CRMon1

hey guys,
Here is a little something to rock the boat some. I've been on many forums and there is always this HIT vs. HVT fight goin' on. Well, the ASEP put out a report titled: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ACSM POSITION STAND ON RESISTANCE TRAINING: INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT RECOMMENDED TRAINING PROTOCOLS volume 7 number 3 June 2004. (You can find the full document at http://www.asep.org/FLDR/Jep/JEPJune2004.htm.) In it they make it clear that their test subjects made increases in strength and size by using HIT. They go even further to say that performing multiple sets per bodypart doesn't increase your chances of gaining size or strength.

I'M NOT TRYING TO *PEACE* ANYONE OFF. I just thought it would be a good read. Based on their tests, these are their reccomendations.

• Select a mode of exercise that feels comfortable throughout the range of motion. There is very little evidence to support the superiority of free weights or machines for increasing muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, or endurance.
• Choose a repetition duration that will ensure the maintenance of consistent form throughout the set. One study showed a greater strength benefit from a shorter duration (2s/4s) and one study showed better strength gains as a result of a longer duration (10s/4s), but no study using conventional exercise equipment reports any significant difference in muscular hypertrophy, power, or endurance as a result of manipulating repetition duration.
• Choose a range of repetitions between three and 15 (e.g., 3-5, 6-8, 8-10, etc.). There is very little evidence to suggest that a specific range of repetitions (e.g., 3-5 versus 8-10) or time-under-load (e.g., 30s versus 90s) significantly impacts the increase in muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, or endurance.
• Perform one set of each exercise. The preponderance of resistance-training studies shows no difference in the gains in muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, or endurance as a result of performing a greater number of sets.
• After performing a combination of concentric and eccentric muscle actions, terminate each exercise at the point where the concentric phase of the exercise is becoming difficult, if not impossible, while maintaining good form. There is very little evidence to suggest that going beyond this level of intensity (e.g., supramaximal or accentuated eccentric muscle actions) will further enhance muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, or endurance.
• Allow enough time between exercises to perform the next exercise in proper form. There is very little evidence to suggest that different rest periods between sets or exercises will significantly affect the gains in muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, or endurance.
• Depending on individual recovery and response, choose a frequency of 2-3 times/week to stimulate each targeted muscle group. One session a week has been shown to be just as effective as 2-3 times/week for some muscle groups. There is very little evidence to suggest that training a muscle more than 2-3 times/week or that split routines will produce greater gains in muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, or endurance.

__________________
In all things, pursue Truth.

big

Okay, so basically what they're saying is that doing one set of machine shoulder presses of 15 reps where you stop when it "starts to get difficult" generates the same muscle growth and strength gains as a heavy 5x5 standing military press routine done to/near failure?

I suspect that any study that supports that probably has been done on inexperienced trainees, where pretty much anything WILL generate the same kind of newbie growth.

But do they honestly believe that Ronnie Coleman and Jay Cutler might as well be doing one 15 rep set of pec deck quitting when it gets difficult and calling it a day?

ONE SMART COOKIE

i personelly think that what they are trying to get across is that 1 set is good enough to do the job and that by stopping short of failure stops the body from going into shock and over stimulating and stressing the central nervous system which can hinder gains considerable,also this will cause the blood vessels etc to constrict and reduce the flow of blood which in turn would reduce the bodies ability to remove lactic acid etc and bring in nutrients to feed and repair the damage done through training.

Now if you were to take the volume approach you would always stop short of failure at about 80% roughly so that you could keep the pump in the muscle for the maximum amount of time possible also increasing the amount of blood to ome degree in there and causing some growth through that process.

CRMon1

This is an exerpt from the ASEP Report: Assuming that the goals of healthy, advanced trainees are realistically within their genetic potential, there is very little evidence to suggest that intermediate or advanced trainees need to spend several hours a day performing resistance training or obsessively manipulating the training variables to attain specific goals such as muscular hypertrophy. If the goal is not within their genetic capability, no amount of resistance training will produce the desired results.

Basically, what the ASEP is getting at is that in the end, the goal of the training routine needs to be creating a hypertrophic response to the stresses of the exercises performed. And that there is no scientific data that shows multiple sets performed at 80% 1RM can create greater hypertrophy than performing 1 set at 95% 1RM.

And the genetic potential and recovery abilities of someone using gear is vastly different from an all natural athelete.
I just thought it was an interesting report worthy of all of our attention.

__________________
In all things, pursue Truth.

James.Titor

Of course you will, its call SAID. Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demand. You place demands on the body, it adapts to them. That doesn't mean its the best way.

Total and utter fcuking nonsense. I mean really, did i just wake up one day 60lbs heavier than when i started training? Is it purely by fluke that i managed a 260kg rack pull last week? No: is the answer. Multiple sets work better than sinlge set failure systems, if you can't see that then maybe you should just give up training.

CRMon1

I can always count on get hostility from James.T.

James, have you tried any workouts that closely resemble something that the ASEP recommends? I'm just curious if you are making an assumption or an observation. The ASEP report is based on observations. That means that they compared HIT vs HVT with trained and untrained subjects.

__________________
In all things, pursue Truth.

James.Titor

TBH you should expect a little hostility when you cite studies that make the most absurd and sweeping statements ever recorded in the history of training science. Then again, maybe i was being a tad harsh. The offence, if any has been caused, is directed at the writers of the aricle/study, not you. Anyways: Of course i have tried HIT. Its total sh1te. 1 month with no progress is enough to tell you that. Seriously, read this extract form YOUR study, then read MY question to you...

1. The quote from your study:

2. My question to you, bearing that above statement in mind:

CRMon1

James.

Its hard to argue with controlled studies. The gains you've made are outstanding, but I wonder about HIT. The advocates of HIT who were also pro's, obviusly made outstanding gains as well. Its no secret that they were using gear, but so are many if not all pro's. If those men who used HIT made the same gains as those using volume training, my question is why did it work for them? What would make their results unobtainable for others?

__________________
In all things, pursue Truth.

andy78139

James it took one sperm from your father to develop into a fully grown individual like yourself.
It takes one set to faliure to stimulate hypertrophy, do not didmiss the idea because of the term "one". 100 units of intensity.

Would 30 sets give you 30 times the growth as someone doing one set?

CRMon1

Good point. I think what root of the study comes down to is the ability to recover. An genetically gifted and elite athlete has a much higher ability to recover than the average Joe or Andy. For many, the Arnold Strong routine of 20 sets/bodypart is to taxing, without using drugs to distort and increase your recovery ability. The average person would likely fall into a pit of overtraining. One set at full intensity i sjust enough to start the hypertrophic process without going so far that a person can't recover.

In any case, I've just started a 1 set/bodypart routine this week. I will post any of my gains or losses.

__________________
In all things, pursue Truth.

James.Titor

Yes. 30x1 would produce awesome gains. Though you may find that the limit for productivity lies somwhere in the 20-25 set margin.

This is my deadlift workout: (Number of sets)
1. Deadlift - Some heavy singles (7)
2. Rackpulls - 3x3 (3)
3. Thick bar deadlift - 3x3 (3)
4. Thick bar static hold - 3x1 (3)
+core+abs+assist (5-9)

Thats a minimum of 21sets and a maximum of 25sets. Are you honestly going to suggest i can make similar/better gains doing:

1. Deadlift - Reps to failure x1

???

James.Titor

It is also no secret that the VAST MAJORITY of the pros DO NOT use HIT. Remind me again, how many Olympia winners and indeed Olympic weightlifting champions, and Powerlifting champions and Strongman competitors, have used HIT as the PRIMARY* source of training in the last 100years, and how many haven't?

*They have to have trainiged like that for the majority of thier career, using it for one season is not good enough.

ONE SMART COOKIE

Franco columbo & Sergio olivia

James.Titor

According to the Encyclopedia of Modern Bodybuilding (i can't comment on SO), but FC (who trained extensively with Arnold himself) used multiple sets for the majority of his career, so did my favorite BBer of all time: Reg Park. Anyways, thats 1 out of how many?????

ONE SMART COOKIE

Park though as a general rule stuck to the 5x5 system

Anyway you just asked for some to be named so I did,lol