Rethinking Hst

FistOfFury said:
Sounds like Leo Costa's Big Beyond Belief program from 20 odd years ago. Is this what you are basing it on?
I have a copy of the book somewhere and there is a pdf version floating around online. It still has a strong following and a lot of people swear by it.
Click to expand...
Yep. Anyone who doesn't try it doesn't know what they are missing.
 
HST_Rihad said:
HST isn't only about how a muscle grows, but also about how to trigger growth most efficiently. Spending 4-5 weeks losing & recovering existing muscle is hardly the best way to go about growth.
Also see this nice sciency article by Brad Schoenfeld for more current insight into how to best train a muscle: http://www.lookgreatnaked.com/articles/mechanisms_of_muscle_hypertrophy.pdf
Click to expand...
Rihad,

You are confusing me, in the original post you stated that you are still training using HST yet every post since you are looking at alternative training methods etc, why are you still training using HST when you now seem to believe that you are spending 4-5 weeks trying to recover 'lost' muscle?
 
There is nothing in that article that would change HST principles. And, it is only an article. It is not a new scientific experiment breakthrough.

Since you seem to to bash HST, even though you say you practice it, which makes absolutely no sense to me, I suggest you adopt what is concluded in that article and stop posting BS here.
 
mickc1965 said:
Rihad,

You are confusing me, in the original post you stated that you are still training using HST yet every post since you are looking at alternative training methods etc, why are you still training using HST when you now seem to believe that you are spending 4-5 weeks trying to recover 'lost' muscle?
Click to expand...
This was only my hypothesis based solely on that single 24 week long research involving untrained subjects.
Ironically, Bryan linked to the study before in support for SD. I'm not sure how he evaluated the study, maybe he didn't see the graphs because he linked to the abstract only. The graphs speak in favor of SD only with respect to being able to go on a break without fear of muscle loss (it can be recovered quickly later), but prove nothing about SD somehow allowing you to achieve new growth using previous loads. So it looks like HST was wrong postulating that you could grow further using previous loads.
 
adpowah, it's not an easy question to answer. Compare 1 week of SD + 5 more weeks to get back to the heaviest loads that do trigger new muscle growth, or 6 weeks total of maintaining the existing muscle, with simply taking just a 2 week long deload to allow CNS to recuperate. Speaking of time efficiency here.
 
mickc1965 said:
Do muscles not grow in the 10 rep block?
Click to expand...
Another hard question ;) The answer is, as usually, multifaceted. For someone new to training of course it does trigger new growth. It's a new load, why the heck wouldn't it. Assuming a person then goes past those loads to 5's, next cycle's lower loads would only serve to recover the atrophied muscle. The graphs prove that. You need to lift bigger loads than you did with 5's to grow bigger, assuming volume stays the same. Or you can lift previous loads doing more sets. But you don't normally increase the number of sets with previous loads in HST, you just do the same 1-2 sets per exercise or whatever. Therefore you rely on bigger than before loads to trigger new growth. And that would be the case not any sooner than when it's time to lift heaviest 5's again.
 
Last edited:
But you are supposed to increase the load from one cycle to the next in all rep ranges aren't you? assuming of course your load increases in the post 5 rep phase, all I do is recalculate my 1rm from best lift of current cycle (generally this would be circa a 3-6 rep lift) and then assume 15rm is somewhere between 65 - 67.5% / 10rm is 75 - 77.5% / 5rm is 85 - 87.5% maybe 88 or 89% of recalculated 1rm.
 
HST_Rihad said:
adpowah, it's not an easy question to answer. Compare 1 week of SD + 5 more weeks to get back to the heaviest loads that do trigger new muscle growth, or 6 weeks total of maintaining the existing muscle, with simply taking just a 2 week long deload to allow CNS to recuperate. Speaking of time efficiency here.
Click to expand...
I am sure you know that training at maximal effort every workout and expecting to see continued growth is a recipe for disaster (maybe you're describing something different). Training at previous loads absolutely induces fatigue that your body has to adapt to which stimulates growth. When you train at similar loads on a weekly basis you will see the progress where your reps get easier, cleaner, faster, less fatigue etc. even if you are not adding reps or weight to the lift (in fact I think you described this earlier) therefore it's evident that your body is adapting over time. At a certain point it will become stagnant and then you have to increase the stimulus, by either load, volume, intensity etc. HST just sets up a regular increase in the load stimulus (one of the easiest to measure and increment) so you don't get caught in the trap of RBE.

So to say that it takes "5 more weeks to get back to the heaviest loads that do trigger new muscle growth" is inaccurate because the repeated loads in your 15s and 10s will continue to stimulate growth. If they do not it would be because they are too far under your current strength curve but that's the fault of the person doing the programming not the program which suggests you start at 70%+ of that repetition's max which is adequate to stimulate growth. The vast majority of us are not so trained that a sub maximal stimulus at a rep range of 15 or 10 does not induce a growth response. Maybe as you close in on your genetic limit you will stop seeing growth benefits from these rep ranges but for the majority analyzing and slightly adjusting this components is vastly inferior to making sure we have adequate rest, technique, calories and consistency.
 
HST_Rihad said:
adpowah, it's not an easy question to answer. Compare 1 week of SD + 5 more weeks to get back to the heaviest loads that do trigger new muscle growth, or 6 weeks total of maintaining the existing muscle, with simply taking just a 2 week long deload to allow CNS to recuperate. Speaking of time efficiency here.
Click to expand...
Lyles generic bulk routine?
 
Is it obvious that Rihad does not understand HST or muscle hypertrophy in general and latches on to whatever the flavor of the day is. I won't waste any more time being sucked into these type of discussions.
 
mickc1965 said:
But you are supposed to increase the load from one cycle to the next in all rep ranges aren't you?
Click to expand...
Sure you do. But don't 5-6 week (including SD) worth of loads just stay the same? Just think about it. Will you grow bigger than you were at the end of the previous cycle's 5's? Is there any kind of real research proving the idea and disproving the results of the 24-week long study I (and Bryan) referred to?

mickc1965 said:
Lyles generic bulk routine?
Click to expand...
Just one example where you don't waste too much time staying the same. I haven't tried it, though.

adpowah said:
So to say that it takes "5 more weeks to get back to the heaviest loads that do trigger new muscle growth" is inaccurate because the repeated loads in your 15s and 10s will continue to stimulate growth.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure you saw the study graphs in the first post. You do grow using the lighter loads after SD, but what kind of growth are we talking about? Maintaining, or worse yet, getting back to where you were size-wise in your 5's? Hardly a thrilling idea.

If they do not it would be because they are too far under your current strength curve but that's the fault of the person doing the programming not the program which suggests you start at 70%+ of that repetition's max which is adequate to stimulate growth.
Click to expand...
I do even better, starting at 75% of the repetition's max. So what.
The vast majority of us are not so trained that a sub maximal stimulus at a rep range of 15 or 10 does not induce a growth response.
Click to expand...
You WILL grow using lighter loads after SD. Back to where you were. And only after you get back to previous cycle's maxes that you grew on in the previous cycle and hopefully surpass them, will you begin to see NEW growth.
 
Once again, this isn't to say that HST doesn't work. Like with every routine out there that has you increase the max loads you work with periodically, you will grow doing 1-2 sets per exercise. My point is that the reasoning behind SD and submaximal run-ups looks naive, in light of the research. You don't grow further using those previous loads. You're doing your best to maintain existing muscle. And then you grow for about two final weeks of the cycle, where you use the max loads equaling or better surpassing the ones you grew with.

I would be REALLY happy to be wrong, that's why I've been asking for some contradicting research. Until then, anecdotal evidence, including my own experience, suggests that you don't grow bigger unless you use bigger loads. This naturally extends to almost all submaximal loads (less than about 5RM) you used in the previous cycle, and in the cycle before, and in the cycle before...
 
Last edited:
You aren't going to find the scientific research you are looking for because it doesn't exist. And I still believe I have provided you with the solution. In my experience progressive increase in volume with sub max loads will induce growth. If you are just going to continue to blabber on and not try what I have suggested then good luck to you.
 
Load is still the primary driver... I did 1000 total incline pushups within a few hours, with no measurable results. Once the load is sufficient, though, required volume tends to fall dramatically.
 
Bulldog, I will PM you for more info on this routine if that is ok with you

Rihad, Why are you wasting your time doing 1000 incline push ups in a few hours? If you want more muscle just LIFT, EAT, SLEEP
 
Last edited:
You would not be really happy if you were wrong. But maybe I am wrong so I will sum up my argument in a single sentence which you failed to address: You will not fully adapt to a load or exceed it's stimulus after lifting it once, therefore for a time previous loads continue to offer a growth stimulus that will allow you to exceed your current state.
 
Last edited:
HST_Rihad said:
I would be REALLY happy to be wrong, that's why I've been asking for some contradicting research. Until then, anecdotal evidence, including my own experience, suggests that you don't grow bigger unless you use bigger loads. This naturally extends to almost all submaximal loads (less than about 5RM) you used in the previous cycle, and in the cycle before, and in the cycle before...
Click to expand...

HST_Rihad said:
Load is still the primary driver... I did 1000 total incline pushups within a few hours, with no measurable results. Once the load is sufficient, though, required volume tends to fall dramatically.
Click to expand...

@Totentanz - well I don't know about you mate, but I think I should consider this as an apology? Or is it just a grudging acknowledgement?

Thoughts? ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top