question regarding the HST training prog

the professor

New Member
I was looking over the proposed loading scheme for HST and have a question.  For the 2 week cycle of 3 days per week, full body - If i can bench 185 for 10 reps (failure), how could i possibly expect to gain any size/strength from doing 1 or 2 sets at 165 for 10 reps? 170 for 10 reps? 175 for 10 reps? etc.  If i can ALREADY do 185 for 10...anything less than that would not provide the proper stimulus for growth (overload principle). Any thoughts/info would be appreciated.
 
Hey Professor,

There is a TON of information available on this sight. You should start by reading all of the FAQ section. It will answer most of your questions. And take your time, read the studies, etc. -- it will all make sense.
 
Thanks for the reply, i'll take a look for sure. I'm an ex. phys professor and have been training for almost 13 yrs now, most of my info/training philosophy is from the standard thought 'lift to failure....give time to recover....do it again'. Overall, i'm impressed with this site and info, regardless. i'll be trying out HST.
 
The whole "lifting to failure" has pretty much been debunked now. Almost all elite strength athletes are using more frequency. Most subscribe to the Dual-Factor Theory. While HST is not based on Dual Factor, it does share many commonalities. Most notably, more frequent training and sub-failure lifting.
 
so what you're saying is that training 6x/week would be aiming more toward strenght than hypertrophy??
cuz in the topic "HST no rules, only options" they talk a lot about working out like either twice a day (am/pm) or 6x/week to get an optimal summation effect (which is....?) and tho better hypertrophy..
??

hehehe thx!!
 
HST is certainly geared towards hypertrophy. I was just making the point that training to failure has no merit in elite athletics.
 
Prof

Welcome to the site.

I fully support your decision to try it out! :D

IMO, it is the only way of knowing if something works
tounge.gif


In the meantime, here's something to chew on, from the FAQ-E-book which is downloadable from:

FAQ's

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]The principles behind HST:

1) Mechanical Load:
Tension upon muscle cells is necessary to induce hypertrophy. When cells experience tension, the delicate sarcomeres are disrupted. Given adequate nutrients, the muscle is then repaired to a greater size than it originally possessed.

Side note: It is commonly misunderstood that muscle failure is the stimulus for muscle growth. Intuitively, it makes sense. How can someone not sustain growth if they are working to the very limits of their capacity? Unfortunately, this is not true!

The tension on the muscle is what actually causes growth.(1)

2) Frequency Potentially the most controversial, so I'll be spending a lot of time on it.
The various growth factors initiated by training all peak at around 24 hours post-workout, and than fall back to baseline by 48 hours. (2, 3, 4, and especially 6, 7) Typically, programs will sacrifice training frequency for the ability to add volume.

This is counterproductive if your goal is to have bigger muscles. Given the average split of once/week, this means one will spend two days growing and five days maintaining muscle size without adding to it. This has been confirmed in the lab.

One study compared the effects of a volume of weight training performed all on one day of the week to the same volume spread across three days of the week. The thrice-per-week group saw greater muscle gains as well as strength gains over 40% greater than the once-per-week group.(5)
This can also seem counterintuitive, as muscle soreness and strength often do not recover after a mere two days. In actuality, neither of those factors (soreness or voluntary strength) is related to muscle growth.

The ability to recover one's strength is directly related to muscle failure. Training to failure directly inhibits voluntary strength. Basically, training to failure fries your nerves (not the technical term ) and prevents them from being able to contract the muscles for long periods of time.

So when one trains to failure and then waits until strength is recovered to train a muscle again, oftentimes the muscle has long recovered and is waiting for the nervous system to catch up.

This means that sometimes, with HST, you will be training through soreness. This is totally okay! Soreness is not harmful, and people generally find that training a sore muscle will cause the soreness to stop.

3) Progressive Load

Anywhere one goes, one hears "Changing one's routine is a way to prevent stagnation. If you're not growing, change things."

We're all in the business of growing muscle. Unfortunately, the body doesn't like to do that. It's rather expensive for the body to repair and produce new muscle tissue. It requires both lots of protein and lots of energy (sort of like the "parts" and the "labor).

So, when an exercise is performed that damages the muscle tissue, in addition to the growth response the muscle also becomes resistant to further damage from that load. This is called the Repeated Bout Effect. (4) This is why routines fail to cause further progress. It is also why HST incorporates progressive load.

Side note: strength programs and growth

As anyone who's done WSB will tell you, strength programs can induce a good deal of hypertrophy. As a result, many bodybuilders adopt strength-training programs as a means of causing growth. By isolating and understanding WHY they cause growth, you can just skip straight to the growth-causing elements without wasting time with all of the neural tricks that strength training uses to increase your 1RM.
Strength programs typically have people work with very low reps, often to failure.

Both of those have been shown to increase the nervous system's efficiency at performing a movement, thus increasing strength. So, when someone starts a strength training program, initially he/she sees a lot of growth. His/her muscles are not that resistant to damage, and at high tension levels the Repeated Bout Effect takes a little while to kick in. As long as he/she also continues making strength gains, he/she will experience progressive load, and will see muscle growth as long as he/she is overeating.

Unfortunately, after a time the strength gains will slow to a crawl, and at that point the muscles are very resistant to damage and will simply not grow.

At this point, conventional wisdom would have our trainee change up his/her routine. This advice is somewhat sound, as new exercises can put new levels of tension on muscle fibers and thus elicit more growth. Also, a rep change can stimulate new growth as well, but ONLY if the new rep range is lower and allows more weight to be used, thus loading the tissue at new levels.

Instead of changing the routine, HST advocates...

4) Strategic Deconditioning

Before each cycle, in order to make the muscles responsive to the light weights in the beginning, a period of 9-14 days is taken off from all training. This reverses some of the effects of the RBE. It allows HST-users to experience rapid and sustainable progress.

This is one of the reasons why newbies experience such great initial gains. They have had such long deconditioning periods.

Trained individuals also notice this; when coming off of a planned or unplanned layoff they often experience a renewal of gains.

Hope this gets you started, there is much, much more reading, and then for profs, there is Dans site.

Dan's research website - a mine of information

Enjoy!
thumbs-up.gif
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (S_F_H @ Jan. 29 2006,9:15)]so what you're saying is that training 6x/week would be aiming more toward strenght than hypertrophy??  
cuz in the topic "HST no rules, only options" they talk a lot about working out like either twice a day (am/pm) or 6x/week to get an optimal summation effect (which is....?) and tho better hypertrophy..
??
hehehe thx!!
The summation effect is apparently arguable, but the basic premise is that if there is a summation effect, then working out as frequently as possible would add to the overall effect.  Specific to your question. aiming for 6x a week is more geared toward hypertrophy than strength because of this proposed effect.  In HST terms it's all about working with a minimally effective load, that increases over time to overcome RBE, as frequently as possible.  The more frequent the signalling, the more pronounced the hypertrophic effect over time.
Strength training is as much about training your CNS to be able to 'put out' when needed as it were, to increase your voluntary strength.  Hypertrophy training would be more about sparing your CNS too much stress, allowing for more frequent training over time.  Maxing out every now and then won't hurt progress, but maxing out 3-6 times a week will hurt gains because a person's CNS will be trashed fairly quickly.  They get burnt out or injured.
As for the options not rules blurb, just means HST is a set of principles that can be applied to any type of workout, as there is no HST workout per se.  Just a set of guidelines in which a whole bunch of variants fit.  For an example, check out this spreadsheet that includes my next workout, based on a workout that I think Biz posted here a while ago.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (xahrx @ Jan. 30 2006,4:53)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]The summation effect is apparently arguable, but the basic premise is that if there is a summation effect, then working out as frequently as possible would add to the overall effect.  Specific to your question. aiming for 6x a week is more geared toward hypertrophy than strength because of this proposed effect.
.
Then, how would you set up a cycle on a 6x/week..??
like doing 3wo with 20, 3wo with 25 and then 4wo with 30??
by doing so, i should get better and/or faster results??

thanks a lot for all your answers!!
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (S_F_H @ Jan. 30 2006,5:43)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] (xahrx @ Jan. 30 2006,4:53)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]The summation effect is apparently arguable, but the basic premise is that if there is a summation effect, then working out as frequently as possible would add to the overall effect. Specific to your question. aiming for 6x a week is more geared toward hypertrophy than strength because of this proposed effect.
.
Then, how would you set up a cycle on a 6x/week..??
like doing 3wo with 20, 3wo with 25 and then 4wo with 30??
by doing so, i should get better and/or faster results??
thanks a lot for all your answers!!
Not like that, no. As one example you'd do a full body workout of low volume 6 times a week. I set, maybe clustered to 15 reps, every day per exercise. Or you could do a push/pull or upper/lower split, one half in the am, one in the pm. You don't have to do anything fancy with the volume at all. Basically you take the volume you can handle and divide it up equally over all six days, somehow hitting each muscle group.

Over at hypertrophy research I think Dan or Ron posted some stuff showing the summation effect isn't really a good bet. Who knows in the end? I think all it comes down to is work consistently and smartly, and eat enough and you'll gain muscle mass. Anything beyond that is "gettin' too fancy" as one of my hick uncles said once.
 
Let me clarify what is said at my site.

The summation affect seen with training every 24 hours vs every 48 hours is what Vicious and I were in disagreement with. Adams and Haddad did 2 studies on this, First one was rats, second was humans with electrical stimulation.

In the rat study they actually compared successive bouts with 12 hours, 24 hours, or 48 hours rest between bouts. In the Human study they only looked at 24 hour rest between bouts.

What Vicious and I discussed, I'm sure the thread is still here somewhere, was that in the rat study all but a couple markers looked at had a higher AUC when sucessive bouts were spaced 48 hours apart.

The two that had equal or higher AUC were IGF binding protein and IGF receptor mRna.

The binding protein elevation may indicate inhibitory signals as it may cause more binding and less free IGF for reaction to the receptor. The increase in receptor mRNA was about the same for 24 or 48 hour rest between bouts.

Vicious' contention was that IGF showed a trend for higher elevation if the study would have measured passed 40 hours post last training bout. My contention is, even if this were the case it would not have changed that AUC all too dramatically. Therefore 48 hour rest between bouts showed the largest summation effect.

Unfortunately the human study did not compare 24 or 48 hour rest between bouts.
 
So Dan, would more frequent training vs. training once every 48 hours be equal or would training only once every 48 hours be more optimal? And what does AUC stand for??
 
I worked out 3 times a week. I worked even out 6 weeks out but there was no difference. After reading researches I have pimped up my HST workout and I train now 2 times a week. It seems to be no difference between 2 days and 3 days per week.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (wwewrestlingguy @ Jan. 31 2006,12:18)]So Dan, would more frequent training vs. training once every 48 hours be equal or would training only once every 48 hours be more optimal?  And what does AUC stand for??

Area Under the Curve I'm guessing, lets you know the level of this or that for a given time interval.  Based on what he summed up there I would guess 48 hours being optimal if you want to take advantage of the summation effect.  Seems any more frequent and all other indicators dropped or stayed the same except the IGF and IGF binder, a rise in the former being good but a rise in the latter could negate that or even have a net detrimental effect, with rises in IGF being not too significant over time.

I did do an HST cycle once training every other day without stopping, no weekend rests or anything.  Honestly didn't notice any subjective difference, nor any subjective difference between three days a week as opposed to two, although two days a week lets me get a bit of a more intense workout in because of the extra recovery time. Physiologically that probably adds up to not much, but mentally I like being able to go a little harder.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (wwewrestlingguy @ Jan. 31 2006,12:18)]So Dan, would more frequent training vs. training once every 48 hours be equal or would training only once every 48 hours be more optimal?  And what does AUC stand for??
AUC=Area under Curve, Xarhx gets ten points.

You will have to see, everyone is different and to steal a phrase from Bryan, "you must manage your own training". There may be advantages either way depending on your training state, how you train and what you are trying to acheive with the training.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (the professor @ Jan. 28 2006,2:00)]I was looking over the proposed loading scheme for HST and have a question. For the 2 week cycle of 3 days per week, full body - If i can bench 185 for 10 reps (failure), how could i possibly expect to gain any size/strength from doing 1 or 2 sets at 165 for 10 reps? 170 for 10 reps? 175 for 10 reps? etc. If i can ALREADY do 185 for 10...anything less than that would not provide the proper stimulus for growth (overload principle). Any thoughts/info would be appreciated.
Professor, welcome to the forum.

There is a principle of HST which states that the potential of any load to induce hypertrophy is dependant on the sensitivity of the tissue to that load at the time the load is applied.

Or to put it more simply, the amount of weight required to induce growth is dependant on how conditioned the muscle is to that amount of weight when you lift it.

With HST is it advised that you start with a period of Strategic Deconditioning in order to decrease the level of conditioning of the tissue and thereby increase the sensitivity of the tissue to being loaded. This allows lighter weights to be effective, if only for a short period of time.

The idea is to get as much growth potential as you can from weights that are below your ~5 RM.

-bryan (adjunct faculty) ;)
 
Back
Top