HIT VS HST

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">HIT is better supported by the research than HST. I've spoken with a few people who are familiar with the studies HST is based on and read several myself, and much of the HST program is not really supported by the research. Haycock makes some huge assumptions in his conclusions.</div>

I thought I'd copy some real &quot;crapola&quot; from Drew Baye also at Darden's website.

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">His &quot;strategic deconditioning&quot; is based on his misunderstanding of repeated bout effect. It's just an extended recovery period. Training frequency and resistance increases should not be based on an arbitrary, one-size-fits-all schedule, but rather on individual requirements. </div>

Some more...
laugh.gif
We gotto this conclusion way back, the vanilla program is only recommended to start off and get an understanding of HST!

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Drew,

I had serious doubts about HST, thanks for clarifying it for me.

Glenn</div>

Unforunatelly the &quot;light&quot; shines on!
laugh.gif
 
Drew has actually impressed me as of late with his willingness to think outside the box.

I posted some thoughts on strain and hypertrophy and he seemed pretty receptive to the idea. He's also strayed away from the HIT, RDA food pyramid style thinking on diet, as well.

On top of this, he's also experimenting with a group of twins using a variation of max-stimulation on one of them, and appears excited about the results.

So, I guess my point is that anybody's mind can ultimately change, but it will always be at their own pace. I'm curious to see if the max-stim experiment in general will give Drew pause for thought.
 
I actually sent DR. Squats an email at the time I started this thread, no reply yet.

I was wondering his opinion on HST.
biggrin.gif
 
I trained HIT before for months and now I'm training with the HST principles.
HIT is good but the HST aproach is better in my opinion.
The discussion is long and pointless ...

I had finished a first cycle on HST and I may say that it was a succes, I gained muscle.
A good protein, glutamin and creatine helped ofcourse. I took a lot of supplements during the workout.

Both are good for you and what I recomend is to combine the principles without worries:
Try the first 6 weeks(the 15, 10, 5 or how you do it) with HST principles and then, in the last 2-3 weeks of your cycle try a HIGH and INTENSE TRAINING(HIT).  
cool.gif
 and then SD.

For that you need to read and practice about both of them: HST is good I think but also knowing how to make drop sets(or breakdowns), super-slow reps, pre-exhaustions(HIT methods) can help you a lot in the last 2-3 weeks of your cycle.
 
cronos: glad you had a good cycle. Excellent stuff.

Re HIT at the end of the cycle: Once you are up to your heaviest 5s the HIT approach is probably not that good an idea. Here's why I think this: If you were to push to momentary muscular failure in your squats, deads and other compounds with 90%+ RM loads you would find it very hard to get in enough work without having to rest a long time between sets. At this end of the cycle, fatigue is the biggest obstacle in the way of achieving required volume to keep the amount of work progressing for the cycle.

Don't forget that working to failure is an indication of exhuastion, not activation. A motor unit can be activated without failing. If the weight is heavy enough, as it will be at the end of the 5s, all motor units will be participating.

Bryan discussed this a while ago <div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Yes, the reason you avoid training to failure and especially using &quot;forced reps&quot; is to avoid undue CNS drain. After all, &quot;fatigue&quot; is not what makes you grow. Taining to exhaustion only delays your next workout, thus slowing your ability to grow. However, if strength is your goal rather than growth, you should &quot;generally&quot; be using a 2/week schedule rather than 3/week anyway. I say general because it changes as fatigue should be periodized.

Training to failure during an HST cycle will not make you any stronger than stopping short of failure. If you are concerned with strength, take weeks 7 and 8 to work on strength. Reduce the number of exericses and do more sets. Delay the next workout 1 day if you begin to fall behind in CNS recovery.

As for training to &quot;failure&quot; begin required to elevate protein synthesis, it isn't. Training to failure is a neurological issue, not a metabolic issue.

The reason subjects train to failure in most training studies is because that's the only way they know how to judge effort. Once the subject can lift his/her 10RM 12 times (just an example) they increase the weight.

Keep in mind that until very recently all bodybuilding methods are gathered from trickle-down strength training research. Where do you think guys doing exercise research get their &quot;training protocols&quot; from? Strength training books.</div>

As far as techniques like super-slow go, I think it is true to say that you will get better at lifting at whatever speed you usually train at (SAID principle). However, if you work the concentric part of the rep as fast as you can, whilst keeping form correct, your muscles will have to generate more power to do so. You will find that, if you train with power output in mind during the concentric part of the motion, increases in strength will translate to slower rep speeds but if you train slowly, increases in slow-rep-speed strength will not usually translate to higher rep speeds. In my book, that would indicate that training with power output in mind (fast concentric) is most likely a better idea than going slowly. Momentum will not be a problem when the weights are heavy enough as your rep speeds will slow down anyway.
 
Doing HIT for the last few weeks of your HST cycle is probably one of the worst routes you could go. Do negatives at least, or cluster to work up to singles or pretty much anything EXCEPT HIT. I don't know why they put &quot;Intensity&quot; in the title, since working to failure pretty much negates being able to work with real intensity. Sure, it might FEEL like it's intense, but when you are lifting much less than your 5 rep max, but you've hit failure on something earlier so you can only go 5 reps with this wuss weight, I don't see how that is really intense.


Re: Drew Baye - I'm actually impressed that he's willing to try out things like Max-Stim. There is this stereotype that everyone in HIT is completely closeminded and almost cult-like in their mindset, but he's proven that he's willing to try going beyond that. I thought he was a total loser after seeing his video &quot;Outright Hard Work&quot; since from that video - my wife was astonished when she watched it because he's smaller than I am, and I'm a relative newbie to lifting compared to him... but anyway, he's apparently turned over a new leaf, and considering the pull he has with most of the HIT crowd, I think this is very, very cool.
 
<div>
(cronos @ Jan. 15 2007,07:42)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Hmmm, I have to read again the HST documentation before starting the next cycle...</div>
Good idea. I do that as often as I can. There's always something extra that sticks whenever I revisit the info. Just wish it would stay stuck longer. Darn senility!
biggrin.gif
 
Excellent suggestions by Lol and Totentanz. I agree that near the end of the cycle clustering and Max-Stim are the way to go. This enables one to keep increasing the weight WITHOUT having to lower work output. Yeah, doing 8 reps with your 8RM FEELS hard (work to failure), but doing 20 total reps with your 3RM using fatigue management techniques (as I said, clustering and Max-Stim) is far superior if you are after hypertrophy, IMHO.

Regards,
Dimitris
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top