Hard to wrap my head around (submax) HST

K

kal-el

New Member
Im sure this has been asked before and I have no doubt its highly annoyign when a new person comes on the forum and asks the same old questions.

The thing is though I have read so much of the stickys on hst that I think my head is about to pop.

Im not going to lie I find it hard to believe working so submaximally produces results. Its just very difficult to get my head around.

I remember reading in one of the many stickies that a good thing about hst is it allows you to workout frequently by not going to failue. What if youre such a beginner that you can go to a rep max failure 3 times a week? I have been following GSLP, if no one is aware of what it is its pretty much 2x5,1x5+ on all lifts going to failure on the last set. At the moment I can still go up in weight while going to failure and most of the time I hit the same number of reps as the previous weight. Should I just keep training like this considering I am able to hit training frequently

squat 2x/week deadlift once on wednesday and cycle bench/curls/shrugs with press/chins/shrugs.

Or is HST still something I could benefit from?

Im not going to lie I always find it hard to put on size, I get strong quickly but size is harder to come by plus Im a little fat about 17% bodyfat.

Im just having a really difficult time seeing that I can take my 15rm back off the weight for how ever many sessions Im going to do and still make progress.

So if any one can say something to help me wrap my head around it, would be great. I am very interested in HST as staying injury free is something I would really want.

Thanks.
 
I just read in another thread that SS follows the basic premise of HST? I didnt really put on much size when I did ss, so did I read that right?
 
Premise/principle is not the same as application.


If you want proof, go and find a photo of lcars in the photo thread, or Totentanz. HST is merely a pragmatic derivative of cumulative scientific studies.

'Failure' is not the the point at which your muscles cannot function any longer, it's the point at which your CNS can't make them do the function any longer. Think of it as a courier failing to deliver the message. You will be able to train more frequently if you resist going to failure. Training more frequently will increase conditions for hypertrophy. 'Failure' itself is not a pre-condition for hypertrophy.

And finally, if you have put on terrific amounts of muscle training in the manner which you do, then maybe nothing here will convince you to give HST a chance.
 
Kal-El. There are plenty of training regimes that you as an inexperienced lifter would believe dont work. But me as an experienced one will tell you do. The best experience i had with strength/size gains was a programmed called DC. Mike Mentzer preached of using only 1 work set. the real key to making anything like this work is doing the program to a "T". in that DC it calls for a REP TONE of 6 second negative 4 positive. so if you blow through 15 reps at a 1-1 u wont feel anything of course. So really you can get whatever you want out of this, but what are you going to put into it. do the reps correctly, controlled, slow. and there is no way you wont gain.
 
Failure isn't necessary for growth although there certainly is benefit to working 'hard'. As Blade has posted (and myo-reps based on):
"The research is pretty clear on the fact that you eventually need to recruit most of/all of the motor units and muscle fibers in a muscle to stimulate maximum muscle growth." You can read more about it here http://borgefagerli.com/myo-reps-in-english/ under Growing Bigger.

I also remember asking Bryan about this and he said that you should be working hard and to slow rep speed or do more reps or sets to achieve that. Just end the set around 1-2 reps shy of failure or 'when rep speed slows significantly' as Blade would put it.
 
I definitely agree that working 1-2 reps shy of failure is ideal, but that's a figurative mile away from actual failure in terms of recovery etc.
 
Thanks for the replies, I guess the part I have the biggest problem getting my head around is is my 10rm is 75kg and I back that off to 65kg to allow for the 2 week build up but I can already at this point do 3x10 at 70kg, then would I not just be wasting a week? I guess I dont see how backing off that much to what I could already do would still allow my to make progress. Dont get me wrong Im not saying its wrong or I disagree Im just trying to get my head around it and see if the idea Ive got in my head is right?

The program Im doing now I mostly stop 1 reps shy of complete failure, rarely I hit total concentric failure and its usually an accident, I think I have one more rep but I dont. I guess in a sense does that follow HST principles?

I did not get huge gains from it I got okay gains but injured myself not long after starting and have been off for a good year dealing with the injury (not training related). Thats one reason why staying healthy and injury free is important at the moment.

I checked out the pic of Totentanz, he looks like a big dude. Im going to read through his log etc when I get a chance.
 
The submaxing is critical to lifters of moderate and advanced training age. If your training age is "beginner" you can push it some more, because at "beginner" your exertion will not overrun your recovery and you can add weight or reps every session. I am pulling this from dual-factor theory ala Rippetoe. The HST argument for submaxing is as follows: It works better in the long-run and there's data back this up. Periodization studies show that after 6-9 weeks periodized routines outperform classical progressive resistance even in beginners.

-Q
 
Im definitely in that beginner stage where I can either add reps or weight each session, I guess that adds to my difficulty in understanding sub max, because in a way for a beginner after you do something that becomes sub max.

I didnt know that about periodization, thanks.
 
FistOfFury said:
Failure isn't necessary for growth although there certainly is benefit to working 'hard'. As Blade has posted (and myo-reps based on):
"The research is pretty clear on the fact that you eventually need to recruit most of/all of the motor units and muscle fibers in a muscle to stimulate maximum muscle growth." You can read more about it here http://borgefagerli.com/myo-reps-in-english/ under Growing Bigger.

I also remember asking Bryan about this and he said that you should be working hard and to slow rep speed or do more reps or sets to achieve that. Just end the set around 1-2 reps shy of failure or 'when rep speed slows significantly' as Blade would put it.
Click to expand...


I read this article and in it he mentions you can go to failure if doing myo reps but its better not to as you will get more myo reps out. Do people follow the myoreps approach with HST full body style workouts?
 
Absolutely. Myo reps is just a way to get more reps at higher fibre activation and can be used in any program. Blade's beginner/intermediate myo reps routine is essentially HST (1-2 weeks at each rep range using linear progression).
A few of us here like to use them through the 15's and 10's. They're not really needed for 5's as you already have full fibre activation from the first rep as the weight is so heavy. But I still use them as clusters to keep my workout time down.
 
All this talk on optimal hypertrophy is damn confusing. As far as I understand HST principles are frequency and using submax loads working up to using your RM once each two week cycle and staying away from muscular failure.

Then the site I just read about myoreps says its all well and good to go to failure and to use a set number of reps instead of sets and reps.

I also just read a huge meta analysis on hypertrophy and it summed it up if doing conventional weight lifting with a normal tempo, then optimal hypertrophy is seen with between 40-60 reps per muscle group, two-three times a week, using youre 8-10RM for sets of 6-12 and going to failure or near failure.

Then it brings in questions like what constitutes a muscle group being hit? for example would chest be including as being a muscle group hit by an over head press etc.

When you say Blades beginner routine is essentiall hst with linear progression, is that for example starting with a weight and just using myoreps to hit say 30 total reps in the 15 and continually adding weight and if you cant get 15 or more on the first set then you just use as many sets as it takes to get to the 30 total reps?

My understanding of the myoreps, is doing your first set to near failure then resting 20 or so seconds hitting another set until near failure and continue doing this until your total reps are done?
 
Sorry for throwing more confusion at you! I'll try to sort out your concerns (although given the nature of training probably just add more!)

First, HST is neither for or against training to failure. Although training with such high frequency sort of rules out training to failure regularly as it will limit your volume and wear you down. Neither Bryan or Blade seek out failure intentionally. For Bryan it MAY happen on your last workouts of each rep block and Blade instructs to train 1-2 reps shy of failure 99% of the time. The research is clear that there is nothing magical happening at failure BUT coming close is important. Stopping 1-2 reps shy gives all the benefits but enables you to train more frequently with more volume.

The Wernbom meta analysis has been talked about here before with some input from Bryan so do a search for that. Bryan says he shoots for those rep targets himself. Also, in the FAQ he mentions about the more advanced you become the more sets/reps you will have to do to overcome years of repeated bout effect and suggests splitting the workout into 6 days a week or twice a day. Personally, I don't get anything from hitting each muscle 2-3 sets/3x week any more and I now train everything 2x week with a higher volume (using myo reps and auto regulation) still following HST principles. As an aside, the 40-60 reps target is for straight sets and if using myo reps is less (around 20 reps) because of the higher fibre activation or 'more effective reps' as Blade puts it.

Overlap should be factored into a routine. If you have just hammered your chest with 3-4 sets then delts need a few sets less (2-3) and triceps maybe just 1-2. It would probably take an article to sort that out though! I use auto regulation which sorts it all out for me!

Here is links to Blade's myo reps series of articles. In part 3 and 4 he lists some progressions and routines. It is translated from Norwegian so it takes a bit of reading to piece it all together.

http://translate.googleusercontent....usjon/&usg=ALkJrhhjqXh1_FU4gHX2zo-2NTP7W9ETJA

http://translate.googleusercontent....engde/&usg=ALkJrhheNQSpXw619Vw94uJQ6gvX21-r0A

http://translate.googleusercontent....esjon/&usg=ALkJrhg5mnk_5lxTgz6g3NREljqNfBZc-w

http://translate.googleusercontent....jonen/&usg=ALkJrhjerDue2bAYRlC4rELrWD8nmbNLqQ
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top