't count too 1 ? Dude, we've heard that before about every single thing you've ever bee... It is when you don't know the answer. im not wasting my time doing a search. Muscle cells ? BWA HAA HAA HAA ! i said as an example dude. Koowel Kingfish, I'll give you kudos for actually posting something. Um, Madcow, I can use 70% of my 1 rep max and get all my fibers to con... Actually in 'maximum voluntary effort' I'd assume maximum bar speed. Agreed, and just for the record I don't do 'special' speed work. Okay, I'm convinced. madcow that was riduculous , just like your statements about how long ... You can only do 8 reps but you have to do 9 or you won't grow. so what are we supposed to do to grow larger muscles, get weaker? If ... Wow, it's really too bad I can't neg you again(not that you need it), ... Useing your example of an 8 rep max weight I would do 5 sets of 6 mayb... Dude - this is fact. Everyone knows this, it's the foundation of training - to get better a... the only problem with HIT. Come on dude. how is it possible that I put 40 lbs on my paused bench in 6 weeks las... Not to beat an already long dead, dismembered, and flogged horse but p... all the guys doing volume and then switch to hit , that i train is jus... 40 pounds is nothing. You just said, "you are not going to gain muscle unless you hit m... We cannot show you what you refuse to see. when did i say its the only way to train. Ever recommend anything other than HIT? So clearly you see it as the o... "mentzer did have an open mind" lol. wow. What's funny is that other cult followers of Mentzer ALSO think he's a... Kingfish you my friend, are very very strange. How are those pictures coming along? I think you labor under the f... Ok now I'm stumped - English is actually your first language??? And he... yes i trained ashley judd and knew her from university of kentucky. You'll need to get one of us 'volume' trainers to blow out the 33 cand... I'm seriously starting to think that this crazy cracker has mental pro... no i can blow up a hot water bottle. I still can't neg this guy? OH C'MON! BB. Seriously dude, we get it. then you quit coming in posts where people want help with a hit routin... Just now figuring that out? Sorry, couldn't help myself. This is a huge load of bullshit followed by a big bag of doritos. this kingfish guy takes retardation to levels never before seen on ear... I think this really more applies to you. Amen, brother It disgusts me to see that this thread has gone as l... You seem rather well spoken for a 6 year old. |