|
Hi guys,
I am not going to be popular with these comments, but I think it is essential in order to guide new bodybuilders who want to try the HIP principles.
Background: I am 23 years old, have a high metabolism (skinny of nature), been working out for 3-4 years and have tried a lot of programs in order to tailor the "perfect" program. I tried HIT for about 4-5 month.
When I first tried HIT, I was so convinced that it would work. HIT speaks so strongly to your logos – logic – (still Mike uses pathos – emotions – as convincing tools). And with HIT I increased my strength in some exercises, but I did not increase in mass – something many bodybuilders recognize. And my hypothesis is that I improved my CNS because I waited 4-5 days before training again, so the CNS were the system to recover more. Your physical resources are totally loaded as well. I can question; where is the scientific fact that your muscles need more 2 days to recover (mikes claim)? The must general rule is that after 48-72 hours your muscles are fully recovered – is that a fact as well? – I cannot find the facts, but obviously your body feels recovered and you are able to train and increase with the 48-72 hours rule – many do. Furthermore some surveys state that more than 1 set is the best in order to achieve maximum hypertrophy. That is causality and based on empirical knowledge, which must be separated from logic (causality and logic cannot work together, because they are opposite). There is much more to say about Mike’s claims and his lack of scientific justification, but let that be. I do not claim that other concepts/programs have better scientific justifications.
You can logically state what is supposed to happen when you work out (recovery), but you will not know the body’s recovery time, you need causality and empirical knowledge. When Mike talks, he talks without these scientific references, which is wrong – and if Mike was/is right, how can people who are doing 3 sets programs with training 3-5 days a week still get excellent results in relation to mass and strength – according to Mike they are not fully recovered and do not have the required intensity to grow. But look at Taylor Lautner for instance (Jacob in “Twilight” – look him up) I have personally gained 16 lbs within 6 months by doing a 3 set full body program, training 3 times a week (Monday, Wednesday and Friday), and I did not gain much with HIT. My point is not to reject HIT, but to say it has discrepancies. You can use the whole way of thinking – press yourself to your limit, that is to positive failure. Think about your TUL and the way you do the exercises and so on. But don’t think HIT will make you increase insanely.
To put it short, the key to growth consists of about 60 % food, 30 % training, 10 % sleep and rest. They are all important, but you need to fuel in order to let your muscles grow, actually you need to BULK!!!! Training is important as well and especially variety is important. You need to push yourself but with a variety of exercises, sets and reps.. design your own program, that is NOT the same during your 5-8 weeks of training before you take 1 week of rest. Your body will build bigger if it is forced to, and will grow if it needs too (with the proper intake of food of course). Sleep and rest is important, and need no explanation.
Conclusion: use the ideas of HIT, but don’t think it is the only solution to mass and strength. Think instead more about your amount of calories and food-intake and the variety of intensity training.
That’s all from here
/Imatjen
|
|
