Dosteov
Something for you to ponder on:
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I think it comes down to a couple issues which I'll address after a short review for those new to HST.
First let me clarify that HST is based on physiologically sound principles, not numbers. In short, they are:
• Progressive load
• Training volume
• Training frequency
• Conditioning (Repeated Bout effect)/Strategic Deconditioning
So we are dealing with 4 basic issues, Load, Volume, Frequency and Conditioning. Within these basic factors we have reps, sets, and rest. HST differs from previous training methods in many aspects, but particularly in how it incorporates knowledge of how the "cell" physiologically responds to the training stimulus in its methodology. Previous methods focus on effort (A.K.A Intensity), current voluntary strength, and psychological factors such as fatigue and variety (i.e. many different exercises).
• The number of Reps is determined by the minimum effective load (this changes over time based on Conditioning)
• The number of Sets is determined by the minimum effective volume (this changes over time according to current load and Conditioning status.)
• The Rest between sets is determined by the amount of time required to regain sufficient strength to successfully achieve the minimum effective Volume.
• The Frequency (rest between workouts) is determined by the ability of the CNS to recover sufficiently to maintain baseline "health" indicators. It is also determined by the time course of genetic expression resultant from the previous workout.
• The interval of Strategic Deconditioning (SD) is determined by the time course of adaptation to the individual’s maximum weight loads. In other words, SD is required to reset growth potential after plateauing. The duration of SD is determined by the level of conditioning attained during the training cycle.
Anyone who argues with these points after understanding them correctly is in error. That is a strong statement but it is true. These are principles that we "know" from research and experience. The data from this research is not theoretically based. It is based on identification, measurements, and direct microscopic observation. All future research will show us is more genetic detail, NOT that we were wrong on some sort of fundamental basis.</div>