HST Book Science

A

abanger

Member
<div>
(Bryan Haycock @ Hypertrophy-Specific Training,HST Methods)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">As the research continues to explore the facets of load induced muscle hypertrophy, HST will apply the new knowledge and become even more effective. For today, HST represents the state of the art and science of hypertrophy. </div>
Will the HST book cover the science behind Max-Stimulation &amp; Myo-Reps?  If so, will you be updating the HST methods to be something more akin to MS &amp; MR?
 
abanger

MaxStim is Dan's idea and he has an e-book covering it, and Myo-reps is Blade's for which I think he also has a book or is busy writing one.

Bryan might mention the two and may hava a chapter for comparison purposes but I don't think he'd expand as his book will cover HST and I tend to think that he'll not go generic!
biggrin.gif


The only issue, and that many of us have tried to pick on him for that, is that he's taking rather long!
biggrin.gif


We're all anxious to get once it pops up!
wink.gif
 
<div>
(Fausto @ Aug. 27 2009,4:40)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">abanger

MaxStim is Dan's idea and he has an e-book covering it, and Myo-reps is Blade's for which I think he also has a book or is busy writing one.

Bryan might mention the two and may hava a chapter for comparison purposes but I don't think he'd expand as his book will cover HST and I tend to think that he'll not go generic!
biggrin.gif


The only issue, and that many of us have tried to pick on him for that, is that he's taking rather long!
biggrin.gif


We're all anxious to get once it pops up!
wink.gif
</div>
Fausto,

Notice I explicitly asked if the book would cover the science behind MS &amp; MR, not the programs themselves per se.  If it did, then the HST methods would have to, in Bryan's words, &quot;apply the new knolwedge.&quot;
 
<div>
(leegee38 @ Aug. 28 2009,8:48)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I just admire your optimism that there will be a book ...  
tounge.gif
</div>
I'm still waiting. Although I have pretty much lost all hope that there will actually be a book.
 
I'd love a proper printed version of an HST book but even if Bryan only offered it as an eBook I'd buy it. Like leegee, though, I'm not holding my breath anymore.
 
&quot;When&quot; (not if) when I get the book published it will cover the science behind it all. One of the primary points of my book is that &quot;hypertrophy-specific training&quot; is just that, any training that a person does for the sole purpose of making a muscle larger is in fact hypertrophy-specific training.

Now, not all methods will be equally effective, but if they adhere to the basic tenants they will induce growth to some extent and/or at some rate. After reading the book, a person should be able to assertain the pros and cons of any method.
 
That's great to hear Bryan. It'll make a great addition to my library.
smile.gif
 
Ummm...while we're at it, Bryan, have you played with the MR's?
Your opinion? (I find them awesome, if only for the giant pump alone)
wink.gif
 
<div>
(Bryan Haycock @ Aug. 31 2009,7:42)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">&quot;When&quot; (not if) when I get the book published it will cover the science behind it all. One of the primary points of my book is that &quot;hypertrophy-specific training&quot; is just that, any training that a person does for the sole purpose of making a muscle larger is in fact hypertrophy-specific training.

Now, not all methods will be equally effective, but if they adhere to the basic tenants they will induce growth to some extent and/or at some rate. After reading the book, a person should be able to assertain the pros and cons of any method.</div>
But, just as in the HST article, you'll have to offer some &quot;vanilla&quot; methods in the book; in said article, you suggest &quot;Progressively Adjusting reps to accommodate Progressive Load.&quot;  However, since, as you stated, &quot;not all methods will be equally effective,&quot; will the HST book default to superior methods as found in Max-Stimulation &amp; Myo-Reps?
 
<div>
(abanger @ Sep. 01 2009,4:26)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">...will the HST book default to superior methods as found in Max-Stimulation &amp; Myo-Reps?</div><div>
(Bryan Haycock @ Sep. 01 2009,1:42)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Now, not all methods will be equally effective, but if they adhere to the basic tenants they will induce growth to some extent and/or at some rate. After reading the book, a person should be able to assertain the pros and cons of any method.</div>
I think the key here is to be able to evaluate your progress in accordance to the basic tenets, no matter what method you use. The science gives us clues to what we need to do to keep progressing.

Both MS and MR manages fatigue, but if you dig into the science behind these methods you will find they are the opposite in what they aim for (in terms of signalling pathways and type of primary stimuli), although in practice they look very much the same.

MS and MR are both methods that adhere to the basic HST tenets mechanical and progressive load, but what about chronic stimuli and strategic deconditioning? You need to continue adressing the factors that affect recovery and conditioning to the load (RBE) to keep on progressing. We all know that this depends on our current conditioning and recovery capacity, wich may vary from bout to bout. We can affect this by adjusting volume, frequency, intensity, density, or even type of exercise, but also by covering aspects such as sleep, nutrition and other stress factors. No method can cover all of these aspects. Only you yourself can, on an individual basis. And that requires experience and willingness to keep record of your progress (or lack of), and know which parameters to adjust.

To claim one method as superior is perhaps pre-mature. They all have their use in the grand matrix of hypertrophy-specific training. You just have to figure out when to use what, and to what extent, and thus, why.

Basic, huh..?  
tounge.gif


Edit: The basic tenants have moved out in favor for the basic tenets! &lt;&lt;copy-paste&gt;&gt; Thanks, Lol!  
wink.gif
 
We're talking tenets here right? I've had some basic tenants but found they didn't always pay their rent on time.
tounge.gif
 
nkl makes a good point...and he has a cool avatar. So he must be right.
biggrin.gif


Seriously though, although I can suggest a &quot;cookie cutter&quot; routine that will cover most average lifter's bases, the more experienced guys know that they will have to adjust things here and there to meet he needs of the moment, whether that be incorporating rest/pause techniques, supersets, giant sets, drop sets, eccentrics, or whatever.
 
...and while we're at it, let's throw in the individual's history, physics, needs, goals, injuries and age...
Simple.
rock.gif
 
Agree, from NKL down!
Besides it's a bit early to be making any claims of superiority just yet . . . . . though I'm liking the addition of MR into my HST program . . . . . however I've had to cut MR reps down during the 10's by about 5 or 6 as I can feel signs fatigue creeping up.
 
<div>
(nkl @ Sep. 01 2009,4:10)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Both MS and MR manages fatigue, but if you dig into the science behind these methods you will find they are the opposite in what they aim for (in terms of signalling pathways and type of primary stimuli), although in practice they look very much the same.</div>
Hey NKL, how are you? It has been a long time.

Your statement here makes me inquire as to how are the pathways and aim opposite between MR and MS.

As far as I know (and I think I might have some insight
biggrin.gif
)they are quite similar with the exception of how to acheive it. Borge is using some fatigue buildup to achieve higher activation, I use load. Then both systems employ fatigue management to be able to provide enough work at higher activation levels to kick off the signalling cascade.
 
<div>
(abanger @ Aug. 26 2009,7:28)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
(Bryan Haycock @ Hypertrophy-Specific Training,HST Methods)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">As the research continues to explore the facets of load induced muscle hypertrophy, HST will apply the new knowledge and become even more effective. For today, HST represents the state of the art and science of hypertrophy. </div>
Will the HST book cover the science behind Max-Stimulation &amp; Myo-Reps?  If so, will you be updating the HST methods to be something more akin to MS &amp; MR?</div>
Even though Bryan has already answered I wanted to add that any book containing the currently known signalling events will contain elements from about any training system ever employed because anytime you lift a weight in all it's various forms it will at some point impact one or another cascade. It's unavoidable, even if not truly Hypertrophy Specific.
 
<div>
(Bryan Haycock @ Aug. 31 2009,7:42)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">&quot;When&quot; (not if) when I get the book published it will cover the science behind it all.</div>
Hey Bryan,

My offer still stands
wink.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top