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
John Little Wrong on Cardio ?
First | Prev | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

HeavyHitter32

epdavis7 wrote:
tensionstrength wrote:
Equity wrote:
I will say one thing in regard to John Little (though I don't know him personally), he's honest in his training theories. I can't conceive that he is duplicitous in regard to his training protocols. He doesn't seem that way (dishonest) in a way to make a quick buck. Same with Mentzer. People claim Mike promoted the consolidation thing to make money only... no! I think he really believed it.

John Little and Mike Mentzer are/was intelligent honest guys who contributed to the morass that is the fitness/bodybuilding industry.




I know we all have to make a living. But yea I can remember thinking similar to what you say many years ago reading magazine articles by Mentzer and John. They often gave the nuts and bolts of what they were advocating right there! Sure the books had more detail but you could often get the gist from the articles, interviews, etc. So when somebody says they wanted you to buy thier system, well sure they did but I remember reading about Heavy Duty, Power Factor Training, Max Contraction, etc. and later owning some of those books lol. But they had sort of laid a lot of it out there in the articles.

I do believe they believe what they are saying. I do not believe they are trying to be dishonest or deceive anyone.


I spoke to Little and Sisco way back during the Power Factor Training days. Both guys sincerely believed in it and were pleasant to talk with, but they're just waaaaay off on things in my opinion. I actually lost a little muscle using Power Factor Training and Sisco's static training. Mentzer's Heavy Duty I stuff (not taken to extremes) was much superior by comparison which I was largely doing at that time.
Open User Options Menu

epdavis7

Lets just say that for sake of argument that HIT (done in rapid fashion) is not as good as traditional cardio/aerobics for "aerobic fitness." You have admitted that it has some benefit. Is that not enough for Joe Schmoe to be healthy? I know enough healthy elderly people that are active day to day that do NO, 0, NADA, NONE formal exercise. They stay plenty busy gardening, walking their dogs, keeping their houses and yards up etc. If they added lets say a BBS Big 3 or 5 to their lifestyle would that not benefit them? What purpose would doing more serve? I just poured a concrete slab with my 75 year old friend. We carried lots of bags of quickcrete and moved a lot of dirt etc. He does no formal exercise and did just fine and kept up with this 53 year old who does lots of formal exercise (I did a fast 10K last weekend and did a Big 5 on Wednesday). Would a Big 3 or 5 not benefit him? Also, exercise is not even in the same realm as the other stuff mentioned historically. The comparison is silly.
Open User Options Menu

ATP 4 Vitality

DuzHIT wrote:
ATP 4 Vitality wrote:


HUGE leap going from aerobics are not needed for general health to the Crusades, Nazi's, and the American Civil War. Lighten up, Francis.



Hardly!

I anticipated a moronic reply such as yours with an easy reply.

There are millions of people on earth with many chronic diseases that could possibly be ameliorated by exercise, including cardiovascular exercise. Thus, intentional deceptive advice in the form of a book, can bring disastrous results a great multitude of people, much like that mentioned previously.

Lighten up yourself Major Samuel Whitside!

Kiss the trousers of misguided HIT writers if you please.

I say wrong is JUST wrong.

Open User Options Menu

DuzHIT

ATP 4 Vitality wrote:
DuzHIT wrote:
ATP 4 Vitality wrote:


HUGE leap going from aerobics are not needed for general health to the Crusades, Nazi's, and the American Civil War. Lighten up, Francis.



Hardly!

I anticipated a moronic reply such as yours with an easy reply.

There are millions of people on earth with many chronic diseases that could possibly be ameliorated by exercise, including cardiovascular exercise. Thus, intentional deceptive advice in the form of a book, can bring disastrous results a great multitude of people, much like that mentioned previously.

Lighten up yourself Major Samuel Whitside!

Kiss the trousers of misguided HIT writers if you please.

I say wrong is JUST wrong.



And I anticipated your moronic reply to my moronic reply.

Millions of people with chronic disease CAN be aided by exercise, but it doesn't have to include aerobic exercise. It doesn't have to include lifting heavy weights, or any weights. Why do you feel the need to make this soooo difficult. Unless being moronic is your type of exercise.

By the way, most HIT people don't wear pants. The legs look too good to hide. Do you train yours?

Open User Options Menu

Equity

ATP 4 Vitality wrote:
Resultsbased wrote:
epdavis7 wrote:
tensionstrength wrote:
Equity wrote:

Yes, I believe they are likely sincere and mistaken. Quite often when people are mistaken, they do don't know it and their convictions are sincere.


Wrong is still wrong. There is ample science and empirical evidence to clearly show the benefits of cardiovascular conditioning exercise. HIT is just wrong here, and so much so, that it is inexcusable to put forth literature insinuating that aerobics is useless and resistance training is a superior form of exercise.

The Jewish nation and Roman leaders were sincere in putting Jesus to death. The Crusades were conducted in sincerity to convert people. The German leaders were sincere in WW2 in killing many Jewish people. Joseph Stalin was sincere. Pol Pot was sincere in Cambodia. The South was sincere during the Civil War. America was sincere toward the American Native Indians. And last but not least, politicians are sincere in their desire to rule. How has it all worked out?

Sincere people can be very dangerous.


So no one should say anything?

In regards to 'Wrong is still wrong', you have one foot in ethics (right/wrong) and epistemology (right/wrong). In the latter case one can make an honest mistake based on limited knowledge. But if a close friend or family member came to you for important potentially life saving advice you'll be mute just in case you might be WRONG?!!!

On the flipside what if someone is RIGHT and it saves someone's life?!!!

Remember the story of Mentzer giving potassium tablets to Samir Bannout and saving his life?

Be careful what you say and do but if you are honest about your level of knowledge then impart it.

Good Day.
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

ATP 4 Vitality wrote:
Resultsbased wrote:
epdavis7 wrote:
tensionstrength wrote:
Equity wrote:

Yes, I believe they are likely sincere and mistaken. Quite often when people are mistaken, they do don't know it and their convictions are sincere.


Wrong is still wrong. There is ample science and empirical evidence to clearly show the benefits of cardiovascular conditioning exercise. HIT is just wrong here, and so much so, that it is inexcusable to put forth literature insinuating that aerobics is useless and resistance training is a superior form of exercise.

The Jewish nation and Roman leaders were sincere in putting Jesus to death. The Crusades were conducted in sincerity to convert people. The German leaders were sincere in WW2 in killing many Jewish people. Joseph Stalin was sincere. Pol Pot was sincere in Cambodia. The South was sincere during the Civil War. America was sincere toward the American Native Indians. And last but not least, politicians are sincere in their desire to rule. How has it all worked out?

Sincere people can be very dangerous.


== Scott ==
Yes and I?m beginnng to see that you are one of them.
Open User Options Menu

ATP 4 Vitality

epdavis7 wrote:
Lets just say that for sake of argument that HIT (done in rapid fashion) is not as good as traditional cardio/aerobics for "aerobic fitness." You have admitted that it has some benefit. Is that not enough for Joe Schmoe to be healthy?


Who knows!

But:

We were not discussing that!
You changed the subject!
Little says cardio is not needed!
He has been proven wrong empirically and scientifically!
You do not need to participate in resistance training to be healthy either.







I know enough healthy elderly people that are active day to day that do NO, 0, NADA, NONE formal exercise. They stay plenty busy gardening, walking their dogs, keeping their houses and yards up etc. If they added lets say a BBS Big 3 or 5 to their lifestyle would that not benefit them? What purpose would doing more serve? I just poured a concrete slab with my 75 year old friend. We carried lots of bags of quickcrete and moved a lot of dirt etc. He does no formal exercise and did just fine and kept up with this 53 year old who does lots of formal exercise (I did a fast 10K last weekend and did a Big 5 on Wednesday). Would a Big 3 or 5 not benefit him? Also, exercise is not even in the same realm as the other stuff mentioned historically. The comparison is silly.


I am all for resistance training along with cardiovascular training.

Deliberately putting out misinformation on cardiovascular conditioning causing many to omit this form of exercise is simply wrong.

Changing the subject is a losing intellectually dishonest debate tactic long used by politicians. Misinformation is one of the chief tools used by many evil/bad rulers.
Open User Options Menu

Equity

ATP 4 Vitality wrote:
Resultsbased wrote:
epdavis7 wrote:
tensionstrength wrote:
Equity wrote:

Yes, I believe they are likely sincere and mistaken. Quite often when people are mistaken, they do don't know it and their convictions are sincere.


Wrong is still wrong. There is ample science and empirical evidence to clearly show the benefits of cardiovascular conditioning exercise. HIT is just wrong here, and so much so, that it is inexcusable to put forth literature insinuating that aerobics is useless and resistance training is a superior form of exercise.

The Jewish nation and Roman leaders were sincere in putting Jesus to death. The Crusades were conducted in sincerity to convert people. The German leaders were sincere in WW2 in killing many Jewish people. Joseph Stalin was sincere. Pol Pot was sincere in Cambodia. The South was sincere during the Civil War. America was sincere toward the American Native Indians. And last but not least, politicians are sincere in their desire to rule. How has it all worked out?

Sincere people can be very dangerous.


You go on about people putting out misinformation and the damage it can cause?

You have just wrote that:
Hitler (And his cronies)
Stalin (ditto)
Pol Pot

Were SINCERE in their convictions?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They were mass psychopathic murderers!!! How can you equate that to exercise info from books written by Little, Mentzer or McGuff or others?

You have no basic grasp of human psychology or ethics if you believe this.

And you say Little, Mentzer and McGuff are spouting extremely damaging information?!!!

I suggest then you use your own logic and watch what you post. And oh yes it has swung to and fro over the years.

Kind Regards.
Open User Options Menu

Average Al

Equity wrote:
I will say one thing in regard to John Little (though I don't know him personally), he's honest in his training theories. I can't conceive that he is duplicitous in regard to his training protocols. He doesn't seem that way (dishonest) in a way to make a quick buck. Same with Mentzer. People claim Mike promoted the consolidation thing to make money only... no! I think he really believed it.

John Little and Mike Mentzer are/was intelligent honest guys who contributed to the morass that is the fitness/bodybuilding industry.




My knowledge of John Little is limited to what he has written, and what he says in interviews. But the impression I've formed is this: He is one of those people who is curious about a lot of different things. When he stumbles onto something novel and interesting, he is like a dog with a fresh bone. He grabs on and gnaws enthusiastically. With over the top enthusiasm, he writes a book to share his discovery with the world, and naturally it looks to him like it is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Then, a few years later, he is on to something else.

Open User Options Menu

Equity

Average Al wrote:
Equity wrote:
I will say one thing in regard to John Little (though I don't know him personally), he's honest in his training theories. I can't conceive that he is duplicitous in regard to his training protocols. He doesn't seem that way (dishonest) in a way to make a quick buck. Same with Mentzer. People claim Mike promoted the consolidation thing to make money only... no! I think he really believed it.

John Little and Mike Mentzer are/was intelligent honest guys who contributed to the morass that is the fitness/bodybuilding industry.




My knowledge of John Little is limited to what he has written, and what he says in interviews. But the impression I've formed is this: He is one of those people who is curious about a lot of different things. When he stumbles onto something novel and interesting, he is like a dog with a fresh bone. He grabs on and gnaws enthusiastically. With over the top enthusiasm, he writes a book to share his discovery with the world, and naturally it looks to him like it is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Then, a few years later, he is on to something else.



He is philosophy driven primarily. This causes disrupts in his exercise prescription. I think his heart genuinely lies in history and philosophy. Not saying he isn't a weight training enthusiast as he surely is.

Regards.

Open User Options Menu

Average Al

ATP 4 Vitality wrote:

Wrong is still wrong. There is ample science and empirical evidence to clearly show the benefits of cardiovascular conditioning exercise. HIT is just wrong here, and so much so, that it is inexcusable to put forth literature insinuating that aerobics is useless and resistance training is a superior form of exercise.



To be clear, I think McGuff's position is that IF you are doing a properly intense HIT program, that will provide you with sufficient cardiovascular conditioning to be healthy.

So:

- At some point in this thread, you (apparently) said that HIT does improve cardiovascular conditioning to some extent. I say apparently, because I think I remember seeing it, but wasn't able to find the comment again to refresh my memory.

- Others then proposed that the level of improvement produced by HIT might well be big enough to be adequate for health purposes.

- Your response to that proposition was: who knows.

Given that response, it is hard for me to understand how you can say that McGuff is wrong. He might be wrong, or he might be right, because who knows?

The other issue I have with your blanket condemnation of McGuff is that you insist that everyone should do cardio, but then you regularly refuse to define the minimum requirements (volume and intensity) for this cardio exercise that you are recommending! Seems unfair to condemn his as being dangerously wrong, without being willing to discuss in any detail what he should be recommending.

The fact is that no one can precisely define the minimum levels of activity, exercise, cardiovascular conditioning, or strength training that someone needs to do to be healthy. There is a continuum, and a range where doing more gives more benefit. But how much is enough is very much a judgement call. This is not an area where binary judgments are possible.



Open User Options Menu

Equity

Average Al wrote:
Equity wrote:
I will say one thing in regard to John Little (though I don't know him personally), he's honest in his training theories. I can't conceive that he is duplicitous in regard to his training protocols. He doesn't seem that way (dishonest) in a way to make a quick buck. Same with Mentzer. People claim Mike promoted the consolidation thing to make money only... no! I think he really believed it.

John Little and Mike Mentzer are/was intelligent honest guys who contributed to the morass that is the fitness/bodybuilding industry.




My knowledge of John Little is limited to what he has written, and what he says in interviews. But the impression I've formed is this: He is one of those people who is curious about a lot of different things. When he stumbles onto something novel and interesting, he is like a dog with a fresh bone. He grabs on and gnaws enthusiastically. With over the top enthusiasm, he writes a book to share his discovery with the world, and naturally it looks to him like it is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Then, a few years later, he is on to something else.



Kind of think the same thing.

But doesn't disregard Litle as a thinker.

Mentzer the same. Not just with training but with the philosophy. That's why I don't speak much about it. Like people talking about religion.

Thank you!
Open User Options Menu

ATP 4 Vitality

Average Al wrote:
ATP 4 Vitality wrote:

Wrong is still wrong. There is ample science and empirical evidence to clearly show the benefits of cardiovascular conditioning exercise. HIT is just wrong here, and so much so, that it is inexcusable to put forth literature insinuating that aerobics is useless and resistance training is a superior form of exercise.



To clear, I think McGuff's position is that IF you are doing a properly intense HIT program, that will provide you with sufficient cardiovascular conditioning to be healthy.

So:

- At some point in this thread, you (apparently) said that HIT does improve cardiovascular conditioning to some extent. I say apparently, because I think I remember seeing it, but wasn't able to find the comment again to refresh my memory.

- Others then proposed that the level of improvement produced by HIT might well be enough to be adequate for health purposes.

- Your response to that proposition was: who knows.

Given that response, it is hard for me to understand how you can say that McGuff is wrong. He might be wrong, or he might be right, because who knows?

The other issue I have with your blanket condemnation of McGuff is that you insist that everyone should do cardio, but then you regularly refuse to define the minimum requirements (volume and intensity) for this cardio exercise that you are recommending! Seems unfair to condemn his as being dangerously wrong, without being willing to discuss in any detail what he should be recommending.

The fact is that no one can precisely define the minimum levels of activity, exercise, cardiovascular conditioning, or strength training that someone needs to do to be healthy. There is a continuum, and a range where doing more gives more benefit. But how much is enough is very much a judgement call. This is not an area where binary judgments are possible.




I do not make blanket statements like some about cardiovascular conditioning. I do not say that exercise is needed to be healthy. But saying that, a wise person sees the calamity of old age and makes prudent choices. One choice would be to exercise or not. I do not know how much exercise everyone needs due to individualism. Neither do you or McGuff. Cardiovascular conditions the body in a different manner than resistance training. In my opinion, both forms can contribute to long healthy productive lives. Some in HIT circles state cardiovascular conditioning is not needed. They have no factual basis for this. Thus, these same ones are deliberately misleading readers. This is very wrong.

Question for you.

Why do you seem to be constantly defending a no cardio HIT paradigm? It is seemingly unbecoming to you.
Open User Options Menu

Resultsbased

One of the things I find very off-putting about HIT is the way that many of the experts come across as being omniscient. By the way, Dr. Darden does NOT and I respect his knowledge and humility.

John Little makes several claims in his books that are so wrong, there isn't time to list them all. If you get his latest book, take a look at pictures of him performing the deadlift...here's a guy who has never performed a deadlift because if he did this normally, he'd be crippled and I'm surprised he let this make it in the book!

Doug McGuff declared the Paleo diet is the healthiest way to eat while cherry picking evidence to support this fad diet. His workout regimen doesn't even resemble what he preached in Body By Science. He even performed a 3 way split...how does this fit with his mutual fund of exercises and does response relationship of exercise?

Next, Drew Baye just released a video of Luke Carlson and Bill Crawford and Jim Flanagan in which Drew repeatedly calls Bill an idiot and clueless. Bill has been instructing since about the time Drew was born, but because it isn't as he thinks it should be - they are idiots.

I mean an hour long video to criticize form on a curl! The form was far more strict than we've seen AJ instruct by the way. And exactly what is Drew Baye going to school Luke Carlson on? Seriously.

Why does Drew wear Heavy Duty gear and reference Mike Mentzer? Mike certainly didn't avoid Val Salva, grunting or grimacing or the occasional cheat rep.

So, HIT has a couple of good ambassadors - Ellington Darden being the best and then you have a bunch of clowns who have just enough information to be dangerous. Sorry and I hate to agree with ATP, but he's right about this stuff for the most part.

Watch out Dr. Darden, you'll be criticized next by Baye for permitting 1 second repetitions! I'm sure he will be able to set you straight. After all, HIT was first defined by you, but according to Baye, he's had to correct and criticize you in the past. What a laugh.
Open User Options Menu

Average Al

ATP 4 Vitality wrote:

I do not make blanket statements like some about cardiovascular conditioning. I do not say that exercise is needed to be healthy. But saying that, a wise person sees the calamity of old age and makes prudent choices. One choice would be to exercise or not. I do not know how much exercise everyone needs due to individualism. Neither do you or McGuff. Cardiovascular conditions the body in a different manner than resistance training. In my opinion, both forms can contribute to long healthy productive lives. Some in HIT circles state cardiovascular conditioning is not needed. They have no factual basis for this. Thus, these same ones are deliberately misleading readers. This is very wrong.

Question for you.

Why do you seem to be constantly defending a no cardio HIT paradigm? It is seemingly unbecoming to you.


Apparently, all you do know is that McGuff (and Little) are WRONG about cardio, and that too many HIT proponents are anti-cardio, and therefore putting millions of lives at risk.

I didn't have to look too far back in this thread to find those sentiments expressed by you. These are pretty broad claims, and consistent with the phrase I used about blanket condemnation.

I'm critiquing you because I think your criticisms are unfocused and inconsistent. Again, McGuff isn't saying that cardiovascular conditioning is unimportant, he is saying that, for health purposes, you can get enough of it from a properly formulated and executed HIT program. You just admitted that you really don't know enough to judge the truth of that claim. (But you are still certain he is wrong about cardio).
Open User Options Menu

Equity

Equity wrote:
Average Al wrote:
Equity wrote:
I will say one thing in regard to John Little (though I don't know him personally), he's honest in his training theories. I can't conceive that he is duplicitous in regard to his training protocols. He doesn't seem that way (dishonest) in a way to make a quick buck. Same with Mentzer. People claim Mike promoted the consolidation thing to make money only... no! I think he really believed it.

John Little and Mike Mentzer are/was intelligent honest guys who contributed to the morass that is the fitness/bodybuilding industry.




My knowledge of John Little is limited to what he has written, and what he says in interviews. But the impression I've formed is this: He is one of those people who is curious about a lot of different things. When he stumbles onto something novel and interesting, he is like a dog with a fresh bone. He grabs on and gnaws enthusiastically. With over the top enthusiasm, he writes a book to share his discovery with the world, and naturally it looks to him like it is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Then, a few years later, he is on to something else.



He is philosophically driven primarily. This causes disrupts in his exercise prescription. I think his heart genuinely lies in history and philosophy. Not saying he isn't a weight training enthusiast as he surely is.

Regards.



Open User Options Menu

epdavis7

I think the claim is not that cardiovascular conditioning is not needed or important, but that it is inherently part of the resistance training.

We can argue over whether which one is better for that purpose ad nauseum (I still think SAID applies and you basically get good at what you practice), but there is a certain level of global metabolic conditioning that occurs in a HIT style workout. For running a half marathon it is not enough, for general health and well being it is probably more than enough.

The best things you can do for health is avoid injury/death by misadventure, eat reasonably well, stay active, get enough sleep and water, don't be overweight, have a positive attitude and pray you were blessed with good genetics.
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

epdavis7 wrote:
I think the claim is not that cardiovascular conditioning is not needed or important, but that it is inherently part of the resistance training.

We can argue over whether which one is better for that purpose ad nauseum (I still think SAID applies and you basically get good at what you practice), but there is a certain level of global metabolic conditioning that occurs in a HIT style workout. For running a half marathon it is not enough, for general health and well being it is probably more than enough.

The best things you can do for health is avoid injury/death by misadventure, eat reasonably well, stay active, get enough sleep and water, don't be overweight, have a positive attitude and pray you were blessed with good genetics.


== Scott==
Avoiding aggravation/ threads like this , can go a long way towards health as well!
Open User Options Menu

epdavis7

entsminger wrote:
epdavis7 wrote:
I think the claim is not that cardiovascular conditioning is not needed or important, but that it is inherently part of the resistance training.

We can argue over whether which one is better for that purpose ad nauseum (I still think SAID applies and you basically get good at what you practice), but there is a certain level of global metabolic conditioning that occurs in a HIT style workout. For running a half marathon it is not enough, for general health and well being it is probably more than enough.

The best things you can do for health is avoid injury/death by misadventure, eat reasonably well, stay active, get enough sleep and water, don't be overweight, have a positive attitude and pray you were blessed with good genetics.

== Scott==
Avoiding aggravation/ threads like this , can go a long way towards health as well!


No doubt lol.
Open User Options Menu

tensionstrength

Resultsbased wrote:
One of the things I find very off-putting about HIT is the way that many of the experts come across as being omniscient. By the way, Dr. Darden does NOT and I respect his knowledge and humility.

John Little makes several claims in his books that are so wrong, there isn't time to list them all. If you get his latest book, take a look at pictures of him performing the deadlift...here's a guy who has never performed a deadlift because if he did this normally, he'd be crippled and I'm surprised he let this make it in the book!

Doug McGuff declared the Paleo diet is the healthiest way to eat while cherry picking evidence to support this fad diet. His workout regimen doesn't even resemble what he preached in Body By Science. He even performed a 3 way split...how does this fit with his mutual fund of exercises and does response relationship of exercise?

Next, Drew Baye just released a video of Luke Carlson and Bill Crawford and Jim Flanagan in which Drew repeatedly calls Bill an idiot and clueless. Bill has been instructing since about the time Drew was born, but because it isn't as he thinks it should be - they are idiots.

I mean an hour long video to criticize form on a curl! The form was far more strict than we've seen AJ instruct by the way. And exactly what is Drew Baye going to school Luke Carlson on? Seriously.

Why does Drew wear Heavy Duty gear and reference Mike Mentzer? Mike certainly didn't avoid Val Salva, grunting or grimacing or the occasional cheat rep.

So, HIT has a couple of good ambassadors - Ellington Darden being the best and then you have a bunch of clowns who have just enough information to be dangerous. Sorry and I hate to agree with ATP, but he's right about this stuff for the most part.

Watch out Dr. Darden, you'll be criticized next by Baye for permitting 1 second repetitions! I'm sure he will be able to set you straight. After all, HIT was first defined by you, but according to Baye, he's had to correct and criticize you in the past. What a laugh.


I gotta agree. I have got a lot from Drew over the years. But some his ways of talking about other trainers and and some other stuff as well is very disrespectful and putting down valuable other training methods etc.

Regarding Paleo and just diet in general. If any of you have a diet that works for you and you enjoy the food you can eat, more power to you. I have been experimenting with mine quite a bit lately and giving up certain foods that I love but also give me problems is quite frustrating.
Open User Options Menu

ATP 4 Vitality

Resultsbased wrote:
One of the things I find very off-putting about HIT is the way that many of the experts come across as being omniscient. By the way, Dr. Darden does NOT and I respect his knowledge and humility.

John Little makes several claims in his books that are so wrong, there isn't time to list them all. If you get his latest book, take a look at pictures of him performing the deadlift...here's a guy who has never performed a deadlift because if he did this normally, he'd be crippled and I'm surprised he let this make it in the book!

Doug McGuff declared the Paleo diet is the healthiest way to eat while cherry picking evidence to support this fad diet. His workout regimen doesn't even resemble what he preached in Body By Science. He even performed a 3 way split...how does this fit with his mutual fund of exercises and does response relationship of exercise?

Next, Drew Baye just released a video of Luke Carlson and Bill Crawford and Jim Flanagan in which Drew repeatedly calls Bill an idiot and clueless. Bill has been instructing since about the time Drew was born, but because it isn't as he thinks it should be - they are idiots.

I mean an hour long video to criticize form on a curl! The form was far more strict than we've seen AJ instruct by the way. And exactly what is Drew Baye going to school Luke Carlson on? Seriously.

Why does Drew wear Heavy Duty gear and reference Mike Mentzer? Mike certainly didn't avoid Val Salva, grunting or grimacing or the occasional cheat rep.

So, HIT has a couple of good ambassadors - Ellington Darden being the best and then you have a bunch of clowns who have just enough information to be dangerous. Sorry and I hate to agree with ATP, but he's right about this stuff for the most part.

Watch out Dr. Darden, you'll be criticized next by Baye for permitting 1 second repetitions! I'm sure he will be able to set you straight. After all, HIT was first defined by you, but according to Baye, he's had to correct and criticize you in the past. What a laugh.


Great post
Open User Options Menu

ATP 4 Vitality

entsminger wrote:
epdavis7 wrote:
I think the claim is not that cardiovascular conditioning is not needed or important, but that it is inherently part of the resistance training.

We can argue over whether which one is better for that purpose ad nauseum (I still think SAID applies and you basically get good at what you practice), but there is a certain level of global metabolic conditioning that occurs in a HIT style workout. For running a half marathon it is not enough, for general health and well being it is probably more than enough.

The best things you can do for health is avoid injury/death by misadventure, eat reasonably well, stay active, get enough sleep and water, don't be overweight, have a positive attitude and pray you were blessed with good genetics.

== Scott==
Avoiding aggravation/ threads like this , can go a long way towards health as well!


There is always The Upper Body Squat by Arthur Jones. Your reread should enlighten , and is of your genre.
Open User Options Menu

Resultsbased

tensionstrength wrote:
Resultsbased wrote:
One of the things I find very off-putting about HIT is the way that many of the experts come across as being omniscient. By the way, Dr. Darden does NOT and I respect his knowledge and humility.

John Little makes several claims in his books that are so wrong, there isn't time to list them all. If you get his latest book, take a look at pictures of him performing the deadlift...here's a guy who has never performed a deadlift because if he did this normally, he'd be crippled and I'm surprised he let this make it in the book!

Doug McGuff declared the Paleo diet is the healthiest way to eat while cherry picking evidence to support this fad diet. His workout regimen doesn't even resemble what he preached in Body By Science. He even performed a 3 way split...how does this fit with his mutual fund of exercises and does response relationship of exercise?

Next, Drew Baye just released a video of Luke Carlson and Bill Crawford and Jim Flanagan in which Drew repeatedly calls Bill an idiot and clueless. Bill has been instructing since about the time Drew was born, but because it isn't as he thinks it should be - they are idiots.

I mean an hour long video to criticize form on a curl! The form was far more strict than we've seen AJ instruct by the way. And exactly what is Drew Baye going to school Luke Carlson on? Seriously.

Why does Drew wear Heavy Duty gear and reference Mike Mentzer? Mike certainly didn't avoid Val Salva, grunting or grimacing or the occasional cheat rep.

So, HIT has a couple of good ambassadors - Ellington Darden being the best and then you have a bunch of clowns who have just enough information to be dangerous. Sorry and I hate to agree with ATP, but he's right about this stuff for the most part.

Watch out Dr. Darden, you'll be criticized next by Baye for permitting 1 second repetitions! I'm sure he will be able to set you straight. After all, HIT was first defined by you, but according to Baye, he's had to correct and criticize you in the past. What a laugh.

I gotta agree. I have got a lot from Drew over the years. But some his ways of talking about other trainers and and some other stuff as well is very disrespectful and putting down valuable other training methods etc.

Regarding Paleo and just diet in general. If any of you have a diet that works for you and you enjoy the food you can eat, more power to you. I have been experimenting with mine quite a bit lately and giving up certain foods that I love but also give me problems is quite frustrating.


Well, Drew sees his way as being the only right way. I. That video critique, he states that partial reps like 21s are totally unnecessary and unproductive. This ignores the thousands of people who get great results using such methods.

Speaking of results, what exactly does Drew have to show?
Open User Options Menu

ATP 4 Vitality

Average Al wrote:
ATP 4 Vitality wrote:

I do not make blanket statements like some about cardiovascular conditioning. I do not say that exercise is needed to be healthy. But saying that, a wise person sees the calamity of old age and makes prudent choices. One choice would be to exercise or not. I do not know how much exercise everyone needs due to individualism. Neither do you or McGuff. Cardiovascular conditions the body in a different manner than resistance training. In my opinion, both forms can contribute to long healthy productive lives. Some in HIT circles state cardiovascular conditioning is not needed. They have no factual basis for this. Thus, these same ones are deliberately misleading readers. This is very wrong.

Question for you.

Why do you seem to be constantly defending a no cardio HIT paradigm? It is seemingly unbecoming to you.

Apparently, all you do know is that McGuff (and Little) are WRONG about cardio, and that too many HIT proponents are anti-cardio, and therefore putting millions of lives at risk.

I didn't have to look too far back in this thread to find those sentiments expressed by you. These are pretty broad claims, and consistent with the phrase I used about blanket condemnation.

I'm critiquing you because I think your criticisms are unfocused and inconsistent. Again, McGuff isn't saying that cardiovascular conditioning is unimportant, he is saying that, for health purposes, you can get enough of it from a properly formulated and executed HIT program. You just admitted that you really don't know enough to judge the truth of that claim. (But you are still certain he is wrong about cardio).


If you recall, your question had a volume component. To which I replied correctly, I do not know. You out of context reply of my response reveals your intent. I do not need to argue that cardiovascular conditioning is very beneficial and resistance training can not and does not provide these unique benefits. In the end, Little and McGuff give wrong advice about exercise. Keep defending them if you must.
Open User Options Menu

Chris H

so the outcome of this topic, is there is no outcome

John Little has not been proved wrong on cardio. Questionable perhaps, but not wrong.

He also has not been proved to be intellectually dishonest, nor insincere.

However the meaning of cardio vascular conditioning as discussed and brought up in various posts, needs context.
CV conditioning for what - health or conditioning.
Health i would venture would be defined as general, walking around capacity. Not getting winded or hurt by basic day to day living.
Conditioning on the other hand would be specific to the activity chosen - running, swimming etc etc , so context is not only required to define cv conditioning, but also the contention that JL is wrong.

As far as i can tell neither has been established.
Open User Options Menu
First | Previous | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | Next | Last
Administrators Online: Mod Phoenix
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy