Real Deal

<div>
(NeeBone @ Jul. 05 2006,13:36)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">For someone in his 30s I could have sworn he was 15.</div>
Actually I was thinking more like 12. He or she sounds like a child. Some of this person’s emotional out bursts are a little too emotional &quot;if you know what I mean&quot;(could be a female or she-male). On the other hand, it’s not unlike roid rage either…hmmmmm.
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I am 6'2&quot; with pretty long arms and biceps that are just about 17 1/2&quot; and I feel like a frickin string bean at times!</div>

I hear you Spyke, I am the same height, but with even smaller arms
sad.gif


<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I haven't forgot his sorry attitude.</div>

Joe, Either have I...

Real Deal,
Doing 15 exercises, 1 set each, full body, 3x/week, with some progression sounds like a pretty decent routine that follows all HST principals outside of SD.

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I don't believe in using submaximal weighs MOST of the time.</div>

I wouldn't either until I tried HST. The longer (6-8 weeks) progressive load battles plateaus better than any other type of trick or technique.
 
Real Deal,

Regarding the many exercises that you do. You keep the volume the same as JV noted. I've done an HST cycle like that in the past. Actually, my first two cycles of HST, I performed 12-13 exercises, something like:

SLDL
Leg Press
Lat Pulldowns
Rows
Bench Press
Dips
Calf Raises
Shrugs
Barbell Curl
Skulls
Pulley Crunches
Shoulder Press

Biz chimed in with a good post about many exercises hitting all muscles equally. You weren't saying the core 5 wasn't hitting every muscle. More or less, you were saying that some isolations and different compounds together with the core exercises will be the most efficient. I agree with you in that fact. You need chins AND rows, bench press AND dips, etc... and throw some isolations in there for specialization and different muscles such as your forearms, neck, rotator cuff area, obliques, yada yada yada... Been there, done that... I am all about simple hypertrophy, so the core exercises plus a few works for me.

I read your post in another thread about getting people to read what you said. If you come out gunslinging, people will listen. You're right, people love to read negative news. However, you pissed off a bunch of people when bash them. You can bash HST all you want... as Fausto pointed out, constructive criticism is accepted. However, you follow HST about 62.5% of the way... some failure, less progression, and no SD makes up the remaining 3/8.

There's my 2 cents, or 3...

&quot;Billsled, Bobsled, whatever it's called.&quot;
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Real: can you explain why you think that lifting an 8 RM load is what leads to slow-twitch fiber hypertophy?

How does failure make any difference? Surely it's the load not the number of reps that causes fibres to be recruited? How would lifting your 8RM load for 2 sets of 5 be worse?</div>
Don't wanna start anything here, but I believe that's because of the &quot;inroading&quot; thing that HIT guys follow.

It's not totally crap, except that it's really inefficient in the long run because of risking frying your CNS.

What they try to accomplish by going to failure is making sure the slow-twitch fibers get to work. Since fast-twitch fibers are the first to work, and slow-twitch fibers generally don't work until the fast-twitch fibers are exhausted, that gives the idea to go to failure, because if you reach failure, you are sure not only have your fast-twitch fibers worked, but also your slow-twitch have worked to failure. They don't want to stop short of failure and rest because that gives the idea that it will allow some of the fast-twitch to recover and prevent slow-twitch fibers from being fully worked.

That's the philosophy behind their training to failure, as far as I understand. It would make a lot of sense, except that it can fry the CNS.

My guess is, he does take a break every now and then, it's just not scheduled like SD every 8+ weeks. Maybe he gets off from working out every 3-6 months. I don't know, just a guess. Happens to a lot of people without them knowing, so in effect they do SD unwittingly.

Regards,
-JV
 
<div>
(jvroig @ Jul. 06 2006,01:01)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"> <div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Real: can you explain why you think that lifting an 8 RM load is what leads to slow-twitch fiber hypertophy?

How does failure make any difference? Surely it's the load not the number of reps that causes fibres to be recruited? How would lifting your 8RM load for 2 sets of 5 be worse?</div>


What they try to accomplish by going to failure is making sure the slow-twitch fibers get to work. Since fast-twitch fibers are the first to work, and slow-twitch fibers generally don't work until the fast-twitch fibers are exhausted, that gives the idea to go to failure, because if you reach failure, you are sure not only have your fast-twitch fibers worked, but also your slow-twitch have worked to failure.  They don't want to stop short of failure and rest because that gives the idea that it will allow some of the fast-twitch to recover and prevent slow-twitch fibers from being fully worked.</div>
Real Deal actually has inroading backwards as in it is the disynchronized activation of the slow-twitch muscle fibers and then fast-twitch fibers which happens during very high loads and/or fatigue. Training 1 set to failure can cause this inroading to occur due to fatigue and the inability of the slow-twitch fibers to contribute as much force, but is that really better than causing inroading by doing several sets with a sub-maximal weight where special attention is paid to eccentric and concentric velocity to maximize inroading? When it comes to inroading you have to pay mind to tension time, rep cadence, and load and decide which one is most important. For instance, is 1 set of 8 to failure using 300 lbs better than 3 sets of 8 with 285 lbs with both using the same rep cadence? Obviously one approach used more weight, but total work, tension time, and likely fatigue are greater in the other. Which brings me to this question: How is HIT better than other programs in terms of hypertrophy if it is based on accelerated inroading which is attainable by more than one pathway?
 
Hey Real Deal

If you wanted to, you could convert your routine to incorporate HST principles while keeping your own principles, without changing too much. For example:

(SD for a week or two)

Weeks 1 &amp; 2
All your compounds and your favorite two isos, 12 reps x 1 set, building up to your 12RM.

Weeks 3 &amp; 4
All your current exercises, 8 reps x 1 set, building up to your 8RM.

Weeks 5 &amp; 6
All your current exercises, 4 reps x 2 sets, building up to your 4RM.

Weeks 7 &amp; 8
Either:
- continue lifting 4x2 at your 4RM,
- do negs at your 1 or 2RM, 4x2
- continue increasing the weight and cluster to 8 reps total for each exercise

The thing about SD is that it makes you weak. So when you come back and start lifting two-thirds of your max weight, you are lifting maximally.

Give it a go if you want to. I know I'd find it much more satisfying to say &quot;I've surpassed my so-called genetic limits&quot; than &quot;I'm almost at my genetic limits&quot;.

Chris.
 
real deal at least your being less rude so you will get better opinions
biggrin.gif

why dont you try a HST cycle and see what you think a lot of us on here have done HIT and many other types of training.
personally i wouldnt slag of another training method unless i tried it first that would be daft
cool.gif
biggrin.gif
 
I'm glad this is at last getting somewhere.

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Real Deal actually has inroading backwards as in it is the disynchronized activation of the slow-twitch muscle fibers and then fast-twitch fibers which happens during very high loads and/or fatigue. Training 1 set to failure can cause this inroading to occur due to fatigue and the inability of the slow-twitch fibers to contribute as much force, but is that really better than causing inroading by doing several sets with a sub-maximal weight where special attention is paid to eccentric and concentric velocity to maximize inroading? When it comes to inroading you have to pay mind to tension time, rep cadence, and load and decide which one is most important. For instance, is 1 set of 8 to failure using 300 lbs better than 3 sets of 8 with 285 lbs with both using the same rep cadence? Obviously one approach used more weight, but total work, tension time, and likely fatigue are greater in the other. Which brings me to this question: How is HIT better than other programs in terms of hypertrophy if it is based on accelerated inroading which is attainable by more than one pathway?</div>
Excellent post by BIZ and a good read. I agree with all of his points (hey, who am I to disagree with BIZ?
laugh.gif
). And a good question to HIT followers. Anyway, I would just like to point out (to remind actually is a better word) that load is the primary determinant of size. When it comes to hypetrophy, the chief players are load and TUT (remember the p38 pathway?). So, to make a long story short, 3 sets of your 5RM (not taken to failure) are in fact better for hypertrophy than 1 set of your 8RM, even if this is taken to absolute failure. I believe this is another major point HIT fails to address.

Regards,
Dimitris
 
RD does not follow HST in that it is a programm which attempts to incorporate [/I]all principles at once, but he still follows several principles.

Looking through his routine, I see everything but SD. But if he's near his max potential, then he's working out to maintain muscle, not grow more, so the principles he is using are just right.

I just wonder how much sooner he would have reached his potential if he had SD's a little throughout his workout history.
 
Is it just me? or is there something that just doesn't ring true about this guy's routine? It all became clear when I read the satement &quot;...almost 5'6&quot; and why no actual poundages to his lifts - is he trying to hide something?

We have a saying, up in Yorkshire: &quot;once a cunt, always a cunt&quot; ergo he was, and he still is.

I like to bide my time with the ol' ad hominem.
 
5'6&quot; 170lbs jesus we really should listen to this guy hes a monster! nice one dark master havent heard that saying for a while lol yorkshire lad also.
cool.gif


s@@t this guys so small his full range of motion on deadlifts is 6 inches.
 
Maybe you shouldn't rip on him for being 5'6&quot; 170, because lots of good members (and experts) here are around 5'6&quot; - 5'8&quot; too, the most prominent of them being Dan and Fausto since they are well loved HST experts. Aside from that, go ahead and rip on him for being a troll, immature, an a-s-s, etc.
 
Didnt mean to rip on him for being short. Just pointing out the fact that short guys can get away with more because short arms dont really have to grow as much to look big. Actually I kinda envy the short guys on that!

From the way he was talking crap, I was expecting that he looked like Hulk Hogan.
 
See thats the problem, unless he came up in here with pics proving he was Conan, he should have been a little more humble and a little less up his own ass. Now if he has something intelligent to say we wont give him the time of day.
 
jvroig and BIZ thanks for your replies.

What you both say makes good sense to me. I was kinda hoping Real would voice his opinion but perhaps he is re-evaluating it after taking into account what you have said?
 
That would be great, but unfortunately, it seems highly unlikey (just my opinion). He seems to be set in his ways already, and if he is near his limit, then he probably also thinks there's no reason at all to bother changing or trying HST.

Well, it's not our job to convert folks to HST anyway. We're just here to help each other out, and whoever else wants help. Guys like him are welcome to read, and ask for help (nicely), or compare routines, or whatever. If at the end of the day he thinks HST is not for him, then he should just be on his merry way out and far away from here - or at the very least, stop rattling the guys around here.
 
Its apparent he's on a crusade to save the weak from the evils of HST and the like (based on his first ever post).

Anyone watch SG1 with those Ori characters? Hmmm deju vu?
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Its apparent he's on a crusade to save the weak from the evils of HST and the like (based on his first ever post).</div>
Oh yes, he should save the &quot;weak&quot; from the evils of HST, lest they actually grow muscle, get big, and become strong
wink.gif
 
uh Hmmm....... I'm 5'9&quot;
biggrin.gif


Anyway what I wanted to say is...Even if Biz wasn't a competing BB'r would it make his knowledge any less credible or valuable, personally I think not. Even some of the HIT Guru's IE Darden is what maybe a buck 60 (70 tops) right now, far from huge, yet he is still admired for his knowledge by the HIT crowd who follow him. So even though Really Deally is only 5'6&quot; doesn't mean we should denigrate him. In the same breath yes, admire Biz for what he has been able to accomplish but not only just with his body but also his mind and practical experience.

Anyway I hope Real Deal follows his own advice, IE a lil less typey a lil more worky, do a little homework, and try it. Who knows he might just learn a bit.
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">s@@t this guys so small his full range of motion on deadlifts is 6 inches.</div>

Lcars, that was a litlle bit below the belt dude! We shouldn't flame people for their genetics!
sad.gif


<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">So even though Really Deally is only 5'6&quot; doesn't mean we should denigrate him./Maybe you shouldn't rip on him for being 5'6&quot; 170, because lots of good members (and experts) here are around 5'6&quot; - 5'8&quot; too, the most prominent of them being Dan and Fausto since they are well loved HST experts. Aside from that, go ahead and rip on him for being a troll, immature, an a-s-s, etc. </div>

Need I add to this?

The guy is coming down to mother earth, sure he was an ass, but surely we can accept him as he is, right? Darn here i come with my girlie, girl goody good attitute again
laugh.gif
Funny, LOL, this time in his defence!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top