# Mike mentzer. HIT training



## Bulldozer

I brought his book and just been reading it and i thought i would post a typical workout that he suggests.

You volume trainers are gonna love this lol.

Workout 1 chest and back

D/b flyes (for pre exhaust) 1 x 6/10 reps

Incline press 1 x 1/3 reps

Straight arm pullover (for pre exhaust) 1 x 6/10 reps

Palms up pulldown 1 x 6/10 reps

Deadlifts 1 x 6/10 reps

REST 4 to 7 days.

Workout 2 Legs and abs

Leg extension (for pre exhaust) 1 x 12/20 reps

Leg press 1 x 12/20

Standing calf raise 1 x 12/20

sit ups 1 x 12/20

REST 4 to 7 days

Workout 3 shoulders and arms

D/b lat raise 1 x 6/10 reps

bent over lat raise 1 x 6/10 reps

palms up pulldowns 1 x 6/10 reps

triceps pushdown (for pre exhaust) 1 x 6/10 reps

dips 1 x 3/5 reps

REST 4 to 7 days

Workout 4 legs and abs

SAME AS WORKOUT 2

REST 4 to 7 days, then start at workout 1 again

NOTE. Only one working set for each exercise! And only a few exercises each session!!

Also note most importantly the rest days , minimum of 4 rest days between each workout, but upto 7 days! (that even shocked me lol)

Each workout should take approx 12 to 15 mins , so he says!!

So what you guys think on that??? pretty radical huh!!


----------



## chrisj22

If he did it, it's worked for him. I was reading an article in Flex about him changing to this HIT training & the gains he made in a short space of time were incredible apparently.

It just seems so little doesn't it? I'd feel like I've done fcuk all if I went into the gym doing that. He must have gone to total failure though (beyond belief).


----------



## Slamdog

he must have gone close to his rep max with the weights otherwise it really wouldn't be much of a load.


----------



## thestudbeast

Mike beleived in training well past failure onto forced reps and forced negatives. You'd have to have a very stong CNS to replicate his gains on this program.


----------



## Stanco

Well he definitely convinced me that training with low volume to failure is the way to go. I don't go as far as what he suggests, i do a program very similar to "big's" workout which is low volume also.

Just a note: Mike actually didn't train like this throughout his career. He got his body from doing the tradional HIT style training (Full body 3 times a week).

I think he goes too far with the consolidation routine though. Only 2 sets a week.


----------



## Galtonator

HIT has worked for me volume leads me to no gains


----------



## marso

I've been a Mentzer fan for nearly 16 years and have his books, DVD's, Video's and even an Audio Tape set. The routine you have listed is from the latest book, but in fact Menzter made his best gains using a four way split and more sets than advocated, he was also a big fan of rest pause training. This information can be found in the original Heavy Duty manuals.

While intensity is very important one should not underlook other variables that can also contribute to hypertrophy those being sufficient volume and frequency (based on the INDIVIDUALS needs and requirements) and in this regard I believe Mentzer took a step in the wrong direction with his latest routines especially his consolidation routine.

Paul.


----------



## anabolic lion

I am thinking of following something like dorian yates hit routine from blood n guts. Obviously not as mny exercises


----------



## marso

Dorian is a perfect example of someone taking the general principles of high intensity training and adapting them to suit HIS specific needs and requirements.

John Hodgson is a latter example of someone using the same principles with great success...


----------



## tiptoe

i've got johns video its one of the better dvd's on training about!


----------



## mindmuscle

Yep, been to a John Hodgson seminar recently, and he reckons he only does one working set for each exercise! ( Plus a few warm up sets) Interesting! Anybody else use this to good effect?


----------



## ah24

mindmuscle said:


> Yep, been to a John Hodgson seminar recently, and he reckons he only does one working set for each exercise! ( Plus a few warm up sets) Interesting! Anybody else use this to good effect?


Im starting it soon and hoping to get results. I think Paul.B does it and James.L is on it at the mo?

Also, yeah, John Hodgson only usually does one working set - got his DVD. His first 2 sets he gets it so the last rep looks slightly difficult but nothing over-exerting. 3rd set is all out and usually includes a couple of assisted reps.


----------



## hackskii

My training partner didnt get any gains till he went to HIT and took twice the time off.

He is progressing very nicely now.

I love HIT and I love the fact I am in the gym only 25 minutes 3 times a week for resistance training.


----------



## pob80

Im using a similar style of training i do 2 warm up sets of 12 reps then an all out set of 6-8 rep into a douple dropset with partials and when safe eg machines negatives with my ttraining partner lifting the weight and I control it down all reps are very slow and controled feeling the positive peak contraction and negative part of the rep.


----------



## chrisj22

mindmuscle said:


> Yep, been to a John Hodgson seminar recently, and he reckons he only does one working set for each exercise! ( Plus a few warm up sets) Interesting! Anybody else use this to good effect?


Your right AH24,this is what Mr. Booth does too... Never tried it myself, but many have changed to this style.


----------



## Galtonator

I do a Dorian Yates type 4 day split but only workout 3 days a week that way some body parts dont get trained 1 week. This gives me more recovery time and i really like it. Picted this idea up from Troy Brown


----------



## leeston

Chris, I am one of those converts that you have described.

Originally I did the typical, three sets of four exercises etc. Since changing my routine I still do three exercises but only one set each. I use a cadence of 4-1-4 and use all out intensity. Beleive me, one set is all you need (and all you can do if done properly).

Well worth trying if you ask me!


----------



## Nine Pack

ah24 said:


> Im starting it soon and hoping to get results. I think Paul.B does it and James.L is on it at the mo?
> 
> Also, yeah, John Hodgson only usually does one working set - got his DVD. His first 2 sets he gets it so the last rep looks slightly difficult but nothing over-exerting. 3rd set is all out and usually includes a couple of assisted reps.


Mate, I train with John & I can tell you it ain't no walk in the park. The guy is freaky strong, but insists on strict form, as do I. It's good for me to train with someone much better as it's pushing me to improve & I'm growing like a weed! we have both used HIT for years, but have recently done a few light flush sets sometimes afterwards just to shunt more blood into the muscle. I think it will help stretch the fascia tissue to allow more growth in future. Either way, he's put some serious size on since he last competed, and is still shredded. There were some who reckoned he'd reached his genetic potential. I think they are in for a big shock next time he competes. Likewise when I compete again...


----------



## leeston

Paul, let me take you down Temple. You can teach me some of your 'tricks'.


----------



## leeston

leeston said:


> Chris, I am one of those converts that you have described.
> 
> Originally I did the typical, three sets of four exercises etc. Since changing my routine I still do three exercises but only one set each. I use a cadence of 4-1-4 and use all out intensity. Beleive me, one set is all you need (and all you can do if done properly).
> 
> Well worth trying if you ask me!


Further to the above post. Using a 4-1-4 cadence is really against the 'old' bodybuilding principal. I was a member of David Llloyd and the PT's were dead against it. Every day I was told I was wrong. i simply said I appreciate whjat you are saying but if it is working and I can see results then why is it wrong. Their response was - yeah it will work to start with but you wont continue to make the gains.

I got over it and now I have changed gyms I am getting the comments again. The so called competing BB's are against my style. FFS will these people ever stop!!!

Paul, the style of training is quite different (just because of theslow cadence) but why are people soooooo set against it. Is it because they are trained in one particular way or have read countelss articles saying fast cadence only?


----------



## Nine Pack

People will typically question something that appears different or unusual. I find a lot of people won't do it because it restricts the amount of weight they can use, but so what?

Bottom line, if it's working, who can say it's wrong. There really is no right or wrong anyway, as any new stimulus will yield gains in the short term, but the methods based on sound physiological fact will always be more productive for longer. Eventually the body will adapt to the point where we need to change things around a bit so we just manipulate the variables. I'm not suggesting that there's only one way to train, but I have seen what methods really work on my clients, rather than only having my own personal experience to draw from. This gives me a slightly better perspective than the average gym user.


----------



## leeston

Paul, that makes sense.

This may seem odd, but after a couple of months my lifts using a slow cadence went up to where they were previously using the old way.

I now feel that I can lift more using your principal than before, and it is under better control. Surely this is a sure sign that it is working!!


----------



## Stanco

Hey ninepack, do you do your HIT workout like what arthur jones suggested or is it more of a heavy duty type training like mentzer? Basically, whats your routine?


----------



## Nine Pack

Stanco said:


> Hey ninepack, do you do your HIT workout like what arthur jones suggested or is it more of a heavy duty type training like mentzer? Basically, whats your routine?


Arthur Jones was nothing short of a genius, but his writing style was a little laborious so many people lose the will to live when trying to wade through the Nautilus Bulletins. Where one word would do, he'd frequently use twelve!  Anyway, I use a modified form of Dorian Yates methods. Dorian adapted the technique from Mentzers methods, and it evolves as time goes on.

My routine is something people often ask me about. If you want the truth, I have not got one. I have a structure of sets & number of exercises, but the precise exercises I do varies almost every workout. In order to keep the intensity high, I will not stand around waiting for a piece of kit to become free, so I try something else for the same bodypart. If you imagine going into the gym with 'plan A' as your routine, and then finishing on 'plan F' you're not far off what I do.


----------



## Galtonator

How many sets do you do for each muscle Nine pack?


----------



## Nine Pack

Galtonator said:


> How many sets do you do for each muscle Nine pack?


It depends on the muscle. Chest/back/delts typically get 7-8, quads/hams/calves get 5-6 (with quads given a slightly higher rep range), and bi's & tri's get 5 sets. All these sets include warm ups.


----------



## Galtonator

Thanks for the info mucg appreciated


----------



## ajfitness

have just started an HIT programme, slightly Dorian Yates-esque, and it rocks!

the DOMS last for days so you know youve had a cracking workout.


----------



## Pete1436114491

Is anyone doing the routine out of the 'High intensity training the Mike Mentzer way'? It seems that legs and abs get trained twice to every other body parts once. Anyone do this as it's written? I'm assuming it correct and not a mistake in the text, but it doesn't mention it in the later paragraphs so got me wondering a bit.

Cheers.


----------



## 60na

H I T works because of the shere intensity needed for 1 repetition,the secret has gotta be the 6-8 second count on the negative and the positive parts of the excercise...Thats painful,and if your not used to it .Very challenging


----------



## Wee G1436114539

Wrote this donkeys ago but it still holds true - HIT has become a kind of blanket term for ALL training technique that involve a low volume, this is a pain in the ass because it makes people think in terms of HIT Vs Volume or ""which is best" or other similar notions. Therefore the following relates tothe MM HIT one set per bodypart per 7-14 days routine, ok?

In simple scientific terms HIT training violates the following universally accepted principles of training science:

1. Principle of individual differences - violated.

2. Principle of overcompensation - may / may not depends on the lifter.

3. Principle of overload - usually violated in HIT programs.

4. SAID (specific adaptation to imposed demand) - Violated.

5. Use / Disuse - Violated.

6. Specificity Principle - Violated.

7. GAS (general adaptation syndrome) principle - Violated.

In short the HIT guys are so concerned with pushing what they incorrectly call "intensity" (what they call intensity is actually correctly referred to as RPE or Rating of Perceived Effort) as the means to gains in size / strength that they blinker themselves to factors such as rep speed, load, volume, density, intensity (correctly defined - the % of a 1RM at which one works), rest times between sets, specificity of adaptation to different means of stimulation etc.

Most low calibre athletes baulk at training a body part more than once or at the most twice a week, but if they realised that fatigue is specific then they would realise that it is perfectly possible to train most muscles several times a week as long as the workouts utilised are not overly similar in terms of motor qualities utilised or neural patterns of activation used. This enables the athlete to more or less simultaneously train several qualities ASSUMING that enough attention is paid to monitoring residual fatigue effects, avoiding overtraining and keeping tabs on total training volume. As many of you will know this approach to training is called the conjugate method and it seems to work pretty well for a certain Barbell club or two. HIT doesn't allow for different means to be used - it demands the means is the same at all times and only allows for changes (increases!) in load - and therefore precludes the use of conjugate training or indeed almost any other way of training. This makes it a pretty foolish way for any performance athlete to train.

That being said Bodybuilding is not a performance sport. It's about being big - it's about Hypertrophy!

In the short term, for Bodybuilders, HIT will not be a particularly effective training means but never "useless". Nothing that provides a training stimulus is "useless" it all depends on the context in which it is utilised.

What irritates me most about the "HIT Jedi" in Bodybuilding is they often insist on HIT being the "best" way for all people to train, all the time. That is nothing short of moronic. There is no one best way to train. At each given instant in time there may be a best way for each individual to train but the chances of that being the same means, all the time, for all people, is practically non-existent. It is like betting on the same horse every time - even when it is isn't running in that particular race - sure it might win eventually but you are going to lose out big time in the long run.

HIT and other extremely low volume routines can be utilised at times WHEN IT IS APPROPRIATE but it is POINTLESS to use HIT as an exclusive system of sports training, or even Bodybuilding training.

Some say a "medium" level of volume will be most suited for most athletes seeking hypertrophy. Id rather state that most athletes will get the best results by making use of the widest possible variety of stimulus over a long period of time - one of these stimuli might well be very low volume work taken to the point of muscular fatigue with low frequency of training i.e. HIT.

Equally one of the stimuli might be a very high volume of work with very high training frequencies. So rather than say a "medium" level of volume used at all times will be most appropriate to maximise gains I'd rather say that most time should probably be spent training with moderate training volume. Almost all levels of volume / intensity / fatigue should be utilised but never at the total exclusion of one another from the overall training plan.

Following HIT protocols as laid out by Mentzer et al automatically excludes all other set / rep / bar speed / frequency / rest period etc combinations and why would anyone want to do that? Far better to vary training stimulus, in a logical manner, over time.

So why is it that so many folks like HIT (at least for a while) ?

I think the gains made by HIT converts are down to a few factors that can be found in any training methodology as follows:

Change in volume / load / fatigue / some other parameter which results in temporary progress by change of means.

Change in work rate through mental change. "This is it! I've finally found the secret - now I am going to work my ass off" and Voila - the belief gives rise to hard work which in turn brings the progress via change in WORK ETHIC. Suddenly all is good in the world and you eat better, train stricter, sleep more etc.

HIT is good for generating both of these things. Low volume training is an unusual stimulus for most athletes.

Most athletes will work pretty hard on something they believe in. HIT, like all other marketed "systems" of BBing is well hyped, slickly marketed and well backed by anecdotal evidence...which generates belief before it is even tried so the trial is "biased".

After a while of this particular stimulus the athlete will become stale and HIT "stops working". At this point if you believe Mentzer you need "more rest" or you must "call on reserves of deep energy" or some other pseudo-philosophical claptrap. The simple truth is you will have to mind a different training stimulus and it will undoubtedly involve greater training volume.

So, bottom line, low volume has a place in bodybuilding training some of the time. Low frequency is a harder one to swallow as the time scale of protein synthesis is pretty well established and it sure ain't 14 days  BUT if low frequency as advocated by HIT allows for neural recovery from weeks / months / years of training then it WILL result in new strnegth and subsequent muscle growth.

Cheers,

G


----------



## Guest

I have his book and find it very good personally i train DC style but just reading some of his mentality ideas ext was very educational for me.


----------



## Chris4Pez1436114538

I think that this type of training can work as any sort of training can be effective but which ever one is best totally depends upon the persons training!

As you can imagine everyones body type is different and reacts different to different training methods, Obviously mike can say what worked for him and obviously it works for other people as well!

I was once watching a programme on this type of training where they only train once every couple of weeks but yet they reconed that this type of training was effective to them but i personally cant see how this works but they said it was for them and until they are proven wrong i dont doubt that it does as i am the sort of person who is open minded (but not gullable) so if i think something is possible i will believe it but then if i think that something is not logical then i wont!

But as i was saying i personally dont see why this sort of training couldnt be as effective as he was saying!!!!


----------



## wogihao

Wee G said:


> Wrote this donkeys ago but it still holds true - HIT has become a kind of blanket term for ALL training technique that involve a low volume, this is a pain in the ass because it makes people think in terms of HIT Vs Volume or ""which is best" or other similar notions. Therefore the following relates tothe MM HIT one set per bodypart per 7-14 days routine, ok?
> 
> In simple scientific terms HIT training violates the following universally accepted principles of training science:
> 
> 1. Principle of individual differences - violated.
> 
> 2. Principle of overcompensation - may / may not depends on the lifter.
> 
> 3. Principle of overload - usually violated in HIT programs.
> 
> 4. SAID (specific adaptation to imposed demand) - Violated.
> 
> 5. Use / Disuse - Violated.
> 
> 6. Specificity Principle - Violated.
> 
> 7. GAS (general adaptation syndrome) principle - Violated.
> 
> In short the HIT guys are so concerned with pushing what they incorrectly call "intensity" (what they call intensity is actually correctly referred to as RPE or Rating of Perceived Effort) as the means to gains in size / strength that they blinker themselves to factors such as rep speed, load, volume, density, intensity (correctly defined - the % of a 1RM at which one works), rest times between sets, specificity of adaptation to different means of stimulation etc.
> 
> Most low calibre athletes baulk at training a body part more than once or at the most twice a week, but if they realised that fatigue is specific then they would realise that it is perfectly possible to train most muscles several times a week as long as the workouts utilised are not overly similar in terms of motor qualities utilised or neural patterns of activation used. This enables the athlete to more or less simultaneously train several qualities ASSUMING that enough attention is paid to monitoring residual fatigue effects, avoiding overtraining and keeping tabs on total training volume. As many of you will know this approach to training is called the conjugate method and it seems to work pretty well for a certain Barbell club or two. HIT doesn't allow for different means to be used - it demands the means is the same at all times and only allows for changes (increases!) in load - and therefore precludes the use of conjugate training or indeed almost any other way of training. This makes it a pretty foolish way for any performance athlete to train.
> 
> That being said Bodybuilding is not a performance sport. It's about being big - it's about Hypertrophy!
> 
> In the short term, for Bodybuilders, HIT will not be a particularly effective training means but never "useless". Nothing that provides a training stimulus is "useless" it all depends on the context in which it is utilised.
> 
> What irritates me most about the "HIT Jedi" in Bodybuilding is they often insist on HIT being the "best" way for all people to train, all the time. That is nothing short of moronic. There is no one best way to train. At each given instant in time there may be a best way for each individual to train but the chances of that being the same means, all the time, for all people, is practically non-existent. It is like betting on the same horse every time - even when it is isn't running in that particular race - sure it might win eventually but you are going to lose out big time in the long run.
> 
> HIT and other extremely low volume routines can be utilised at times WHEN IT IS APPROPRIATE but it is POINTLESS to use HIT as an exclusive system of sports training, or even Bodybuilding training.
> 
> Some say a "medium" level of volume will be most suited for most athletes seeking hypertrophy. Id rather state that most athletes will get the best results by making use of the widest possible variety of stimulus over a long period of time - one of these stimuli might well be very low volume work taken to the point of muscular fatigue with low frequency of training i.e. HIT.
> 
> Equally one of the stimuli might be a very high volume of work with very high training frequencies. So rather than say a "medium" level of volume used at all times will be most appropriate to maximise gains I'd rather say that most time should probably be spent training with moderate training volume. Almost all levels of volume / intensity / fatigue should be utilised but never at the total exclusion of one another from the overall training plan.
> 
> Following HIT protocols as laid out by Mentzer et al automatically excludes all other set / rep / bar speed / frequency / rest period etc combinations and why would anyone want to do that? Far better to vary training stimulus, in a logical manner, over time.
> 
> So why is it that so many folks like HIT (at least for a while) ?
> 
> I think the gains made by HIT converts are down to a few factors that can be found in any training methodology as follows:
> 
> Change in volume / load / fatigue / some other parameter which results in temporary progress by change of means.
> 
> Change in work rate through mental change. "This is it! I've finally found the secret - now I am going to work my ass off" and Voila - the belief gives rise to hard work which in turn brings the progress via change in WORK ETHIC. Suddenly all is good in the world and you eat better, train stricter, sleep more etc.
> 
> HIT is good for generating both of these things. Low volume training is an unusual stimulus for most athletes.
> 
> Most athletes will work pretty hard on something they believe in. HIT, like all other marketed "systems" of BBing is well hyped, slickly marketed and well backed by anecdotal evidence...which generates belief before it is even tried so the trial is "biased".
> 
> After a while of this particular stimulus the athlete will become stale and HIT "stops working". At this point if you believe Mentzer you need "more rest" or you must "call on reserves of deep energy" or some other pseudo-philosophical claptrap. The simple truth is you will have to mind a different training stimulus and it will undoubtedly involve greater training volume.
> 
> So, bottom line, low volume has a place in bodybuilding training some of the time. Low frequency is a harder one to swallow as the time scale of protein synthesis is pretty well established and it sure ain't 14 days  BUT if low frequency as advocated by HIT allows for neural recovery from weeks / months / years of training then it WILL result in new strnegth and subsequent muscle growth.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> G


Bumped for the truth! Very good post.


----------

