Don't want to start anything

Discussion in 'General Training' started by iceman0625, Jul 29, 2005.

  1. Rain

    Rain New Member

    This is an interesting thread. The probably best thing about it is that it lays out the HST principles in a condensed and easy to understand manner. I am only in the middle of my 1st HST cycle, but have been involved in weight training for about 20 years.

    To me HST seems logical, which is why I decided to evaluate the principles in practice. Evaluating doesn't mean doing one 8-week cycle, it means doing it for a long enough period to be able to compare my results while "on HST" with my "pre-HST" results. This will probably mean somewhere around 4-5 cycles, to be able to finetune and tweak my application of the principles. How can anyone say that something doesn't work without being willing to evaluate it?

    Vince seems like a nice man, and he probably believes in his method. Like him, I will make up my own mind. Right now, I lean strongly towards HST.

    / R
  2. In quite a few discussions I've had with Vince, the one thing I would never ever call him is unintelligent. Just this statement alone verifies he has quite a bit of understanding.

    This statement also verifies he does agree with some of the same priciples that are applied in HST.

    The truth is the truth and as such can be universally applied.

    But as Xarhx has said and Vince just repeated in his last statement, Application is KEY.

  3. Vince Basile

    Vince Basile New Member

    Hi Dan. Yes, the truth about hypertrophy has to apply universally. If something turns out to falsify any of my theories or ideas then I will have to abandon them. That is how science progresses and it is far easier to be mistaken about matters than correct.

    One principle I do not agree with so far is strategic deconditioning. I see no need for a muscle to have to rest before further growth is possible. From my experience I would say it is possible to obtain linear, uninterrupted growth. In principle it should always be possible to do a workout that generates growth. What I do is make every workout one that generates growth. It works.
  4. Totentanz

    Totentanz Super Moderator Staff Member

    But you agree that the only way to continue to generate growth is to continually increase the weight used, right?

    Also, eventually you will reach your rep max, where you will no longer be able to continually increase the weight, although your rep max should be effective for causing hypertrophy for quite a while, still, it will eventually no longer be effective. Sure, you may be able to increase weight further after using your RM for a while, since strength will probably increase... but eventually you will reach a weight so heavy that you will not be able to increase any longer, and eventually that weight will become ineffective.

    What do you do at that point? I suppose you could keep using that weight until your strength increases again, then increase your weight, but wouldn't the growth from such a thing be slow, since the weight is no longer working well for hypertrophy?
  5. Sonny

    Sonny New Member

    Go on a long SD and then start a new cycle .
    Even if you can only add 2 lbs.
    I keep a pair of 1 pounders just for that reason .
    Slow is better than none !
  6. Jester

    Jester Well-Known Member

    I haven't meant to indicate that you're unintelligent Vince, but I'm perplexed as to how you can outline your principles, then say that you're arms aren't growing and you're injured but the principles hold true.

    You can cite improper application of course, but that seems like an easy way out, so to speak.
  7. Sonny

    Sonny New Member

    The facts about HST are true with science to back it up, but you have it give it a chance. And one cycle is not enough to make a true decision.
    I did a split HIT routine for 15 years and hit a point for about a year where I could not make any gains
    Then I found the HST and with the help of Brian, Dan and Old & Gray I’m backmaking gains with the standard full body HST routine (5 10 15)...
    In addition, I’m 53 years old and BB’ing since I was 16 and still making gains with HST when nothing else would no longer work .
    So, no one can tell me that HST doesn’t work. If it is true for me, then it is has got to be true for you.
    You are progressively adding more weight. Right ? Then why would it not work?
    In addition, if this were my board, I would insist that we keep the subject matter to the science and principles of HST. If you want to do HIT then go to Dr. Dardens wed site.
    Also I feel that Aaron_f flamed O&G for no apparent reason should apologize. He is a wealth of knowledge, and a great value to this forum. And I hate to see him gone.
    Since I’m at it …………
    Hey Vince Why do you stay on this forum?
    Just to keep on disputing HST?
    You seem like an intelligent guy, so why don’t you tell us what /how you work out,and the gains you have made with your method.
    Maybe we all can learn something from you.
    You maybe able to start your own web site.
    (SD)Even the pros take time off now and then.
    3-4 hours in a gym! What is real funny!
    5 or more sets are even funnier! Facts prove otherwise.
    And NO! I’m not going to go find the fact again to show you.
    I don’t have to prove anything.
    You just have to prove me wrong then I’ll listen.
  8. Vince Basile

    Vince Basile New Member

    No, there are other factors besides adding resistance. Otherwise all top bodybuilders would be enormously strong and most are not. As muscles grow they seem to require more training than smaller muscles. More sets. Oh, there are methods that claim high intensity is the key and only a couple of intense sets are required. I think that is false for almost all advanced bodybuilders. Larry Scott introduced new ways of training that weren't all about adding weight. His method involved exhausting a muscle with various training he called burns. Partial movements and intense pain. Over and over.

    This statement is definitely false. What facts are you talking about? If all were proven there would be no need for any discussion about hypertrophy.

    I smile when I think of the sites dedicated to hypertrophy research. What bodybuilding research has been done in the last decade? Almost nothing. The scientists could answer all our questions if they wanted to know how to make muscles grow large. Where is research? Nil, zip, zero. In the vacuum appear all manner of research proving absolutely nothing at all about hypertrophy. Doesn't anyone else see the irony of it all. If you people attend university then go to the exercise science departments and ask the good people there about the research in building up one's muscles. Good luck.

    I am impressed with the detailed research into muscle physiology. However, most of that work is of little use to bodybuilders.

    I am forging away in my own little experiment trying to make my arms grow larger. I am not giving up by saying I am at my maximum or that I require anabolic agents. Because I am specializing on arms I am omitting most of the factors that confuse most trainees who wouldn't have a clue about what is causing what. For a site dedicated to science why is it that so few are embracing testing on themselves?

    From the Basile hypertrophy lab I would say that 3 sets with a maximum are insufficient to cause growth in a large muscle. 5 sets or more are required.
  9. Aaron_F

    Aaron_F New Member

    Oh bollocks, no apparent reason?

    I questioned an assertation made by Coach Hale, and O&G got in a hissy because I dared question Hale and left.

    If O&G wants to pack a sad - like a little baby and run away - then more power to him.

    (and if Hale continued to post supposed scientific information with no research based backing then he would continue to be questioned.)

Share This Page