MB Madaera
Lost 31.7 lbs fat
Built 11.7 lbs muscle


Chris Madaera
Built 9 lbs muscle


Keelan Parham
Lost 30 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle


Bob Marchesello
Lost 23.55 lbs fat
Built 8.55 lbs muscle


Jeff Turner
Lost 25.5 lbs fat


Jeanenne Darden
Lost 26 lbs fat
Built 3 lbs muscle


Ted Tucker
Lost 41 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle

 
 

Determine the Length of Your Workouts

Evaluate Your Progress

Keep Warm-Up in Perspective


ARCHIVES >>

"Doing more exercise with less intensity,"
Arthur Jones believes, "has all but
destroyed the actual great value
of weight training. Something
must be done . . . and quickly."
The New Bodybuilding for
Old-School Results supplies
MUCH of that "something."

 

This is one of 93 photos of Andy McCutcheon that are used in The New High-Intensity Training to illustrate the recommended exercises.

To find out more about McCutcheon and his training, click here.

 

Mission Statement

H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy

Privacy Policy

Credits

LOG IN FORUM MAIN REGISTER SEARCH
HIT vs High Volume
1 | 2 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

WillEast

Outside of philospical debate, I would like to hear if anyone can describe their actual experiences with HIT compared to high volume/frequency for building size and strength. I am currently trying my own experiment but so far it is inconclusive. It is not clear if high volume is any better but I would like to hear other experiences.
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

==Scott==
I don't know if this is considered high volume but I made my best gains doing 3 sets per body part of 30-15-6 reps to failure, sometimes a slight cheat at the end of the set to add a few more reps. One set per body part never did much for me nor did any more sets than 3.
Open User Options Menu

HDLou

entsminger wrote:
==Scott==
I don't know if this is considered high volume but I made my best gains doing 3 sets per body part of 30-15-6 reps to failure, sometimes a slight cheat at the end of the set to add a few more reps. One set per body part never did much for me nor did any more sets than 3.


Were those 3 sets taken to failure? Different weight for each set?
Open User Options Menu

hit4me

Florida, USA

first of all, it depends on what your goals are and what you consider to be great gains.

I did high volume in my twenties, training 6 days/week Arnold style and made great gains, weighed 180 lbs and 5'8" and was as strong as an ox and could run miles and swim laps like tarzan.....with my recuperation level back then it was awesome

in my thirties I made great gains training yates style, however with injuries....so I would not consider that style of training worthwhile

now in my 50s, I consider my gains great, training full body 3/week and walking a few miles about 3/week...no injuries...as all I care about at this point is being healthy

so, what are your goals?
Open User Options Menu

Crotalus

entsminger wrote:
==Scott==
I don't know if this is considered high volume but I made my best gains doing 3 sets per body part of 30-15-6 reps to failure, sometimes a slight cheat at the end of the set to add a few more reps. One set per body part never did much for me nor did any more sets than 3.


Yeah Scott, I think that three set routine is great too. Three sets seems to be the max for me per exercise also, but if I'm doing three exercises per muscle group , two works better for me. I just can't seem to stay focused on one exercise for more than three sets.

Another three set per exercise routine that works well is Dogg Crap Training ( that is what it's called these days but it too has been around from the beginning ) .

Pick a goal number of reps for the three sets and go for it. EX: Goal is 20 reps in three sets for pulldowns ; pick a weight you can get 10 - 12/failure for the first set , rest 15-30 seconds and go again , rest the same and go again. When your total reaches 20 up the weights. Your goal can be whatever is best for you. For me, upper body I usually pick 15 for my three set total.

Real simple and I'll know you'll enjoy it much better than that 303030 you're trying to get into now. Just don't rest too long between sets.
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

HDLou wrote:
entsminger wrote:
==Scott==
I don't know if this is considered high volume but I made my best gains doing 3 sets per body part of 30-15-6 reps to failure, sometimes a slight cheat at the end of the set to add a few more reps. One set per body part never did much for me nor did any more sets than 3.

Were those 3 sets taken to failure? Different weight for each set?


==Scott==
Yes to failure and sometimes a slight cheat at the end to get a rep or two more. I'd pretty much use the same weight and by the 2nd set I could only do about 15 and the third about 6. I'd rest about 30 seconds or less between sets.
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

Real simple and I'll know you'll enjoy it much better than that 303030 you're trying to get into now. Just don't rest too long between sets.
==Scott==
I'm just trying 30 30 30 out of respect for Darden.I had no misgivings at the beginning that it would work, in fact I thought it wasn't going to work and I've seen nothing so far to dispute that but at this point I've got nothing to lose so I'm trying it a while.
My biggest question is how others seem dragged out and spent and ready to go to bed after a 30 30 30? When I finish my 30 30 30 I'm raring to go again in no time and it feels too easy? Gee, I've said this before.It's like I'm talking to the wall.
Open User Options Menu

Lioncourt

entsminger wrote:
I'm just trying 30 30 30 out of respect for Darden.I had no misgivings at the beginning that it would work, in fact I thought it wasn't going to work and I've seen nothing so far to dispute that but at this point I've got nothing to lose so I'm trying it a while.
My biggest question is how others seem dragged out and spent and ready to go to bed after a 30 30 30? When I finish my 30 30 30 I'm raring to go again in no time and it feels too easy? Gee, I've said this before.It's like I'm talking to the wall.


After our discussions on here I wanted to give the new protocols a try again. But this time I did the 15-15-15+8-12 instead, since some older posts Darden said he thought it might be even better. I did it Monday and felt absolutely wiped that night with a lot of fatigue in my legs in particular. I never felt that way after 30-30-30. Weights I used were close to what I did for my last 30 workout. I can't say that I enjoyed the workout much more and I still don't see me using it as anything more than as an intensity enhancer from time to time.

Open User Options Menu

Lioncourt

WillEast wrote:
Outside of philospical debate, I would like to hear if anyone can describe their actual experiences with HIT compared to high volume/frequency for building size and strength. I am currently trying my own experiment but so far it is inconclusive. It is not clear if high volume is any better but I would like to hear other experiences.


I think there is a need to define what you mean by high volume. Anything more than 1 set per bodypart 2-3x a week by traditional HIT is high volume. But anyone doing an Arnold style routine of 20 sets per bodypart training on a 6 day split is going to have trouble getting results.

With that said I can maintain muscle just fine on a traditional Mentzer or Darden style HIT routine training everything 1-2x a week for a set to failure each.

I need to up the volume to something like an upper/lower split with everyone trained 2x a week for around 10-14 sets over the course of the week for optimum muscle gains. Maybe only about half of those sets approach failure and the rest are a rep or 2 shy.
Open User Options Menu

OldFred

Scott: When you say you made gains, was it about equal in both strength and in hypertrophy, or did one aspect stand out?
Also, how long did you use the 30-15-6 approach before you saw some gains?
Open User Options Menu

HDLou

entsminger wrote:
HDLou wrote:
entsminger wrote:
==Scott==
I don't know if this is considered high volume but I made my best gains doing 3 sets per body part of 30-15-6 reps to failure, sometimes a slight cheat at the end of the set to add a few more reps. One set per body part never did much for me nor did any more sets than 3.

Were those 3 sets taken to failure? Different weight for each set?

==Scott==
Yes to failure and sometimes a slight cheat at the end to get a rep or two more. I'd pretty much use the same weight and by the 2nd set I could only do about 15 and the third about 6. I'd rest about 30 seconds or less between sets.


Sounds like you were using some light weights to be able to get 30 reps. Were you performing full range reps, full stretch and full contraction, or more of a mid range range of motion?
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

After our discussions on here I wanted to give the new protocols a try again. But this time I did the 15-15-15+8-12 instead, since some older posts Darden said he thought it might be even better. I did it Monday and felt absolutely wiped that night with a lot of fatigue in my legs in particular. I never felt that way after 30-30-30

==Scott==
I did 30 30 30 again last night and felt fresh as a daisy after the workout. Now one thing I didn't mention is that with my bad knee I can't do hard leg work. I just don't know how people are feeling wiped out after 30 30 30? I'll have to try the 15 15 15 +8--12 .
Open User Options Menu

Average Al

entsminger wrote:
==Scott==
I don't know if this is considered high volume but I made my best gains doing 3 sets per body part of 30-15-6 reps to failure, sometimes a slight cheat at the end of the set to add a few more reps. One set per body part never did much for me nor did any more sets than 3.


Just curious about this:

I assume you start light, and then go heavier with each subsequent set?

Did you have a specific weight progression (c.f., 50%, 75%, then 100%)?

Did you go to failure on every set?

What kind of rest period between sets?
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

HDLou wrote:
entsminger wrote:
HDLou wrote:
entsminger wrote:
==Scott==
I don't know if this is considered high volume but I made my best gains doing 3 sets per body part of 30-15-6 reps to failure, sometimes a slight cheat at the end of the set to add a few more reps. One set per body part never did much for me nor did any more sets than 3.

Were those 3 sets taken to failure? Different weight for each set?

==Scott==
Yes to failure and sometimes a slight cheat at the end to get a rep or two more. I'd pretty much use the same weight and by the 2nd set I could only do about 15 and the third about 6. I'd rest about 30 seconds or less between sets.

Sounds like you were using some light weights to be able to get 30 reps. Were you performing full range reps, full stretch and full contraction, or more of a mid range range of motion?


==Scott==
It may seem light when compared to a weight I'd use for 6 reps but by number 30 my arms are screaming! I use full range very strict reps. Weight used means nothing so long as it challenges the muscle.
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

Average Al wrote:
entsminger wrote:
==Scott==
I don't know if this is considered high volume but I made my best gains doing 3 sets per body part of 30-15-6 reps to failure, sometimes a slight cheat at the end of the set to add a few more reps. One set per body part never did much for me nor did any more sets than 3.

Just curious about this:

I assume you start light, and then go heavier with each subsequent set?

Did you have a specific weight progression (c.f., 50%, 75%, then 100%)?

Did you go to failure on every set?

What kind of rest period between sets?


==Scott==
There's no way anyone could do a legitimate 30 reps with maybe 15 or so seconds between sets and then add weight to the next set unless he waited several minutes between sets and he's jerking up the weight or he only wants to get maybe 2 reps on the second set. I'm lucky to get 15 reps on the second set with the same weight.
Open User Options Menu

WillEast

My goal is primarily to build strength in the bench, Overhead, squat and deadlift. I am going to finish up my 4 day split to see what the results are. It is too early for me to tell yet.
Open User Options Menu

DownUnderLifter

entsminger wrote:

==Scott==
There's no way anyone could do a legitimate 30 reps with maybe 15 or so seconds between sets and then add weight to the next set "unless he waited several minutes between sets and he's jerking up the weight".....


I think that is similar to what Bio recommended with his 30/15/8 routine....5 minutes rest between sets and using a "cheating" type of form...

Open User Options Menu

hit4me

Florida, USA

WillEast wrote:
My goal is primarily to build strength in the bench, Overhead, squat and deadlift. I am going to finish up my 4 day split to see what the results are. It is too early for me to tell yet.


then I would follow a 3x/week routine with only those exercises and reduce to 2/week when you stop making progress

I would perform one working set with a 2 to 3 warmups prior

Open User Options Menu

1958

Texas, USA

WillEast wrote:
My goal is primarily to build strength in the bench, Overhead, squat and deadlift. I am going to finish up my 4 day split to see what the results are. It is too early for me to tell yet.


Marty Gallagher has a good,basic program to fit your needs.I'm uncertain of the exact template,but it's something like squat&bench on day 1,and then deadlift&overhead press three days later.
Three or four work sets per exercise.
Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

WillEast wrote:
Outside of philospical debate, I would like to hear if anyone can describe their actual experiences with HIT compared to high volume/frequency for building size and strength. I am currently trying my own experiment but so far it is inconclusive. It is not clear if high volume is any better but I would like to hear other experiences.


For me, 'high' volume never worked. If high means what most think of it as, aka 10-20 sets per exercise.
Now some volume up to low/medium works best for me for 'size' gains. I gain strength pretty rapidly for a while with single sets but no size, I've even lost size while getting stronger with single sets once a week per muscle. My best size to strength gains were with 2x per week, avoid failure and get a few 'bouts' in per muscle. Either 2-3 sets, or a set plus a few drop sets/rest pause sets, again, avoiding failure. Failure wipes my nervous system out way too much and seems to add nothing to the growth over going close to failure.



Open User Options Menu

simon-hecubus

Texas, USA

Lioncourt wrote:
I think there is a need to define what you mean by high volume. Anything more than 1 set per bodypart 2-3x a week by traditional HIT is high volume. But anyone doing an Arnold style routine of 20 sets per bodypart training on a 6 day split is going to have trouble getting results...


Sorry, but I must differ with that extreme definition of "high volume". By that yardstick, even some of Dr. D's and Jones' routines would be considered "high volume".

Now, I can see a definition that includes "single set per exercise" to failure or maximal effort being HIT, but 'bodypart' is restrictive to the extreme.

This is the sort of attitude that draws all the disdain from non-HIT circles.
Open User Options Menu

WillEast

Would each of the exercises be performed each day. Perhaps you could give a sample routine.
Open User Options Menu

WillEast

hit4me wrote:
WillEast wrote:
My goal is primarily to build strength in the bench, Overhead, squat and deadlift. I am going to finish up my 4 day split to see what the results are. It is too early for me to tell yet.

then I would follow a 3x/week routine with only those exercises and reduce to 2/week when you stop making progress

I would perform one working set with a 2 to 3 warmups prior




Would each workout consist of every exercise or would I split it. I would like to see a sample routine. Thanks.
Open User Options Menu

WillEast

Nwlifter wrote:
WillEast wrote:
Outside of philospical debate, I would like to hear if anyone can describe their actual experiences with HIT compared to high volume/frequency for building size and strength. I am currently trying my own experiment but so far it is inconclusive. It is not clear if high volume is any better but I would like to hear other experiences.

For me, 'high' volume never worked. If high means what most think of it as, aka 10-20 sets per exercise.
Now some volume up to low/medium works best for me for 'size' gains. I gain strength pretty rapidly for a while with single sets but no size, I've even lost size while getting stronger with single sets once a week per muscle. My best size to strength gains were with 2x per week, avoid failure and get a few 'bouts' in per muscle. Either 2-3 sets, or a set plus a few drop sets/rest pause sets, again, avoiding failure. Failure wipes my nervous system out way too much and seems to add nothing to the growth over going close to failure.





Could you provide some sample routines. I would like to design a workout schedule. Thanks,

Open User Options Menu

WillEast

I would like to read some sample workouts from those who made some general suggestions. How would a 3x workout per week look? As a recap I am trying to build overall strength on the bench, overhead, squat deadlift and gaining muscle would be nice. What have you found works best? How many sets/reps per exercise?

Is something like this good or are there better options?

Workout A

Squat
OHP
Deadlift

3 day rest

Workout B

Bench
Row

Repeat.
Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | Next | Last
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy