Starting HIT training..

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I've been working out a couple of years and for a while I've been
training in the 3-5 rep range. I am thinking of doing a HIT program for
mass and power.
I'm a bit unsure on how to structure the training...

this is how I imagine doing it:
(1 set in the 12-15 rep range (which will be unusual for me), to
failure, maybe up to 20 on the squats):

That regime won't get you "mass and power".

Quoted message said:

squats
stiff legged deadlifts
db pullovers
rows
bench variation
press
shrugs

Dump the SLDL's and do DL's.

Quoted message said:

3 times a week
or

to split it up, at least the upper body work.
like this

day 1)
squats
sldl
chins
dips
curls
pullovers
french presses

day 2)
squats
sldl
rows
bench
shrugs
presses

..
now, should I just pick one horizontal chest excercise and go with it
for the duration of the program, like narrow grip bench, or should I
alternate?

Narrow grip bench's are mostly for tri's.

this is how I imagine doing it:
(1 set in the 12-15 rep range (which will be unusual for me), to
failure, maybe up to 20 on the squats):

squats
stiff legged deadlifts
db pullovers
rows
bench variation
press
shrugs

3 times a week

--Looks good. I'd drop the shrugs since they're hit deadlifting,
rowing, and pressing, and I'd drop it to twice a week. Oh, and I think
the rep range for HIT is 6-12 for upper body. Whatever works for you,
though.

Cheers

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

I've been working out a couple of years and for a while I've been
training in the 3-5 rep range. I am thinking of doing a HIT program for
mass and power.

HIT training and power development pretty much contradict one another.
If by HIT training you mean training to 'failure' (I like Zatsiorsky's
term 'refusal' better, myself.)

Power training is training motor units to fire together and is primarily
neural. HIT training is essentially telling the body not to fire the
motor units together because there are more reps coming and is primarily
metabolic.

If you like the idea of HIT I'd consider doing phases of HIT for
hypertrophy and phases of 'Quality Training' or QT (an idea I believe
which Tommy Kono popularized back in the 50's).

Jason Keen has some interesting routines on both modified HIT and QT.

http://www.tc.umn.edu/~keen0018/routines.htm

'The best of the best' is a QT routine and the HIT is labeled as HIT.

--
Keith

Hobbes said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

I've been working out a couple of years and for a while I've been
training in the 3-5 rep range. I am thinking of doing a HIT program for
mass and power.

HIT training and power development pretty much contradict one another.
If by HIT training you mean training to 'failure' (I like Zatsiorsky's
term 'refusal' better, myself.)

The usual scientific reference is "MVC": maximal voluntary contraction.
Although that term is usually applied to single-repetition isometric
contractions, it pretty much applies here.

Quoted message said:

Power training is training motor units to fire together and is primarily
neural. HIT training is essentially telling the body not to fire the
motor units together because there are more reps coming and is primarily
metabolic.

If you like the idea of HIT I'd consider doing phases of HIT for
hypertrophy and phases of 'Quality Training' or QT (an idea I believe
which Tommy Kono popularized back in the 50's).

Jason Keen has some interesting routines on both modified HIT and QT.

http://www.tc.umn.edu/~keen0018/routines.htm

'The best of the best' is a QT routine and the HIT is labeled as HIT.

I still think HIT is good for newbies. It provides structure and
neuromuscular training that is essential to a decent strength training
program. Most newbies are trained by morons who tell them, "Do ten of
these and twenty of those." They need to learn their limits and the
concept of increasing weight and repetitions within a
progressive-resistance format so that they can develop conscious and
unconscious "learning" of their general capacity for X repetitions at X
weight range. Once they have that down, they should probably move on
to another program that is better suited toward their goals.

In article <[email hidden]>,

JMW said:

Hobbes said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

I've been working out a couple of years and for a while I've been
training in the 3-5 rep range. I am thinking of doing a HIT program for
mass and power.

HIT training and power development pretty much contradict one another.
If by HIT training you mean training to 'failure' (I like Zatsiorsky's
term 'refusal' better, myself.)

The usual scientific reference is "MVC": maximal voluntary contraction.
Although that term is usually applied to single-repetition isometric
contractions, it pretty much applies here.

Quoted message said:

Power training is training motor units to fire together and is primarily
neural. HIT training is essentially telling the body not to fire the
motor units together because there are more reps coming and is primarily
metabolic.

If you like the idea of HIT I'd consider doing phases of HIT for
hypertrophy and phases of 'Quality Training' or QT (an idea I believe
which Tommy Kono popularized back in the 50's).

Jason Keen has some interesting routines on both modified HIT and QT.

http://www.tc.umn.edu/~keen0018/routines.htm

'The best of the best' is a QT routine and the HIT is labeled as HIT.

I still think HIT is good for newbies. It provides structure and
neuromuscular training that is essential to a decent strength training
program. Most newbies are trained by morons who tell them, "Do ten of
these and twenty of those." They need to learn their limits and the
concept of increasing weight and repetitions within a
progressive-resistance format so that they can develop conscious and
unconscious "learning" of their general capacity for X repetitions at X
weight range. Once they have that down, they should probably move on
to another program that is better suited toward their goals.

I would agree with that if you mean after they have learnt proper motor
patterns in the lifts (ASSuming you are talking free weights here).
Having someone go to MVC in a rep deadlift who doesn't know how a
deadlift should feel is asking for injury, IMO. I also think the
emphasis should be on maximal voluntary rep that can be done in good
form - and emphasis is on the latter. I've seen too many people
(normally guys) get the testosterone thing going and just use terrible
technique.

HIT training is also useful for certain sports preparation - for example
both wrestling and rugby could use a week or two of HIT training in the
off-season preparation cycle, IMO.

I like it as a discreet modality - I don't like it when it is touted the
be all and end all of training.

--
Keith

Hobbes said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

JMW said:

Hobbes said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] wrote:

> I've been working out a couple of years and for a while I've been
> training in the 3-5 rep range. I am thinking of doing a HIT programfor
> mass and power.

HIT training and power development pretty much contradict one another.
If by HIT training you mean training to 'failure' (I like Zatsiorsky's
term 'refusal' better, myself.)

The usual scientific reference is "MVC": maximal voluntary contraction.
Although that term is usually applied to single-repetition isometric
contractions, it pretty much applies here.

Quoted message said:

Power training is training motor units to fire together and is primarily
neural. HIT training is essentially telling the body not to fire the
motor units together because there are more reps coming and is primarily
metabolic.

If you like the idea of HIT I'd consider doing phases of HIT for
hypertrophy and phases of 'Quality Training' or QT (an idea I believe
which Tommy Kono popularized back in the 50's).

Jason Keen has some interesting routines on both modified HIT and QT.

http://www.tc.umn.edu/~keen0018/routines.htm

'The best of the best' is a QT routine and the HIT is labeled as HIT.

I still think HIT is good for newbies. It provides structure and
neuromuscular training that is essential to a decent strength training
program. Most newbies are trained by morons who tell them, "Do ten of
these and twenty of those." They need to learn their limits and the
concept of increasing weight and repetitions within a
progressive-resistance format so that they can develop conscious and
unconscious "learning" of their general capacity for X repetitions at X
weight range. Once they have that down, they should probably move on
to another program that is better suited toward their goals.

I would agree with that if you mean after they have learnt proper motor
patterns in the lifts (ASSuming you are talking free weights here).
Having someone go to MVC in a rep deadlift who doesn't know how a
deadlift should feel is asking for injury, IMO. I also think the
emphasis should be on maximal voluntary rep that can be done in good
form - and emphasis is on the latter. I've seen too many people
(normally guys) get the testosterone thing going and just use terrible
technique.

HIT training is also useful for certain sports preparation - for example
both wrestling and rugby could use a week or two of HIT training in the
off-season preparation cycle, IMO.

I like it as a discreet modality - I don't like it when it is touted the
be all and end all of training.

Therein lies the problem with many good training and nutritional
programs: too many of their proponents tout them as The Answer®,
particularly the proponents who stand to make a profit from them.