Bigger Lats

[cereal]

Shouldn't you be in the gym overtraining yourself?

 

[El Freako]

^


Despite its faults that comment made me lol.

 

[PrinceVegeta]

pullovers lol

 

[_ROBERTiNHO_]

Squats combined with pullovers for ribcage expansion

 

[Pickle]

^


Despite its faults that comment made me lol.

me too lol

 

[Xiva]

Chinups are good.

Lat shrugs are fucking perfect!

I would go for a mix of lat shrugs and chinups.

 

[CombBoy]

I do: deadlifts, barbell rows, one-arm dumbbell rows.

 

[cereal]

HIT = Fail for lazy bastards.

Extra heavy in HIT is an oxymoron.

So you trust a drug addict, neurotic that never achieved any success in the BBing world, who literally made himself mad with a cocktail of Ayn Rand and amphetamines??? You really picked a good idol to whorship there

You know I've just started up a business making graven images for idolators. I make Mike Mentzer statues out of premium grade male-bovine-excrement, sizes range from life-size to key chain versions. Whorship your idol in the manner befitting his memory.

Volume = epic fail for lazy bastards
high volyme = epic fail for idiot lazy bastards who cant think

Drug addict....yeah, show me a pro who isn't
and what's Ayn Rand gotta do with this....some follows him, I don'tand btw, he's not my idol, so FU and stop putting words on other people mouths.
and stick your key chains into somwplace where the sun doesn't shine.

 

[tim290280]

Volume = epic fail for lazy bastards
high volyme = epic fail for idiot lazy bastards who cant think

Drug addict....yeah, show me a pro who isn't
and what's Ayn Rand gotta do with this....some follows him, I don'tand btw, he's not my idol, so FU and stop putting words on other people mouths.
and stick your key chains into somwplace where the sun doesn't shine.

Wow COMEBACK!!!! You've spent a month cooking that post up??

Once you get the HIT goggles off you will realise I'm right on this. All the good science shows that HIT sucks. All the successful athletes are trying to incorporate more volume (regardless of drugs). HIT isn't completely without merit, but unless you have a really active life and only two free periods a week to train it is crap in comparison. Every activity study shows you need to be active everyday, not twice a week.

And yes Mentzer was a nutcase. Have you ever read any of his later work?? There was an interesting article written by one of his book editors about how much crap they had to trim out of his writings so that it made sense. He was an addict. BBers aren't addicts just because they take drugs, just as most people aren't alcoholics just because they drink.

 

[Johnny Bravo]

Drug addict....yeah, show me a pro who isn't

Mentzer was a big user of amfetamine.

 

[Bulkboy]

Volume = epic fail for lazy bastards
high volyme = epic fail for idiot lazy bastards who cant think

try telling this to Jay Cutler, Ronnie Coleman and Arnold

there are many ways to Rome. HIT may work for some, but you dont have science on your side. most people arent even able to generate enough intensity in order to justify doing 1-2 working sets for a bodypart.

 

[cereal]

try telling this to Jay Cutler, Ronnie Coleman and Arnold

there are many ways to Rome. HIT may work for some, but you dont have science on your side. most people arent even able to generate enough intensity in order to justify doing 1-2 working sets for a bodypart.

what a bunch of bullshit. Learn more from science (because what you are saying is pretty far from it) and you might discover that ain't true. HIT works for everyone. There is no few special guys who can do HIT. I can say same for volume. It may work for someone...doesn't that sound little odd? Yes it does. Now you are not thinking scientific.
Search your feelings. Use teh force.

 

[Bulkboy]

what a bunch of bullshit. Learn more from science (because what you are saying is pretty far from it) and you might discover that ain't true. HIT works for everyone. There is no few special guys who can do HIT. I can say same for volume. It may work for someone...doesn't that sound little odd? Yes it does. Now you are not thinking scientific.
Search your feelings. Use teh force.

show me a scientific paper that advocates one set to failure and beyond as the best way to induce hypertrophy and strenght gains.

 

[El Freako]

I'm not going to argue the volume vs HIT scientific case but I would just like to highlight the inherent flaws in a program that espouses the pullover as a major bulk-building exercise.

 

[PrinceVegeta]

5/3/1 ftw!

 

[tim290280]

show me a scientific paper that advocates one set to failure and beyond as the best way to induce hypertrophy and strenght gains.

There are a few papers around that were run by proponents of HIT who have done some studies that supposedly support HIT. But when they were reviewed there was no logical evidence shown, as they did not test their stated hypothesis.

This is a recent review that actually consolidates all of the research on number of sets:
Volume vs HIT: The Answer - MuscleMecca.com Forums
It concludes that more sets is superior, but volume hasn't been suitably studied to conclude whether more sets is better, although that is the indication. Weightlifting studies (which are usually unpublished or published years later due to the countries wishing to hide the data) have always tended towards volume, and they are the kings of strength and hypertrophy (although someone is going to argue this last point).

 

[cereal]

This volume fuzzing seems to be like worldwide fundametalistic religion.

Oh yeah, 5 sets is good, ten even better, 40 sets more better, damn train 18hours a day for 4 years and you'll be big as Dorian Yates...

sure, I would like to have 100€ more than 1€, but bodybuilding isn't economics.
A bodybuilding is not an endurance contest either.

Volume isn't wrong, HIT isn't wrong, there is no right way to train, in MY opinion HIT is just best...gets it?

You guys do your stuff and I do mine. ok?

Now STFU and go back squatting!

 

[Big_Guns_Lance]

^ LOL, shouldnt you be squatting too?!

Anyway, listen cereal. I was a follower of the mentzer crew and protected it with useless arguments like you have been doing but it really isn't the most productive way to train, FACT.

Although i did make good gains on it, i would have made better progress on a a programme with more volume. Not just that, but i was literally training to failure all the time! And that wasn't good for my cns. I was getting ill very frequently. I did however like training to failure like this, dunno why just did, but what i wanted is a programme that is going to give me the very best results possible and it's fair to say that it isn't the HIT way. So if you want to carry on training your way if you enjoy it, just understand that HIT is flawed and soon (hopefully) you will realise and leave it behind for good.

 

[cereal]

Mebbe I will, mebbe I don't. Yes it HITs the cns, thats why you gotta take care of recovery and nutrition etc...same thing in volume thingies. Human is not a machine. Everyone has a limited recovery reserve. I know that.

First reason I changed to this was my injuries, especially shoulder. Second was my knee.
I cant do really heavy weightlifting, so isotension is only choice at this moment. Gotta make it heavy differently.

Useless arguments...HIT is flawed....yeah right, wake up to real world and stop listening those multinational bullshit companies.

 

[Johnny Bravo]

Useless arguments...HIT is flawed....yeah right, wake up to real world and stop listening those multinational bullshit companies.

What the hell are you talking about now?