200, 300, 400, 500 - A quest for greatness
- Thread starter mikeynov
- Start date
I
imported_fearfactory
Guest
it's probably Lol, didn't he say he was hairy?
SST
Squats
It's worth noting here that most of my PR's for reps in squats are done with a belt, and I haven't been using one as of yet. My disparity in strength between using a belt and not is pretty marked, possibly as a function of my narrow midsection?
Anyways, warmed up to 225 for 3 sets of 5. The first two sets were reasonably challenging. I am fighting my usual tendency of hip drift that I've tried to "fix" for years as the weights get heavier and fatigue mounts. Though this also seems to scale with strength - if I get stronger in general, weights where I'd previously experience a bit of lateral hip drift on the way up no longer do so. As long as it's not hurting me...
The last set of 5 I tried looking ahead but slightly down, going a bit against Rip's advice, and this set felt by far the easiest. I think if I simply put my head in a "neutral" position, looking more or less forward/slightly down without "thinking" about where I'm looking my strength is highest. Dunno why.
Bench
My first hiccup in my program.
I wound up warming up to 205 for 2 sets of 5, first reps paused. I knew I was in trouble after the second set when the 5th rep was pretty grindy.
The third set I managed 4.5 reps, keeping the rhythm smooth and not "forcing" it. I just couldn't quite lock it out, but this set actually felt the best in terms of my groove.
I will contemplate what to do here for the remaining 3 sessions of my preparatory period, I may just sit at this weight until I can manage 3 sets of 5 before increasing it.
Chins
Apparently deadlifting before chins doesn't help my chinning strength, because 3 sets of me + 75 lbs for 5 reps was probably easier than me + 70 lbs was last time. Cool deal.
HST
Leg Press + Calf Raises
Warmed up to 6 plates per side for a set of 15 in the leg press. I could literally feel the strain in my *** (no homo), like early DOMS, after this set.
A set of 2 plates + 35 lbs per side for 15 reps with brief pauses at the top and bottom of each rep in calf raises (same leg press), then a 30 second hold at the bottom doing sort of an x-reps thing where I lightly bounce the reps in the stretched position. Youch.
Dips
I just used the dip stand at the gym. If I position myself towards the furthest end, the distance between the handles actually isn't far off from my home stand, and it felt fine on my shoulders. Strength seems comparable, so I'll just do it here despite the wide handles.
Me + 35 lbs for a set of 14, and I performed one more lowering for good measure afterwards.
Hammer Iso Row
120 for a set of 15.
Squats
It's worth noting here that most of my PR's for reps in squats are done with a belt, and I haven't been using one as of yet. My disparity in strength between using a belt and not is pretty marked, possibly as a function of my narrow midsection?
Anyways, warmed up to 225 for 3 sets of 5. The first two sets were reasonably challenging. I am fighting my usual tendency of hip drift that I've tried to "fix" for years as the weights get heavier and fatigue mounts. Though this also seems to scale with strength - if I get stronger in general, weights where I'd previously experience a bit of lateral hip drift on the way up no longer do so. As long as it's not hurting me...
The last set of 5 I tried looking ahead but slightly down, going a bit against Rip's advice, and this set felt by far the easiest. I think if I simply put my head in a "neutral" position, looking more or less forward/slightly down without "thinking" about where I'm looking my strength is highest. Dunno why.
Bench
My first hiccup in my program.
I wound up warming up to 205 for 2 sets of 5, first reps paused. I knew I was in trouble after the second set when the 5th rep was pretty grindy.
The third set I managed 4.5 reps, keeping the rhythm smooth and not "forcing" it. I just couldn't quite lock it out, but this set actually felt the best in terms of my groove.
I will contemplate what to do here for the remaining 3 sessions of my preparatory period, I may just sit at this weight until I can manage 3 sets of 5 before increasing it.
Chins
Apparently deadlifting before chins doesn't help my chinning strength, because 3 sets of me + 75 lbs for 5 reps was probably easier than me + 70 lbs was last time. Cool deal.
HST
Leg Press + Calf Raises
Warmed up to 6 plates per side for a set of 15 in the leg press. I could literally feel the strain in my *** (no homo), like early DOMS, after this set.
A set of 2 plates + 35 lbs per side for 15 reps with brief pauses at the top and bottom of each rep in calf raises (same leg press), then a 30 second hold at the bottom doing sort of an x-reps thing where I lightly bounce the reps in the stretched position. Youch.
Dips
I just used the dip stand at the gym. If I position myself towards the furthest end, the distance between the handles actually isn't far off from my home stand, and it felt fine on my shoulders. Strength seems comparable, so I'll just do it here despite the wide handles.
Me + 35 lbs for a set of 14, and I performed one more lowering for good measure afterwards.
Hammer Iso Row
120 for a set of 15.
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Apparently deadlifting before chins doesn't help my chinning strength, because 3 sets of me + 75 lbs for 5 reps was probably easier than me + 70 lbs was last time. Cool deal.</div>
My back is generally wrecked after deads so doing any kind of chinning or pull-ups afterwards is always much harder. I generally just hang from my chinning bar after deads to stretch my lats out. You did really well managing chins with bw+70lb right after deads.
My back is generally wrecked after deads so doing any kind of chinning or pull-ups afterwards is always much harder. I generally just hang from my chinning bar after deads to stretch my lats out. You did really well managing chins with bw+70lb right after deads.
I
imported_fearfactory
Guest
<div>
(mikeynov @ Aug. 14 2008,5:14)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">My disparity in strength between using a belt and not is pretty marked, possibly as a function of my narrow midsection?</div>
I would guess this is a sign that you know how to use a belt. I've heard it said that folks either get carryover from using a belt, or don't know how to use it.
I fall into that latter category. Any advice you'd care to offer on use of a belt?
(mikeynov @ Aug. 14 2008,5:14)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">My disparity in strength between using a belt and not is pretty marked, possibly as a function of my narrow midsection?</div>
I would guess this is a sign that you know how to use a belt. I've heard it said that folks either get carryover from using a belt, or don't know how to use it.
I fall into that latter category. Any advice you'd care to offer on use of a belt?
<div>
(fearfactory @ Aug. 16 2008,7:21)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
(mikeynov @ Aug. 14 2008,5:14)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">My disparity in strength between using a belt and not is pretty marked, possibly as a function of my narrow midsection?</div>
I would guess this is a sign that you know how to use a belt. I've heard it said that folks either get carryover from using a belt, or don't know how to use it.
I fall into that latter category. Any advice you'd care to offer on use of a belt?</div>
I'm not sure I'm doing anything special.
I've noticed I seem to get most of the benefit from a belt by having it not so tight. I suppose I'm reflexively bracing my abs against it.
I've found this useful for both strength out of the hole in the squat, and deadlift strength off the floor.
For the latter (deadlifts), I noticed a tight belt actually WORSENS my pulling strength. A loose belt helps, though.
(fearfactory @ Aug. 16 2008,7:21)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
(mikeynov @ Aug. 14 2008,5:14)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">My disparity in strength between using a belt and not is pretty marked, possibly as a function of my narrow midsection?</div>
I would guess this is a sign that you know how to use a belt. I've heard it said that folks either get carryover from using a belt, or don't know how to use it.
I fall into that latter category. Any advice you'd care to offer on use of a belt?</div>
I'm not sure I'm doing anything special.
I've noticed I seem to get most of the benefit from a belt by having it not so tight. I suppose I'm reflexively bracing my abs against it.
I've found this useful for both strength out of the hole in the squat, and deadlift strength off the floor.
For the latter (deadlifts), I noticed a tight belt actually WORSENS my pulling strength. A loose belt helps, though.
scientific muscle
New Member
Deadlifting I don't get too much out of the belt. But squatting I feel a big difference with a fairly tight belt supporting my abs. Get a thick belt that covers the abdomen, those thin ones give hardly any support.
<div>
(scientific muscle @ Aug. 16 2008,5:48)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Deadlifting I don't get too much out of the belt. But squatting I feel a big difference with a fairly tight belt supporting my abs. Get a thick belt that covers the abdomen, those thin ones give hardly any support.</div>
I have an Inzer lever belt that I bought off of a strongman a few years ago:
Awesome belt, highly recommended.
(scientific muscle @ Aug. 16 2008,5:48)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Deadlifting I don't get too much out of the belt. But squatting I feel a big difference with a fairly tight belt supporting my abs. Get a thick belt that covers the abdomen, those thin ones give hardly any support.</div>
I have an Inzer lever belt that I bought off of a strongman a few years ago:
Awesome belt, highly recommended.
Joe.Muscle
Active Member
Glad to see you here Mikey.
I have took some time off from the forum as well and even to lifting...except fullbody once to twice a week.
I have been playing a ton of golf and now its time to get back in the gym to help the golf game / golf body...so your thread will be one I follow constantly!
I have took some time off from the forum as well and even to lifting...except fullbody once to twice a week.
I have been playing a ton of golf and now its time to get back in the gym to help the golf game / golf body...so your thread will be one I follow constantly!
I was thinking about some of the people that motivated me in the lifting world, and, honestly, there aren't a ton of people out there that I see that I think, wow, I want that.
However, I find this guy on youtube to be extremely motivational:
Greatness.
Seriously, from the dude's crazy strength (look at his 355 x 20 video or his extreme deficit deads with 425) to his outstanding physique, this guy is just awesome. Apparently a lifetime drug-free natural bodybuilder, too, which I respect greatly.
However, I find this guy on youtube to be extremely motivational:
Greatness.
Seriously, from the dude's crazy strength (look at his 355 x 20 video or his extreme deficit deads with 425) to his outstanding physique, this guy is just awesome. Apparently a lifetime drug-free natural bodybuilder, too, which I respect greatly.
Mikey, Bastionhead is a great find. Very inspirational if he is a natty [and I think he is; he has a natty look about him (ie. traps and delts in proportion to the rest of him) so I believe him]. Makes my 275lb x 15 squat effort look like a walk in the park. I now have my sights set on trying to get where he is now. At my age I might never make it to that level but it's worth a try. He must be well past my 200,300,400,500 goal although I haven't seen any vids of him pressing. He has some great back and leg development. Judging by his calves he has some pretty good genetics going on too.
Man, this **** is getting tiring as I near my 3 sets of 5 and 15 RMs.
I've test run this logic or variations thereof before for the SST portion, but combining it with HST, I'd probably trade some volume, i.e. go from 2 sets of 5 to a single set of 5, in future cycles. 3 sets of 5 during the preparatory phase combined with the sets of 15 is pretty brutal by the end.
However, performance continues to climb and I haven't run into any strength walls yet, so maybe I'm just being a whiney pussy.
SST
Squats
Warmed up to 235 for 3 sets of 5, beltless wonder. I was having some corkscrew/GM problems on these, though the second set was by far the best as I really tried to concentrate on a few cues that are useful for me (Rip's raise the *** up out of the hole combined with thinking about holding my back angle constant out of the bottom vs. raising my chest).
I also wonder how much of these deviations in form are something other people would notice vs. me being a perfectionist. But still...
One thought that occurs to me is that I tend to self-select a slightly uneven stance (right foot just slightly behind left), and I tend to modify this before starting my set to make things even, but it's possible some of my asymmetry might be due to fighting my natural tendencies. Or natural asymmetry, as it were.
Bench
Warmed up to 3 sets of 205 for 5, first reps paused. Better, got the third set of 5 today.
Chins
Warmed up to 3 sets of me + 80 for 5 reps. Very hard.
HST
Leg Press
6 plates + 10 lbs per side for a set of 15. The feeling of strain in my glutes/hamstring area again almost instantly after the set. I take this as a good sign.
Dips
I used the dip stand at the gym again, and my left shoulder actually bothered me during the movement. Lame.
Still, I managed me + 40 lbs for a set of 13.75. I just could not lock the fucker out at the end.
2 more reps after like ~15-20 seconds rest.
Hammer Iso Row
1 plate + 25 lbs per side for a set of 15. Getting towards my 15 RM here.
I've test run this logic or variations thereof before for the SST portion, but combining it with HST, I'd probably trade some volume, i.e. go from 2 sets of 5 to a single set of 5, in future cycles. 3 sets of 5 during the preparatory phase combined with the sets of 15 is pretty brutal by the end.
However, performance continues to climb and I haven't run into any strength walls yet, so maybe I'm just being a whiney pussy.
SST
Squats
Warmed up to 235 for 3 sets of 5, beltless wonder. I was having some corkscrew/GM problems on these, though the second set was by far the best as I really tried to concentrate on a few cues that are useful for me (Rip's raise the *** up out of the hole combined with thinking about holding my back angle constant out of the bottom vs. raising my chest).
I also wonder how much of these deviations in form are something other people would notice vs. me being a perfectionist. But still...
One thought that occurs to me is that I tend to self-select a slightly uneven stance (right foot just slightly behind left), and I tend to modify this before starting my set to make things even, but it's possible some of my asymmetry might be due to fighting my natural tendencies. Or natural asymmetry, as it were.
Bench
Warmed up to 3 sets of 205 for 5, first reps paused. Better, got the third set of 5 today.
Chins
Warmed up to 3 sets of me + 80 for 5 reps. Very hard.
HST
Leg Press
6 plates + 10 lbs per side for a set of 15. The feeling of strain in my glutes/hamstring area again almost instantly after the set. I take this as a good sign.
Dips
I used the dip stand at the gym again, and my left shoulder actually bothered me during the movement. Lame.
Still, I managed me + 40 lbs for a set of 13.75. I just could not lock the fucker out at the end.
2 more reps after like ~15-20 seconds rest.
Hammer Iso Row
1 plate + 25 lbs per side for a set of 15. Getting towards my 15 RM here.
A bit of an odd day. I changed things up a little (skipped squats and chins) due to the gym being rather busy and feeling a little worn out. The object isn't to kill myself in the preparatory period
SST
Deadlifts
After watching this video...
Deadlift setup with Mark Rippetoe.
I worked on my setup to match what Rip describes there.
It's worth noting that, in the past, I haven't emphasized the chest up, back locked in extension posture, which I am doing now.
Anyways, warmed up to 3 sets of 305 for 5 like this. The last set was not super easy.
Bench
Warmed up to 2 sets of 207.5 for 5 reps, first reps paused. Second set was pretty tough.
Chest Supported Rows
I was trying to figure out a candidate for this, and I think I might just use the damn Hammer Iso Row as my 'strength' variant of the row in the next phase.
210 for a set of 5, then 200 for another set of 5.
HST
Hammer Iso Row
1 plate + 25 + 2.5 lbs per side for a set of 12. Wow, the preceding sets of 5 definitely juiced me here, this is only 5 more lbs than what I used last time for 15 reps.
Dumbbell Incline Bench
Since I'm at/over my 15 RM already in dips, I decided to stick something else in here. 60's for a set of ~14.5 reps. Couldn't lock that last one out. Mad pumps.
Leg Press
6 plates + 25 lbs per side for a set of 15. Pretty brutal by the end.
SST
Deadlifts
After watching this video...
Deadlift setup with Mark Rippetoe.
I worked on my setup to match what Rip describes there.
It's worth noting that, in the past, I haven't emphasized the chest up, back locked in extension posture, which I am doing now.
Anyways, warmed up to 3 sets of 305 for 5 like this. The last set was not super easy.
Bench
Warmed up to 2 sets of 207.5 for 5 reps, first reps paused. Second set was pretty tough.
Chest Supported Rows
I was trying to figure out a candidate for this, and I think I might just use the damn Hammer Iso Row as my 'strength' variant of the row in the next phase.
210 for a set of 5, then 200 for another set of 5.
HST
Hammer Iso Row
1 plate + 25 + 2.5 lbs per side for a set of 12. Wow, the preceding sets of 5 definitely juiced me here, this is only 5 more lbs than what I used last time for 15 reps.
Dumbbell Incline Bench
Since I'm at/over my 15 RM already in dips, I decided to stick something else in here. 60's for a set of ~14.5 reps. Couldn't lock that last one out. Mad pumps.
Leg Press
6 plates + 25 lbs per side for a set of 15. Pretty brutal by the end.
Mikeynov
Im relatively new to HST..
as i understand training to failure will promote strength gains especially with heavy loads as you are doing..
But i dont understand how you can perform hypertrophy training at the same time..your fatiguing your CNS through your strength training which will hamper you incrementing your loads for hypertrophy training...
Can you explain how you keep control of this please??
Im relatively new to HST..
as i understand training to failure will promote strength gains especially with heavy loads as you are doing..
But i dont understand how you can perform hypertrophy training at the same time..your fatiguing your CNS through your strength training which will hamper you incrementing your loads for hypertrophy training...
Can you explain how you keep control of this please??
<div>
(ratty @ Aug. 20 2008,6:08)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Mikeynov
Im relatively new to HST..
as i understand training to failure will promote strength gains especially with heavy loads as you are doing..
But i dont understand how you can perform hypertrophy training at the same time..your fatiguing your CNS through your strength training which will hamper you incrementing your loads for hypertrophy training...
Can you explain how you keep control of this please??</div>
It's a delicate balance, obviously.
If your statement was correct, Westside Barbell style training shouldn't work, as they are intentionally training strength (max effort) alongside hypertrophy (repeated effort). Same for Hepburn style routines which mix "strength" and "pump" work.
So, I suppose my point is there is a long history of weight training that explicitly combines training for strength with training for size, and I definitely didn't invent this.
However, in my own case, I am making things manageable by:
1) Limiting the total number of strength/hypertrophy exercises.
2) HST, by design, does not involve frequent training to failure, so most of the hypertrophy work is submaximal.
3) Even my SST stuff has been mostly submaximal so far (hence the preparatory period). I will start doing top sets of 5 soon, but at a reduced frequency (twice a week for squats, 1.5 times a week for bench, press, chins, and chest supported rows, once a week for deadlifts). So I planned ahead that work closer to failure will need to be done less frequently.
(ratty @ Aug. 20 2008,6:08)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Mikeynov
Im relatively new to HST..
as i understand training to failure will promote strength gains especially with heavy loads as you are doing..
But i dont understand how you can perform hypertrophy training at the same time..your fatiguing your CNS through your strength training which will hamper you incrementing your loads for hypertrophy training...
Can you explain how you keep control of this please??</div>
It's a delicate balance, obviously.
If your statement was correct, Westside Barbell style training shouldn't work, as they are intentionally training strength (max effort) alongside hypertrophy (repeated effort). Same for Hepburn style routines which mix "strength" and "pump" work.
So, I suppose my point is there is a long history of weight training that explicitly combines training for strength with training for size, and I definitely didn't invent this.
However, in my own case, I am making things manageable by:
1) Limiting the total number of strength/hypertrophy exercises.
2) HST, by design, does not involve frequent training to failure, so most of the hypertrophy work is submaximal.
3) Even my SST stuff has been mostly submaximal so far (hence the preparatory period). I will start doing top sets of 5 soon, but at a reduced frequency (twice a week for squats, 1.5 times a week for bench, press, chins, and chest supported rows, once a week for deadlifts). So I planned ahead that work closer to failure will need to be done less frequently.
Warning: long *** post forthcoming.
For anyone who's never read through Jules' (vicious) source material for what later turned into the Pimp my HST e-book, have a look at this thread:
http://www.hypertrophy-specific.info/cgi-bin....2;t=476
Seriously, amazing stuff. I didn't realize the genesis of what later turned into Max-Stim is basically in that thread, too, with Dan and Jules labcoating about clustering and its advantages for improving average strain per repetition.
I'm also re-amazed at just how far some of our resident labcoats took this stuff in terms of reasoning out what works, why, and even practical ways to apply it. Jules' sequence of base exercises (15s) --> + stretch point lifts (10s) --> peak contraction lifts (5s) seems one of the most useful, practical suggestions for incorporating all this wisdom that I've seen.
I understand the "shut up and lift" philosophy. Seriously, I do. But I feel like some of the information discussed at this forum is literally YEARS ahead of the rest of the training world, and could be used by almost anybody. Examples of principles gleamed from HST that could be used to help just about anybody:
1) Progressive load. While many systems acknowledge this, the ramifications, I think, are bigger than people realize.
Meaning, a person ultimately fulfills their genetic potential on the training end of things by adding weight to the bar consistently over many, many, years. Think of HST as sort of a "microcosmic" version of a person's whole (macrocosmic) training career, with the periods of strategic deconditioning like starting over as a beginner again each time.
For actual beginners, I would suggest that programs like Staring Strength ARE as hypertrophy-specific as anything else (including vanilla HST) by virtue of linearly adding weight to the bar. Strength and hypertrophy training are, fundamentally, the same thing at this stage.
At some point, of course, linear gains in strength become exhausted, at which point a person enters the "intermediate" stage.
HST, then, is literally a miniature reproduction of the beginner stage, made possible by incorporating SD to restore the growth potential of lighter weights again. Will it ever work as well as the beginner stage, when EVERY training session was a "new stimulus" for your muscles? Of course not, but, it's the next best thing.
The point here is that any given person could probably help optimize their muscle gains by intentionally load cycling, as there's nothing more "shocking" to a muscle than having to generate levels of tension far above what it is accustomed to. The step beyond load cycling, of course, is the SD between these periods, though I realize this issue is still controversial. I suspect, however, that while an imperfect solution, it is still the best approach to helping optimize the effects of load cycling.
2) Along with #1, the fundamental nature of the hypertrophy stimulus, and how to manipulate this for stuff that isn't growing.
People still seem fundamentally confused about WHAT is producing growth, i.e. (progressive) mechanical strain. Really, this should be a natural conclusion if you acknowledge #1 is true. If you come to this point, you can probably apply this information in useful ways.
As Jules' speculates, for example, if you have a lagging body part and your base routine does not seem to be fixing the problem, what would you do to address it? Obviously, you want to increase strain, specifically, to that body part.
How do you do that? Well, first and foremost, get stronger in exercises that involve that body part. But we're suggesting here that, despite doing so, we're still not growing.
Obviously, "isolation" exercises figure in here. But it's worth asking if any given isolation exercise is necessarily going to do this, particularly since many compounds are probably exposing the involved muscles to more strain than any isolation exercise ever could. Example: close grip bench presses vs a rope pushdown or something. Dante of DC training fame has gone over this logic extensively, and it's why he selects "big/heavy/progressable" exercises to get people as strong as fast as possible.
However, if we understand the role of strain in muscle growth, we know, relatedly, that increased stretch-under-tension is a direct way to increase strain. By looking at exercise mechanics, we could attempt to increase strain by selecting exercises with a heavy stretch-under-load component.
Examples: dumbbell flies for pecs, RDL's for hamstrings, incline curls for the biceps.
Instead of just throwing "more work" at the problem, we would realize that, if we're going to do "more work" to bring up a given body part, we do so in as efficient a way as possible. Since we understand what causes growth, our first choice is to simply increase strain to that body part, and the best way to do that is to use heavy exercises with a strong emphasis on stretch-under-load.
3) The role of other (training) factors in growth. A lot has been made of "the pump" by groups like IART, Matrix Training and so forth, and there does seem to be a fair amount of anecdote related to manipulating exercise in order to generate a lot of burn/pump being conducive to growth. This SEEMS to stand in stark contrast to point #2 above, until you realize it's simply a third component in the hypertrophy game.
Note that people who are advocating this logic report "new growth" after years of stagnation, but that most of their growth, by the numbers, was still a product of good old fashioned, progressive overload training.
The answer, then, is that both groups are right - you still have to get massively stronger to get big (e.g. DC training), but that increasing the metabolic stress still IS a potent facilitator of growth.
However, as Jules speculated in the pimp my HST thread, a strong argument could be made that it's comparatively less important than A) first getting strong(er) and B) adding work with the stretch/strain angle. That doesn't make it unimportant, it just means that your first two avenues towards manipulating training variables in order to grow would logically exhaust those before moving into the super pump stuff.
So, if after exhausting the "get stronger" angle and the "more work with stretch-->strain" angle you still find yourself having issues making stuff grow, add "metabolic stress" in order to magnify the hypertrophy stimulus even further.
Going back to the original thread linked in this overly long post, what's nice about Jules' application is that he has taken this basic wisdom, and already put it into a practical format for somebody's HST cycle.
I.e. during the 15's, coming off of your SD, use your core lifts initially to induce strain.
During the 10's, add a second layer to optimize your progressive strain by adding lifts, as necessary, with a stretch-under-tension component.
Finally, during the 5's, when metabolic stress is starting to fall, introduce some pump/burn-y type stuff in order to keep hypertrophy humming along.
Still, even a person using a body part split could make use of this wisdom:
1) Intentionally cycle loads, and take some time off between these cycles (really, how much faster do people think they're growing by never taking a week off, or how much would you lose even if SD is "wrong?"
. Even if you're on a 5 day body part split, there is a strong logic here.
2) Make the core of your routine basic, compound movements that are "easy" to progress in load over time.
3) In order to optimize your gains, add movements to address lagging body parts over time which, first and foremost, increase strain, specifically, to those muscles. At some point, particularly if the above isn't "enough," consider adding metabolic stress as a third component. The format, then, being (big, progressive compounds) + (added stretch-under-load movements) + (metabolic, feel the burn movements), starting with the first and adding the others as necessary.
For anyone who's never read through Jules' (vicious) source material for what later turned into the Pimp my HST e-book, have a look at this thread:
http://www.hypertrophy-specific.info/cgi-bin....2;t=476
Seriously, amazing stuff. I didn't realize the genesis of what later turned into Max-Stim is basically in that thread, too, with Dan and Jules labcoating about clustering and its advantages for improving average strain per repetition.
I'm also re-amazed at just how far some of our resident labcoats took this stuff in terms of reasoning out what works, why, and even practical ways to apply it. Jules' sequence of base exercises (15s) --> + stretch point lifts (10s) --> peak contraction lifts (5s) seems one of the most useful, practical suggestions for incorporating all this wisdom that I've seen.
I understand the "shut up and lift" philosophy. Seriously, I do. But I feel like some of the information discussed at this forum is literally YEARS ahead of the rest of the training world, and could be used by almost anybody. Examples of principles gleamed from HST that could be used to help just about anybody:
1) Progressive load. While many systems acknowledge this, the ramifications, I think, are bigger than people realize.
Meaning, a person ultimately fulfills their genetic potential on the training end of things by adding weight to the bar consistently over many, many, years. Think of HST as sort of a "microcosmic" version of a person's whole (macrocosmic) training career, with the periods of strategic deconditioning like starting over as a beginner again each time.
For actual beginners, I would suggest that programs like Staring Strength ARE as hypertrophy-specific as anything else (including vanilla HST) by virtue of linearly adding weight to the bar. Strength and hypertrophy training are, fundamentally, the same thing at this stage.
At some point, of course, linear gains in strength become exhausted, at which point a person enters the "intermediate" stage.
HST, then, is literally a miniature reproduction of the beginner stage, made possible by incorporating SD to restore the growth potential of lighter weights again. Will it ever work as well as the beginner stage, when EVERY training session was a "new stimulus" for your muscles? Of course not, but, it's the next best thing.
The point here is that any given person could probably help optimize their muscle gains by intentionally load cycling, as there's nothing more "shocking" to a muscle than having to generate levels of tension far above what it is accustomed to. The step beyond load cycling, of course, is the SD between these periods, though I realize this issue is still controversial. I suspect, however, that while an imperfect solution, it is still the best approach to helping optimize the effects of load cycling.
2) Along with #1, the fundamental nature of the hypertrophy stimulus, and how to manipulate this for stuff that isn't growing.
People still seem fundamentally confused about WHAT is producing growth, i.e. (progressive) mechanical strain. Really, this should be a natural conclusion if you acknowledge #1 is true. If you come to this point, you can probably apply this information in useful ways.
As Jules' speculates, for example, if you have a lagging body part and your base routine does not seem to be fixing the problem, what would you do to address it? Obviously, you want to increase strain, specifically, to that body part.
How do you do that? Well, first and foremost, get stronger in exercises that involve that body part. But we're suggesting here that, despite doing so, we're still not growing.
Obviously, "isolation" exercises figure in here. But it's worth asking if any given isolation exercise is necessarily going to do this, particularly since many compounds are probably exposing the involved muscles to more strain than any isolation exercise ever could. Example: close grip bench presses vs a rope pushdown or something. Dante of DC training fame has gone over this logic extensively, and it's why he selects "big/heavy/progressable" exercises to get people as strong as fast as possible.
However, if we understand the role of strain in muscle growth, we know, relatedly, that increased stretch-under-tension is a direct way to increase strain. By looking at exercise mechanics, we could attempt to increase strain by selecting exercises with a heavy stretch-under-load component.
Examples: dumbbell flies for pecs, RDL's for hamstrings, incline curls for the biceps.
Instead of just throwing "more work" at the problem, we would realize that, if we're going to do "more work" to bring up a given body part, we do so in as efficient a way as possible. Since we understand what causes growth, our first choice is to simply increase strain to that body part, and the best way to do that is to use heavy exercises with a strong emphasis on stretch-under-load.
3) The role of other (training) factors in growth. A lot has been made of "the pump" by groups like IART, Matrix Training and so forth, and there does seem to be a fair amount of anecdote related to manipulating exercise in order to generate a lot of burn/pump being conducive to growth. This SEEMS to stand in stark contrast to point #2 above, until you realize it's simply a third component in the hypertrophy game.
Note that people who are advocating this logic report "new growth" after years of stagnation, but that most of their growth, by the numbers, was still a product of good old fashioned, progressive overload training.
The answer, then, is that both groups are right - you still have to get massively stronger to get big (e.g. DC training), but that increasing the metabolic stress still IS a potent facilitator of growth.
However, as Jules speculated in the pimp my HST thread, a strong argument could be made that it's comparatively less important than A) first getting strong(er) and B) adding work with the stretch/strain angle. That doesn't make it unimportant, it just means that your first two avenues towards manipulating training variables in order to grow would logically exhaust those before moving into the super pump stuff.
So, if after exhausting the "get stronger" angle and the "more work with stretch-->strain" angle you still find yourself having issues making stuff grow, add "metabolic stress" in order to magnify the hypertrophy stimulus even further.
Going back to the original thread linked in this overly long post, what's nice about Jules' application is that he has taken this basic wisdom, and already put it into a practical format for somebody's HST cycle.
I.e. during the 15's, coming off of your SD, use your core lifts initially to induce strain.
During the 10's, add a second layer to optimize your progressive strain by adding lifts, as necessary, with a stretch-under-tension component.
Finally, during the 5's, when metabolic stress is starting to fall, introduce some pump/burn-y type stuff in order to keep hypertrophy humming along.
Still, even a person using a body part split could make use of this wisdom:
1) Intentionally cycle loads, and take some time off between these cycles (really, how much faster do people think they're growing by never taking a week off, or how much would you lose even if SD is "wrong?"
. Even if you're on a 5 day body part split, there is a strong logic here.2) Make the core of your routine basic, compound movements that are "easy" to progress in load over time.
3) In order to optimize your gains, add movements to address lagging body parts over time which, first and foremost, increase strain, specifically, to those muscles. At some point, particularly if the above isn't "enough," consider adding metabolic stress as a third component. The format, then, being (big, progressive compounds) + (added stretch-under-load movements) + (metabolic, feel the burn movements), starting with the first and adding the others as necessary.
<div>
(ratty @ Aug. 20 2008,6:08)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Mikeynov
Im relatively new to HST..
as i understand training to failure will promote strength gains especially with heavy loads as you are doing..
But i dont understand how you can perform hypertrophy training at the same time..your fatiguing your CNS through your strength training which will hamper you incrementing your loads for hypertrophy training...
Can you explain how you keep control of this please??</div>
As some have noticed, I am using my journal as a means not only to track my training, but also my thoughts in general.
I'm re-replying to this question because it's actually addressing an issue I've been trying to "tackle" for a long time.
It seems to me that a properly applied Westside template seems to work about as well as anything for, well, almost everything, including gains in strength and size.
Part of this was made possible, imho, by separating the different training qualities into discrete entities, and applying them simultaneously.
My own thoughts have also led to this, and given my interest in strength training (i.e. see the title of my thread), I have long thought about ways to optimize this process.
The question being asked here, however, really gets to the heart of the "problem" in this approach. Meaning, it's easier, in a sense, to envision a way to optimize any given motor quality if you're only addressing that quality. Addressing multiple qualities simultaneously, by design, will necessitate a compromise in design.
Meaning, a "pure" strength routine, at least in the short run, is going to be better for strength than a strength + hypertrophy routine. Because it has to be. This is why stuff like Smolov or Sheiko are probably beating even Westside in terms of people's reported performance boosts over short time periods.
However, as a long term approach, I still think a person's peak strength potential will be best actualized by also growing as much as possible while gaining strength. I think this is where Westside type approaches figure in, and one option, obviously, is just to use their template.
However, I can't get over the fact that the "repeated effort" method in Westside really doesn't contain many "hypertrophy-specific" principles, and is basically a way to throw a bunch more work at stuff without exploding (i.e. they proactively avoid failure).
That's fine and well, and obviously "works," but if you think of Westside as various motor quality cycles running in parallel, I think you could "cut out" traditional "repeated effort" training and stick HST in its place, with some obvious compromises.
HST, for example, attempts to create "an environment for growth" via increased frequency. Well, I think an upper/lower split ala Westside is a pretty good compromise between acute stimulus (i.e. doing more on a given session to assure "something" is happening) and a chronic one. Which would mean our "HST" component would probably be only twice a week.
Cycle length here could vary, obviously, but this would probably be a good fit for the shorter, higher acute stimulus style HST routines I've proposed in the past (i.e. "mini-HST" variants). 3 weeks on, 1 week (SD) off, which preserves a pretty high SD:training ratio.
Example: calculate approximate 5, 10, and 15 RM's for a handful of lifts. Over 3 weeks time, cycle up towards your RM's while proactively avoiding failure every step of the way. On the fourth week, do no hypertrophy work whatsoever.
Another problem, of course, is that with periods of "SD" in the above, SD also tends to substantially reduce performance in the short run, which runs counter to our strength goals. So we would probably still be doing some low volume strength work, if nothing else, during our "SD" week (i.e. even if RE work is out, we are doing, perhaps, some combination of ME or DE). Will this somewhat dampen the effectiveness of SD? Yes, because it probably has to.
Still, if you crunch the numbers, 3 weeks on, 1 week off of "hypertrophy" work would involve something like ~3 weeks of these cycles with ~10 days off between them. Even with lower volume "strength" work during the deload weeks, I have to think we are, to some degree, restoring our muscles' ability to respond to lighter loads again.
Would it work as well as a pure SD for a true HST cycle? No, but, as above, compromise of design.
So, simple example of a "Westside" style routine using these principles:
Max Effort work - once a week for both an upper and lower body lift, basically working up to a single, maximal attempt in any given lift. Westside traditionally has this in the 1-3 RM range, but if you wanted to be a little more cautious, going for ~5 RM's would suit "general strength" advocates just fine, imho.
Dynamic Effort work - perhaps less important for people without competition aspirations, you could work on RFD for your chosen lifts once a week or so.
Repeated Effort work, i.e. HST - performed twice a week, proactively avoiding failure, with a moderate amount of work that is rapidly escalated in load from session to session. Every ~4th week this is skipped entirely in order to resensitize muscle tissue for subsequent cycles.
(ratty @ Aug. 20 2008,6:08)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Mikeynov
Im relatively new to HST..
as i understand training to failure will promote strength gains especially with heavy loads as you are doing..
But i dont understand how you can perform hypertrophy training at the same time..your fatiguing your CNS through your strength training which will hamper you incrementing your loads for hypertrophy training...
Can you explain how you keep control of this please??</div>
As some have noticed, I am using my journal as a means not only to track my training, but also my thoughts in general.
I'm re-replying to this question because it's actually addressing an issue I've been trying to "tackle" for a long time.
It seems to me that a properly applied Westside template seems to work about as well as anything for, well, almost everything, including gains in strength and size.
Part of this was made possible, imho, by separating the different training qualities into discrete entities, and applying them simultaneously.
My own thoughts have also led to this, and given my interest in strength training (i.e. see the title of my thread), I have long thought about ways to optimize this process.
The question being asked here, however, really gets to the heart of the "problem" in this approach. Meaning, it's easier, in a sense, to envision a way to optimize any given motor quality if you're only addressing that quality. Addressing multiple qualities simultaneously, by design, will necessitate a compromise in design.
Meaning, a "pure" strength routine, at least in the short run, is going to be better for strength than a strength + hypertrophy routine. Because it has to be. This is why stuff like Smolov or Sheiko are probably beating even Westside in terms of people's reported performance boosts over short time periods.
However, as a long term approach, I still think a person's peak strength potential will be best actualized by also growing as much as possible while gaining strength. I think this is where Westside type approaches figure in, and one option, obviously, is just to use their template.
However, I can't get over the fact that the "repeated effort" method in Westside really doesn't contain many "hypertrophy-specific" principles, and is basically a way to throw a bunch more work at stuff without exploding (i.e. they proactively avoid failure).
That's fine and well, and obviously "works," but if you think of Westside as various motor quality cycles running in parallel, I think you could "cut out" traditional "repeated effort" training and stick HST in its place, with some obvious compromises.
HST, for example, attempts to create "an environment for growth" via increased frequency. Well, I think an upper/lower split ala Westside is a pretty good compromise between acute stimulus (i.e. doing more on a given session to assure "something" is happening) and a chronic one. Which would mean our "HST" component would probably be only twice a week.
Cycle length here could vary, obviously, but this would probably be a good fit for the shorter, higher acute stimulus style HST routines I've proposed in the past (i.e. "mini-HST" variants). 3 weeks on, 1 week (SD) off, which preserves a pretty high SD:training ratio.
Example: calculate approximate 5, 10, and 15 RM's for a handful of lifts. Over 3 weeks time, cycle up towards your RM's while proactively avoiding failure every step of the way. On the fourth week, do no hypertrophy work whatsoever.
Another problem, of course, is that with periods of "SD" in the above, SD also tends to substantially reduce performance in the short run, which runs counter to our strength goals. So we would probably still be doing some low volume strength work, if nothing else, during our "SD" week (i.e. even if RE work is out, we are doing, perhaps, some combination of ME or DE). Will this somewhat dampen the effectiveness of SD? Yes, because it probably has to.
Still, if you crunch the numbers, 3 weeks on, 1 week off of "hypertrophy" work would involve something like ~3 weeks of these cycles with ~10 days off between them. Even with lower volume "strength" work during the deload weeks, I have to think we are, to some degree, restoring our muscles' ability to respond to lighter loads again.
Would it work as well as a pure SD for a true HST cycle? No, but, as above, compromise of design.
So, simple example of a "Westside" style routine using these principles:
Max Effort work - once a week for both an upper and lower body lift, basically working up to a single, maximal attempt in any given lift. Westside traditionally has this in the 1-3 RM range, but if you wanted to be a little more cautious, going for ~5 RM's would suit "general strength" advocates just fine, imho.
Dynamic Effort work - perhaps less important for people without competition aspirations, you could work on RFD for your chosen lifts once a week or so.
Repeated Effort work, i.e. HST - performed twice a week, proactively avoiding failure, with a moderate amount of work that is rapidly escalated in load from session to session. Every ~4th week this is skipped entirely in order to resensitize muscle tissue for subsequent cycles.
I
imported_fearfactory
Guest
very interesting read and also well written. hats off to you for taking the time to share.
1. so that I'm clear, your example at the end would see 11 workouts over a 4 week period. 3x weekly(2 RE and 1 ME) for 3 weeks = 9. 2x for the 4th week (ME)....at that point the program would reset. I'm mainly interested to know what you're getting at in "rapidly escalating loads". Realizing that this will vary from person to person and level to level, I'd be interested, specifically, in how this would work with an athlete with some experience (yourself for example).
2. I'm not terribly familiar w/ Westside or Smolov, but I know the meat & potatoes of Sheiko is 5 sets of triples w/ 80% of current 1RM. Sheiko also increases volume (dramatically) as a person moves ever closer to Master and begins using the more advanced programming.
additionally, Sheiko advocates coming back to the same exercise later in a given session, after having already fatigued yourself in that same movement w/ the intention of causing the body to further recruit the CNS in performing it again.
something like:
Day 1: Squat, Bench, Squat
Day 2: Dead, Bench, Dead
Day 3: Bench, Squat, Bench
I'd like to hear your thoughts or response if possible.
1. so that I'm clear, your example at the end would see 11 workouts over a 4 week period. 3x weekly(2 RE and 1 ME) for 3 weeks = 9. 2x for the 4th week (ME)....at that point the program would reset. I'm mainly interested to know what you're getting at in "rapidly escalating loads". Realizing that this will vary from person to person and level to level, I'd be interested, specifically, in how this would work with an athlete with some experience (yourself for example).
2. I'm not terribly familiar w/ Westside or Smolov, but I know the meat & potatoes of Sheiko is 5 sets of triples w/ 80% of current 1RM. Sheiko also increases volume (dramatically) as a person moves ever closer to Master and begins using the more advanced programming.
additionally, Sheiko advocates coming back to the same exercise later in a given session, after having already fatigued yourself in that same movement w/ the intention of causing the body to further recruit the CNS in performing it again.
something like:
Day 1: Squat, Bench, Squat
Day 2: Dead, Bench, Dead
Day 3: Bench, Squat, Bench
I'd like to hear your thoughts or response if possible.
<div>
(fearfactory @ Aug. 20 2008,8:03)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">very interesting read and also well written. hats off to you for taking the time to share.
1. so that I'm clear, your example at the end would see 11 workouts over a 4 week period. 3x weekly(2 RE and 1 ME) for 3 weeks = 9. 2x for the 4th week (ME)....at that point the program would reset. I'm mainly interested to know what you're getting at in "rapidly escalating loads". Realizing that this will vary from person to person and level to level, I'd be interested, specifically, in how this would work with an athlete with some experience (yourself for example).
2. I'm not terribly familiar w/ Westside or Smolov, but I know the meat & potatoes of Sheiko is 5 sets of triples w/ 80% of current 1RM. Sheiko also increases volume (dramatically) as a person moves ever closer to Master and begins using the more advanced programming.
additionally, Sheiko advocates coming back to the same exercise later in a given session, after having already fatigued yourself in that same movement w/ the intention of causing the body to further recruit the CNS in performing it again.
something like:
Day 1: Squat, Bench, Squat
Day 2: Dead, Bench, Dead
Day 3: Bench, Squat, Bench
I'd like to hear your thoughts or response if possible.</div>
1. What I had in mind, basically, was a Westside style setup. For a very good, basic explanation of the "default" template, read the following:
http://www.elitefitness.com/forum....68.html
Basically, I'm envisioning an upper/lower split, with two uppers and two lowers per week. Something like a Monday - Lower, Tuesday - Upper, Wednesday - off, Thursday - Lower, Friday - Upper, Saturday/Sunday - off setup.
Oversimplified example:
Monday:
ME Squat or Deadlift Variant
HST stuff
Tuesday:
DE Bench
HST stuff
Thursday:
DE Squat
HST stuff
Friday:
ME Bench
HST stuff
The "HST stuff" is basically just HST. Think of it as a "normal" 2 week minicycle drawn out over three weeks, with 6 total sessions, just like we use in the 15's, 10's, or 5's.
However, with our slightly reduced frequency, this is one opportunity to slightly up the volume . You could, of course, just use a "favorite" rep range (e.g. 15's or 10's or whatever), but you could also do a single set of 5, 10, and 15 reps per exercise per session. Over the course of the three weeks, the "rapidly escalating load" is the same as it is in a normal HST cycle, though in this case our sets of 5, 10, and 15 each would rapidly escalate session to session, ending in our approximate 5, 10, and 15 rep maxes on the last session of the third week.
Of course, we'd have to be VERY cautious about the interaction of the HST stuff with our strength work - proactively avoiding failure and using some of the fatigue management methods here would be advisable.
2) Not sure what response you're looking at for Sheiko, but the basic pattern for most of that stuff is accumulation-->deload-->intensification, i.e. basic dual factor logic. Russian routines tend to smother people with some combination of frequency and volume, somehow deload you, and then, theoretically, your gains in fitness are revealed, and these gains can be sizable assuming you survived the accumulation period.
Note that the super basic SST logic I outlined on the first page of this thread an example of this same performance-based logic, though, imho, in a bit more straightforward way.
(fearfactory @ Aug. 20 2008,8:03)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">very interesting read and also well written. hats off to you for taking the time to share.
1. so that I'm clear, your example at the end would see 11 workouts over a 4 week period. 3x weekly(2 RE and 1 ME) for 3 weeks = 9. 2x for the 4th week (ME)....at that point the program would reset. I'm mainly interested to know what you're getting at in "rapidly escalating loads". Realizing that this will vary from person to person and level to level, I'd be interested, specifically, in how this would work with an athlete with some experience (yourself for example).
2. I'm not terribly familiar w/ Westside or Smolov, but I know the meat & potatoes of Sheiko is 5 sets of triples w/ 80% of current 1RM. Sheiko also increases volume (dramatically) as a person moves ever closer to Master and begins using the more advanced programming.
additionally, Sheiko advocates coming back to the same exercise later in a given session, after having already fatigued yourself in that same movement w/ the intention of causing the body to further recruit the CNS in performing it again.
something like:
Day 1: Squat, Bench, Squat
Day 2: Dead, Bench, Dead
Day 3: Bench, Squat, Bench
I'd like to hear your thoughts or response if possible.</div>
1. What I had in mind, basically, was a Westside style setup. For a very good, basic explanation of the "default" template, read the following:
http://www.elitefitness.com/forum....68.html
Basically, I'm envisioning an upper/lower split, with two uppers and two lowers per week. Something like a Monday - Lower, Tuesday - Upper, Wednesday - off, Thursday - Lower, Friday - Upper, Saturday/Sunday - off setup.
Oversimplified example:
Monday:
ME Squat or Deadlift Variant
HST stuff
Tuesday:
DE Bench
HST stuff
Thursday:
DE Squat
HST stuff
Friday:
ME Bench
HST stuff
The "HST stuff" is basically just HST. Think of it as a "normal" 2 week minicycle drawn out over three weeks, with 6 total sessions, just like we use in the 15's, 10's, or 5's.
However, with our slightly reduced frequency, this is one opportunity to slightly up the volume . You could, of course, just use a "favorite" rep range (e.g. 15's or 10's or whatever), but you could also do a single set of 5, 10, and 15 reps per exercise per session. Over the course of the three weeks, the "rapidly escalating load" is the same as it is in a normal HST cycle, though in this case our sets of 5, 10, and 15 each would rapidly escalate session to session, ending in our approximate 5, 10, and 15 rep maxes on the last session of the third week.
Of course, we'd have to be VERY cautious about the interaction of the HST stuff with our strength work - proactively avoiding failure and using some of the fatigue management methods here would be advisable.
2) Not sure what response you're looking at for Sheiko, but the basic pattern for most of that stuff is accumulation-->deload-->intensification, i.e. basic dual factor logic. Russian routines tend to smother people with some combination of frequency and volume, somehow deload you, and then, theoretically, your gains in fitness are revealed, and these gains can be sizable assuming you survived the accumulation period.
Note that the super basic SST logic I outlined on the first page of this thread an example of this same performance-based logic, though, imho, in a bit more straightforward way.
scientific muscle
New Member
HST theory is truly fascinating, and I feel like I am finally starting to 'get' it.
I think that the whole idea of starting 'light' and gradually progressing the loads in ever decreasing rep ranges until maxing out and then deconditioning for another cycle is one of the most critical ideas unique to HST.
Sure, periodized training existed long before Bryan created his HST theory. But his research clearly demonstrated that the 'periodized' format of undulating rep range progression has KEY muscle hypertrophy signalling stimulation built right into it.
A fact that eluded me for a long time was that cycling load (tension relative to conditioning) is just as important as the load itself (absolute tension.) And that is the key factor which distinguishes HST from anything else.
I finally am grasping the fundamental idea which is quoted here from the HST FAQ:
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">HST's method of using submaximal weights at the beginning of the cycle is based on the fact that the effectiveness of a given load to stimulate growth is dependant on the condition of the tissue at the time the load is applied. This is a very important concept for natural lifters. It is also based on the need to maintain the health (injury free) of the tissues.
You can't really apply the external load based simply on the capacity to do so, and expect to the muscle to respond the way you want it to (growth). Too much weight too soon, even though you can lift it, will not always result in an optimal hypertrophic response. Not only that, but the greater the load, the greater the response to build resistance to it, and/or get injured.
Why not just do as many reps as possible (A.K.A. train at “100% intensity”, or “train to failure”) for every increment/workout instead of changing it only every 2 weeks? Because when using sufficient frequency to stimulate rapid hypertrophy, you tend to get CNS burn out. Fortunately, it isn’t necessary to train at “100% intensity” to grow quickly. This is a very unpopular statement to experienced lifters who have prided themselves on torturous workouts. They take pride in their toughness and in their willingness to self inflict nauseating exhaustion workout after workout. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THIS. As long as it is not taught as the correct way to train for “growth”.
HST incorporates ever increasing loads in order to stay ahead of the adaptive curve. This curve is set by the tissues level of conditioning at the time the load is applied. This is as much an art as a science. Because we can't do a biopsy of the muscles every time we train, we have to guess how much, how hard, and how often, based on the available research an the "feeling" of the tissue at the time. Why use submax weights? Because using max weights eventually stops working, and simply increases the risk of injury.</div>
I think that the whole idea of starting 'light' and gradually progressing the loads in ever decreasing rep ranges until maxing out and then deconditioning for another cycle is one of the most critical ideas unique to HST.
Sure, periodized training existed long before Bryan created his HST theory. But his research clearly demonstrated that the 'periodized' format of undulating rep range progression has KEY muscle hypertrophy signalling stimulation built right into it.
A fact that eluded me for a long time was that cycling load (tension relative to conditioning) is just as important as the load itself (absolute tension.) And that is the key factor which distinguishes HST from anything else.
I finally am grasping the fundamental idea which is quoted here from the HST FAQ:
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">HST's method of using submaximal weights at the beginning of the cycle is based on the fact that the effectiveness of a given load to stimulate growth is dependant on the condition of the tissue at the time the load is applied. This is a very important concept for natural lifters. It is also based on the need to maintain the health (injury free) of the tissues.
You can't really apply the external load based simply on the capacity to do so, and expect to the muscle to respond the way you want it to (growth). Too much weight too soon, even though you can lift it, will not always result in an optimal hypertrophic response. Not only that, but the greater the load, the greater the response to build resistance to it, and/or get injured.
Why not just do as many reps as possible (A.K.A. train at “100% intensity”, or “train to failure”) for every increment/workout instead of changing it only every 2 weeks? Because when using sufficient frequency to stimulate rapid hypertrophy, you tend to get CNS burn out. Fortunately, it isn’t necessary to train at “100% intensity” to grow quickly. This is a very unpopular statement to experienced lifters who have prided themselves on torturous workouts. They take pride in their toughness and in their willingness to self inflict nauseating exhaustion workout after workout. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THIS. As long as it is not taught as the correct way to train for “growth”.
HST incorporates ever increasing loads in order to stay ahead of the adaptive curve. This curve is set by the tissues level of conditioning at the time the load is applied. This is as much an art as a science. Because we can't do a biopsy of the muscles every time we train, we have to guess how much, how hard, and how often, based on the available research an the "feeling" of the tissue at the time. Why use submax weights? Because using max weights eventually stops working, and simply increases the risk of injury.</div>