Quick question.....

R

Robbie734

New Member
Hello there guy since this is my first post i'd just like to say how you all doing?
now to business....

I was just wondering if when doing a HST routine, instead of doing a full week of 15 then 10 then 5 reps, you could do the first workout of the week 15, the 2nd 10 and 3rd 5? would this make any sense and give wildly varying result in any direction?

thanks
 
Since you sound new to HST, and perhaps even lifting, I would stick to the vanilla simple HST routine.

However, to answer your specific question, I've done what you asked about to reduce boredom but noticed no difference other than a propensity to injure myself more easily. Similar, but a bit safer, I thought, was doing all three protocols in one session. That is the first set of 15, then 10 then 5 in the same workout. Next workout is second set of 15, 10's and 5's. Etc. As to giving a "wildly varying result in any direction", no.

What I tend to do now is regular HST but when I get to the 5's, I follow my last set of 5 up with a quick set of 8 to 10 reps followed immediately by a quick set of 12 to 15 reps. I am noticing a bit more pump but mostly more definition and vascularity. This technique would not be suitable for a beginner or intermediate lifter, in my opinion.
 
yes i've done hst a couple of times with pretty decent results, i always intend to come back to it once a year

i'm not exactly new to lifting, i've been at it for around 4 years now
 
Since you "come back to it once per year", I wonder what non-HST program you are using that gives you better results.
 
i found westside training for skinny b***rds, doggcrapp and german volume training to pack more muscle on me personally but since i wouldn't even call myself an actual bodybuilder ( more into my martial arts myself), lifting for me is more something productive to keep me occupied that i enjoy plus a way to get functionally stronger ( that said, extra muscle packed on for the ladies never hurt anyone :p)
so basically even if i found hst to be the perfect program for growth for me, i'd still do other routines to keep things fresh and interesting


also in before anyone points out german volume training won't do jack for strength, as i said, i like to mix it up every few months
 
I wouldn't point out that gvt doesn't do jack for strength. I'd point out that gvt doesn't do jack for jack. It's great if you want (temporary) sarcoplasmic changes. That's about it. Nobody not on steroids has gained any real appreciable muscle on gvt. Especially in comparison to something that is sane, like pretty much any routine other than gvt.

Mixing it up every few months is, honestly, for people who either have extreme ADHD or just really, really, really hate consistent gains. It's not like you can't "mix it up bro" by simply changing what lifts you use anyway. You do realize that "mixing it up bro" reduces muscle size gains because you're almost constantly working on neural adapations instead of actual changes to the cross sectional area of the muscle fibers, right? Sorry bro, science is dead set against you on that issue. It's bad for strength, it's bad for size. The strongest people in the world don't get to that level by changing things constantly. In fact, they tend to do the same lifts nearly every single day of the week.

It's ok though, we need more guys who like mixing it up bro to make the rest of us look that much hyooger at the gym.
 
Robbie734 said:
so basically even if i found hst to be the perfect program for growth for me, i'd still do other routines to keep things fresh and interesting


also in before anyone points out german volume training won't do jack for strength, as i said, i like to mix it up every few months
Click to expand...

DJ'ing sounds like a vocation you might be interested in.


Sorry to be blunt, but 'mixing it up' just doesn't appeal to me when it comes at the expense of building muscle. I dunno, I suppose results satisfy the 'interest' test, personally.



And that 15-10-5 : 1st-2nd-3rd plan would entirely invalidate SD, as well as render the 15 and 10 workouts irrelevant w/regard to hypertrophy.
 

umm why all the hostility? i came on here to ask a genuine question about HST because i do appreciate that it gives effective results and intend to do another cysle of it fairly soon, and most replies are acting as if i've came on to troll and say sh!t against hst
in fact, HST is just about the only hypertrophy focused routine i consistantly will be coming back to over the years

You do realize that "mixing it up bro" reduces muscle size gains because you're almost constantly working on neural adapations instead of actual changes to the cross sectional area of the muscle fibers, right? Sorry bro, science is dead set against you on that issue. It's bad for strength, it's bad for size. The strongest people in the world don't get to that level by changing things constantly.

well for a start i was never 'ZOOOOMG bro i'm gonna mix it up all da time!!' but in reply to what you are saying this goes against pretty much everything i have read on bodybuilding so far, which states that in order to keep making progress one should change what they are doing every so often ( although there does seem to be much debate as to how often)
just for example-http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/wotw44.htm

it even goes so far as to quote in that article that charles stanley recomends changing workout every 4 weeks, ian king every 3 weeks and charles poliquin reckons the body adapts to a routine in as little as 6 workouts

now i too would think that that is going too crazy with change, but i'm just using it to illustrate my point that with what there is out there to read, the general consensus seems to be in favour of not sticking to the one program. If however as you have said you have science to back you up on this then please show me as i am here to learn afterall. That would be much better than getting all pissy with someone because they either don't agree with your line of thinking or are not privvy to the same information as you.

i was also fully aware of gvt being temporary muscle gain, the times i've used it have generally only been right before going on holiday and sometimes in the morning before going on the beach, and those times it did give an impressive boost to size so therefore i found it successful
 
I wouldn't say "hostility" per se; no one here has an issue of personality. It's more motivational; if something works, why change it for the sake of change?

I, for one, am certainly not able to put my hand up in the category of 'pure vanilla HST acolytes', however the principles of HST have never left any training I've done since discovering it, with the one exception for instances when I don't wish to gain but don't want to reduce calories to facilitate this; i.e. I leave the weights at heavy and don't increment when I could.

The idea that change in exercise selection promotes muscles growth is flawed at the most basic level - yep, Poliquin and all those others just have it wrong. A muscle does two things only; contracts when told to & relaxes when the signal stops. The exercise choice doesn't change the signal, nor does it change the biochemical response within the muscle and signalling pathways that follow.

The instances when a change in exercise will result in growth are those when the exercise is actually using different fibres within the muscles at different %s (Rows vs Chins/Pulls), or different fibres/muscles period.

However changing the specific exercise is one thing, changing the method of load application is another and there's pretty much nothing in science that supports that notion. What science has shown is that;

-Load is the stimulus for muscle growth (total load exposure, ala 'work done' once threshold load is met)
-Frequency should be every 2-3 days
-Muscle growth will not continue using the same load (repeated bout effect)
-Load must increase (repeated bout effect) for growth to continue (progressive load)
-Halting exposure to load (SD) will enable muscle to respond (grow) at previous unresponsive loads (lighter weights)
-Caloric surplus is required to build LBM
-Protein is required to build LBM
-Muscles can be worked out every day using loads ranging from minimal, to near maximum (approaching 1RM) day after day. The idea of 'resting muscles' is illusory.
-CNS fatigue occurs over time. The idea of resting the nervous system is not illusory, i.e. has merit.


And the rest falls into place. HST, as a system, is merely a natural collection of those findings. If you asked yourself how would you satisfy those findings in the form of a routine, it would look like HST, ala

-Work out 3 times a week, maybe even just every other day
-Eat plenty
-Plan out progression so loads increase
-Take a break to recondition the muscle to lighter weights (SD)
-Take a break to relieve CNS fatigue




There's very little incentive for most ppl here to 'mix it up', as it doesn't lead to gains, is more likely to lead to injury (DC training, for example), wastes time if you want strength or size, just ends up being X-months that could have been spent on HST-style training.
 
what's incentive got to do with it? i wasn't trying to convert anyone to my way of thinking
and if it's a question of motivation, my motives for lifting are different from pure bodybuilders, so i'm not gonna lift like one all the time

but anyway that's enough of that think, on to more interesting discussion

The idea that change in exercise selection promotes muscles growth is flawed at the most basic level - yep, Poliquin and all those others just have it wrong. A muscle does two things only; contracts when told to & relaxes when the signal stops. The exercise choice doesn't change the signal, nor does it change the biochemical response within the muscle and signalling pathways that follow.

yes, i agree but the difference in most reputable training programmes/principles isn't usually exercise selection ( it's pretty much agreed that large, compound exercises are better than puny isolation for lots of mass) but rather other variables such as reps,sets, rest time, % of max etc so unless i'm misunderstanding that statement i think the point is moot. feel free to correct of course


also, would you be able to explain to me (genuine question here) why performing only one type of training regime for a one year period would be better than if you changed it perhaps every 3 months, if in both instances everything else was correct such as proper exercise selection, diet and progression

say we even went as far as to take HST out of the mix on this one and over a year trained in say, max ot for 3 months then doggcrapp then a body each workout then some other full body 3x per week but which does not follow any other hst rules.
why would this be inferior to sticking to any one of those techniques listed all year round? aside from the fact that any one example might be inferior in it'self. What is it that makes changing inherently worse?

again those were just examples, i don't need an explanation in why any one might totally suck bro
 
Old and Grey said:
How so Alex?
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the question, but isn't the question asking about;

-Wk 1 of cycle, do 1st 15s workout, then 1st 10s workout, then 1st 5's workout (M, W, F)
-Wk 2 of cycle, do 2nd 15s workout, then 2nd 10s workout, then 2nd 5s workout (M, W, F)

... etc

So basically, that 5's workout on the first Friday is going to invalidate The 15s and 10s from that point out, by exposing the tissue to a much higher load and undo the SD spent doing nothing to recondition the tissue to the 15s and 10s.


?
 
Alex, you may be correct and I admit to being about two years behind in the research but I believe you can do HST type workouts in any order, 15-10-5, 5-10-15, 10-15-5. The strategic deconditioning is not dependent on the heaviness of the weight last lifted or the weight lifted post SD. The basic purpose is to decondition the muscle to load and then to lift an increasing load within any givin rep range. I think it makes a lot more sense to go the 15-10-5 route for a number of reasons and it is the way I almost always go myself but I don't think the SD cares. I am sure that there are many who will disagree with me, including, perhaps, Bryan, but, like everyone else, I have an opinion as well as one of those other things! :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's definitely contrary to what Bryan has said here several times (not to diminish your right to your own take on things of course :) ).
 
I must have slept through that seminar. :confused: In case there is some confusion, in my previous post I was talking about 15 for 2 weeks, 10 for 2 weeks then 5 for 2 weeks. Not 15,10 and 5 in the same day or even the same week.

Sometimes I am thinking something and forget that everyone may not be on the same page as I am. :o
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Robbie734 said:
what's incentive got to do with it? i wasn't trying to convert anyone to my way of thinking
and if it's a question of motivation, my motives for lifting are different from pure bodybuilders, so i'm not gonna lift like one all the time

but anyway that's enough of that think, on to more interesting discussion

The idea that change in exercise selection promotes muscles growth is flawed at the most basic level - yep, Poliquin and all those others just have it wrong. A muscle does two things only; contracts when told to & relaxes when the signal stops. The exercise choice doesn't change the signal, nor does it change the biochemical response within the muscle and signalling pathways that follow.

yes, i agree but the difference in most reputable training programmes/principles isn't usually exercise selection ( it's pretty much agreed that large, compound exercises are better than puny isolation for lots of mass) but rather other variables such as reps,sets, rest time, % of max etc so unless i'm misunderstanding that statement i think the point is moot. feel free to correct of course


also, would you be able to explain to me (genuine question here) why performing only one type of training regime for a one year period would be better than if you changed it perhaps every 3 months, if in both instances everything else was correct such as proper exercise selection, diet and progression

say we even went as far as to take HST out of the mix on this one and over a year trained in say, max ot for 3 months then doggcrapp then a body each workout then some other full body 3x per week but which does not follow any other hst rules.
why would this be inferior to sticking to any one of those techniques listed all year round? aside from the fact that any one example might be inferior in it'self. What is it that makes changing inherently worse?

again those were just examples, i don't need an explanation in why any one might totally suck bro
Click to expand...

I would prefer you reversed the onus around. Why would you change a training system/routine?

The dominant principle in any walk of life is don't change what is working, that is, change should happen when circumstances dictate it but not for the sake of it.

When you have a routine that follows science, the onus is on the side that advocates change.

Why would you change anything? The body doesn't change on its own accord. Despite the nonsense rhetoric found on popular BB'ing forums (and generally those with financial incentives), it's a homeostatic organism. It likes to keep things where they are. It also responds best to repetitions of the same stimulus. This is how we learn, develop sensory-motor skills and so on.

This follows through to resistance training. You will be most successful when you stick with a technique, within a non-changing routine. Your neural adaptations develop better and stay better. If I do bench press for 12 mths, all other factors equal, I will be stronger and bigger than if I change between flat bench, incline, dips and flys for 12 months. Changing it every 6mths is probably going to yield the same results I suppose. Our muscles are capable of far more strength in contraction than what we can (usually) consciously produce. If you took the right machine, apply the electrodes and crank up the power you can cause your muscles to contract forcefully enough to snap tendon and/or break your bone.

And again, the onus is always on explaining a need for change. That need can be as simple as "what I'm doing isn't working", but when something is working, and is based on established scientific understanding ... there's no reason to 'mix it up'.

Generally speaking, the only reason to 'mix it up' would a lack of mental discipline (one could re-frame being undisciplined as 'bored' etc, but that's just avoidance).


If training for you is all about getting as broad exposure as possible, then 'mix it up' is probably something you'll enjoy doing forever. For most people here, and certainly myself, Totentanz etc it's about getting as big and strong as possible naturally (though certainly some go for chems and there's no shame/judgment in that), and straying from routines that put into practice that which science has shown is just a waste of time in achieving that end, to be frank.
 
AlexAustralia said:
Maybe I'm misunderstanding the question, but isn't the question asking about;

-Wk 1 of cycle, do 1st 15s workout, then 1st 10s workout, then 1st 5's workout (M, W, F)
-Wk 2 of cycle, do 2nd 15s workout, then 2nd 10s workout, then 2nd 5s workout (M, W, F)

... etc

So basically, that 5's workout on the first Friday is going to invalidate The 15s and 10s from that point out, by exposing the tissue to a much higher load and undo the SD spent doing nothing to recondition the tissue to the 15s and 10s.


?
Click to expand...

not really because even though the 5 is heavier than the 15 its still only about 75% of your max,i wouldnt recomend that way of doing HST but you are still progreesing load over 6 to 8wks.
 
Why would you change anything?


when your goals change perhaps? outside the pure bodybuilding world this does happen you know

for the vast majority of the year i train for strength over hypertrophy because that is in line with my goals and then just before summer or going away i'd like to build up a bit more so do a more hypertrophy orientated approach


If I do bench press for 12 mths, all other factors equal, I will be stronger and bigger than if I change between flat bench, incline, dips and flys for 12 months. Changing it every 6mths is probably going to yield the same results I suppose.

while i agree this does sound logical and i would have thought so too until recently but i've been reading stuff lately on conjugate periodization that would contradict this
http://www.westside-barbell.com/westside-articles/PDF.Files/03PDF/The%20Conjugate%20Method.pdf
such as this article right there

so far i've been backing my points up with articles or at least quotes and all you have given is anecdotal evidence or repeated the word science at me
if you do ave a scientific study, paper or journal of some sort to back up never changing at all then please share and i shall mend my heathen ways

so much for a quick question :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top