Even if HST did not provide the quickest gains in mass, there are other positive points. I had a discussion with Jules a while back, and he added that, aside from being at your optimal size if you follow HST (i.e., sarcomere & sarcoplasmic hypertrophy are both focused on equally), you will be at your optimal injury prevention level for the weight you lift. This may be trivial to some, but if you think about it, it's kind of cool. You cycle through the 15's and 10's often enough that your body is getting time away from heavy weights and the tendons/ligaments/connective tissues/joints are given time to catch up. Then, you set new records, pace through the post-5's or negatives, and then loop back. It seems like a nice balance. Now I'm not saying HST isn't the best, but even if it wasn't, how much better would any other program be? That's what you have to think about. You're not going to be short-changing yourself with HST. It's not as if some other program would have you 10-15 lbs. bigger in a year's time. Plus, even if it would, unless this is your career, why worry so much? Honestly, I'd like to stick with a routine that has a lot to offer. With HST, I feel I get: A) A program (no semantic games, I know it's really a set of principles) that works great for hypertrophy (both kinds). B) A steady progression and planned jump in weights from cycle to cycle to continually gain strength. C) A slew of ways to tweak. May be possible with any routine, but from what I've seen, there are a million and one kinds of HST cycles. Skip the 15's, longer or shorter SD, no SD, compounds only, all the techniques that can be used through the cycle, frequency tweaks, etc. D) Focus on injury prevention and overall health and function rather than pursuing size/strength without consideration for other delicate tissues. I don't know, I could probably think of more reasons, but HST is good.