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
Turpin?
1 | 2 | 3 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

Castiron

Just checking in. Haven't seen an update to Turpin's log in a while. Turpin, hope you are well.
Open User Options Menu

Average Al

A couple weeks back, I stumbled upon his Facebook page. Not quite sure how/why that happened. (Unfortunately, can't recall his real name, so I can't give you a link).

He looked healthy, still training. But the post mentioned coming back from some kind of layoff due to surgery. I wasn't able to figure out what the surgery was for (and not really my business).

Awhile back, I had gotten the impression that he wasn't enjoying much of the discussion that goes on here, and didn't care to interact with some of the participants (possibly including me).

There are others who have stopped posting (bioforce) that still are active on Facebook.

Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

Average Al wrote:
A couple weeks back, I stumbled upon his Facebook page. Not quite sure how/why that happened. (Unfortunately, can't recall his real name, so I can't give you a link).

He looked healthy, still training. But the post mentioned coming back from some kind of layoff due to surgery. I wasn't able to figure out what the surgery was for (and not really my business).

Awhile back, I had gotten the impression that he wasn't enjoying much of the discussion that goes on here, and didn't care to interact with some of the participants (possibly including me).

There are others who have stopped posting (bioforce) that still are active on Facebook.



== Scott==
When you think about it there are really are very few people on here worth interacting with and especially very few who might train as he does. I find him very inspirational and one tough dude but I?d never train as he does. I?d be broken in half in no time. He?s one guy you?d never want to mess with. A mans man.
Open User Options Menu

Average Al

entsminger wrote:
Average Al wrote:
A couple weeks back, I stumbled upon his Facebook page. Not quite sure how/why that happened. (Unfortunately, can't recall his real name, so I can't give you a link).

He looked healthy, still training. But the post mentioned coming back from some kind of layoff due to surgery. I wasn't able to figure out what the surgery was for (and not really my business).

Awhile back, I had gotten the impression that he wasn't enjoying much of the discussion that goes on here, and didn't care to interact with some of the participants (possibly including me).

There are others who have stopped posting (bioforce) that still are active on Facebook.



== Scott==
When you think about it there are really are very few people on here worth interacting with and especially very few who might train as he does. I find him very inspirational and one tough dude but I?d never train as he does. I?d be broken in half in no time. He?s one guy you?d never want to mess with. A mans man.


He is very strong for his size. And I think he works in a correctional institute, so that would require a certain level of toughness.

Some of the stuff debated here can be pretty nerdy. If you've decided old school heavy lifting is the way to go, why bother following endless arguments about exercise science and HIT methods?

Open User Options Menu

Castiron

I think folks ultimately need to find there own way. I did HIT exclusively for a long time. Also amounted one of the complete collections of time machine and 1st gen nautilus (inc duo squat, my only non-first gen piece).
Sold the collection! Went back to barbells and rack after a hiatus. Basic 5x5...and started to do really well. Evolved further to a 5/3/1 inspired program - low volume, high effort and have found myself at the highest strength levels I've ever achieved. Go figure...
Not bashing HIT or anything, just learned - in my late 40s - what works exceptionally well for me. That said, HIT taught me the importance of recovery and such.
Just my two cents. Do what works best for you, and toss the rest.
Open User Options Menu

Average Al

Castiron wrote:
I think folks ultimately need to find there own way. I did HIT exclusively for a long time. Also amounted one of the complete collections of time machine and 1st gen nautilus (inc duo squat, my only non-first gen piece).
Sold the collection! Went back to barbells and rack after a hiatus. Basic 5x5...and started to do really well. Evolved further to a 5/3/1 inspired program - low volume, high effort and have found myself at the highest strength levels I've ever achieved. Go figure...
Not bashing HIT or anything, just learned - in my late 40s - what works exceptionally well for me. That said, HIT taught me the importance of recovery and such.
Just my two cents. Do what works best for you, and toss the rest.


Cool story.

Open User Options Menu

MikaelPR

Castiron wrote:
I think folks ultimately need to find there own way. I did HIT exclusively for a long time. Also amounted one of the complete collections of time machine and 1st gen nautilus (inc duo squat, my only non-first gen piece).
Sold the collection! Went back to barbells and rack after a hiatus. Basic 5x5...and started to do really well. Evolved further to a 5/3/1 inspired program - low volume, high effort and have found myself at the highest strength levels I've ever achieved. Go figure...
Not bashing HIT or anything, just learned - in my late 40s - what works exceptionally well for me. That said, HIT taught me the importance of recovery and such.
Just my two cents. Do what works best for you, and toss the rest.



Well said.
Open User Options Menu

sirloin

I do miss his updates. Was interesting seeing the evolution of his training on his log, and the changes in strength and conditioning that came with each stage.

For me the biggest takeaway from his log is to do what works for you, not to blindly follow or fall hook, line and sinker for what this one or that one says, be your own master.

Hope hes doing good.
Open User Options Menu

oldbutsteady

Cast,

Well said. Too many people chase their favorite authors and trainers waiting for the next "secret" they'll discover and pen for their audience (see Grant's never ending suck up to his favorites).

Hard work on the basics is where most fail.

One may have to experiment to determine their recovery rate vs. volume of work but adjusting these variables to determine what works best shouldn't be an issue for someone who can take accurate training notes.

Over time the body changes with age and their training must change as well. If you think you're going to train the same way at the same intensity your entire life, you are seriously mistaken. Or buying into the lie that as an advanced, middle aged or senior trainee you will have a never ending gain in muscle size and fat loss.

Changing your routine each time one reads a new article or book about lifting (see Grant) is just plain stupid. Nearly any change to one's workout schedule will produce an immediate short term gain. What does that prove? Can it continue for 6 months, a year, or more? I think all the adults here know the answer to that question.

And just like Grant they wait for the next secret to be shared.

OBS



Open User Options Menu

Grant D

Illinois, USA

Folks at Home (still)

Many here are infatuated with this guys' crazed sessions when in harsh reality they should have no appearance on Dr. Darden's blog. We talk about how he is "open" or "inclusive" but this has actually created extreme confusion among the very few here who are able to understand. So much conflicting information that the good Truth is easily distracted. 99% of the readers here have no chance, and as a result no clue. We are left with delusional performances. It is very very good that Turpin hasn't posted since 09/2019!
Grant
Open User Options Menu

sirloin

Grant D. wrote:
Folks at Home (still)

Many here are infatuated with this guys' crazed sessions when in harsh reality they should have no appearance on Dr. Darden's blog. We talk about how he is "open" or "inclusive" but this has actually created extreme confusion among the very few here who are able to understand. So much conflicting information that the good Truth is easily distracted. 99% of the readers here have no chance, and as a result no clue. We are left with delusional performances. It is very very good that Turpin hasn't posted since 09/2019!
Grant


Turpin / Craig is a transparent hard working inspirational individual, whereas you are a narcissistic faceless troll, infatuated with the "experts".
Open User Options Menu

Castiron

Just to share my evolution, I started off as a teen following a basic schedule in one of those Robert Kennedy books (Hardcore Bodybuilding), made some progress, nothing dramatic. About a year or so into it, I found "the magazines" and made HUGE mistakes - followed those routines. Yep, ran myself into the ground. Being the academic type, I sought knowledge in other books - found Darden's High Intensity Bodybuilding - started to make progress. Somewhere along the lines (in my 20s), I found the Nautllus bulletins, and started to follow those, although didn't do very well, admittedly. Entered my career, but still chasing the iron dreams, I discovered Mentzer, and with a busy career, his "philosophy" fit well. And I did OK. The (not so) "Ideal Routine" worked reasonably well for me. I should qualify, this whole journey of mine was always a fixation on strength and not physique, per se (but yeah, can't say I wasn't interested in how I looked). So...did that for a while...tried the "consolidation routine", etc...but my training life to that point - minus the start with the Kennedy books - was HIT principled.
Career got busier and saw nice success, and well, life happened and training became on and off. Watching folks become "middle aged" I saw the importance of training - especially in my opinion, strength. Seeing older folks struggle to get along, I realized something really simple, a 70-year old who can deadlift 400 at any time never has a tough time getting out of a chair, based on strength. So...my mission was clear and in my late 30s I began to train again consistently, HIT. And with my new career budget, was able to buy really nice toys, hence my nautilus collection (which I eventually sold and went back to barbells). Again, I made progress using a HIT approach - and in my late 30's/early 40s was "amazed" that I hit (no pun intended) very, very similar maxes on the big three that I did in my early 20s, so I was stoked. But...progress slowed and stopped and frankly, Mentzer's approach to reduce frequency and all that was probably the worst thing I could ever do. I became frustrated and stuff and started to loose interest, but pragmatically knew how important strength training is as one ages. But balancing family, career, etc... I found myself in a dark place, concluding that I gave this my best shot, did better than average, but never really would reach those dreams. Just the way it is, I reconciled.
Somewhere, I can't remember where, I came across an Reg Park article on his interpretation of 5x5 (2 warm ups and three sets of five with the same weight), not training to failure ever (how dare he suggest that!). But what caught me was the "basic" routine: hyperextensions, squat, bench, deadlift following the 5x5 scheme described, and no curls or anything else until you can bench 300. At first I was like, yeah, that's BS...but then I figured that I needed a "template" and had little time to train, so maybe I'd give it a try, but do one exercise per session; 3 days a week, and see what happens. So, I did it, never did more than 5 reps when I could do more, and just progressed, linearly and slowly. Guess what? Numbers started to go up, and up, and up. And while I trained "hard", it was nothing to how I did with HIT and my vintage nautilus toys. Eventually I stalled, but interestingly, I was at a level of strength performance greater than when I was in my early 20s. I hit numbers that I never did before and with better form and technique. So, I was onto something. I then discovered Wendler and his 5/3/1 progression model, and adapted that to my big three, done one day on and two days off. Differing from Wendler, on the AMRAP sets, I just do one more (when I can) then the specified number on the final set - and I progress slowly as he indicates. I focus now on three main lifts: barbell squat, bench press, trap bar deadlift, and on bench press day, do one arm dumbbell rows (2 sets of 5) and each day use a neck harness with one high rep (30-50 reps) set. That's all now. I do light one warm up with 10 reps, and maybe 2 low rep (to get the feel; 3 reps) increasingly heavier warm ups, then my three 5/3/1 sets. Each session lasts about 20 minutes. Works like a charm for me - and my training numbers now, in my late 40s, are well beyond where they were in my early 20s.
Just sharing my "training journey". Find out what works for you - and pursue it. I wish I was able to do that years and years and years ago. Best to all.
Open User Options Menu

Bastion

I've always enjoyed Turpin's posts and his motivating vids and experience and input. I hope he is healthy and doing well.
Into the 2nd half of my 40's. I'm learning that I really have to adjust my training and eating to stay lean. In my experience, unless I go on a near starvation diet, I cannot stay lean training heavy once or twice a week. I have arthritis in my hips and anything other than a 15-20 min ride on the stationary bike hurts. Yet leg presses make my hips feel great. Perhaps it's not about worrying about the log book and how much for how many anymore. Maybe a 15 min bike ride and 1 bodypart per day along with abs or calves or forearms is what's best at this stage, despite knowing that there are better ways to train for maximum strength and size. What was best 10 years ago, or even 6 months ago might not be best today or tomorrow in terms of our needs and goals. one of the posters in this thread mentioned that he owned a ton of nautilus machines, and now trains 5x5 in a power rack years later. Just a great example of how there really is no right or wrong way, or better way really. Just your own way and what keeps you happy, healthy and consistent.
Some people love to workout and be active and be in the gym. Some get off on annihilating themselves every 10-14 days. At the end of the day. In my 30 years of weight training. Nobody has ever approached me and asked me weather I train HIT or Volume, or how much can I curl.
Open User Options Menu

DownUnderLifter

Grant D. wrote:
Folks at Home (still)

Many here are infatuated with this guys' crazed sessions when in harsh reality they should have no appearance on Dr. Darden's blog. We talk about how he is "open" or "inclusive" but this has actually created extreme confusion among the very few here who are able to understand. So much conflicting information that the good Truth is easily distracted. 99% of the readers here have no chance, and as a result no clue. We are left with delusional performances. It is very very good that Turpin hasn't posted since 09/2019!
Grant

With this attack on Turpins character I think Grant D. might actually be Joshua Trentine.

Open User Options Menu

oldbutsteady

Grant,

You couldn't find the truth if it were stapled to your ass and you were searching with both hands.

OBS
Open User Options Menu

Gainz

Grant D. wrote:
Folks at Home (still)

Many here are infatuated with this guys' crazed sessions when in harsh reality they should have no appearance on Dr. Darden's blog. We talk about how he is "open" or "inclusive" but this has actually created extreme confusion among the very few here who are able to understand. So much conflicting information that the good Truth is easily distracted. 99% of the readers here have no chance, and as a result no clue. We are left with delusional performances. It is very very good that Turpin hasn't posted since 09/2019!
Grant


Hi Gimmick, let's look at this way:

Turpin has been completely transparent about his training methods and results, and has also provided solid evidence of such along the way.

You, the other hand, spout a load of pseudoscientific horseshit from various 'authorites' in the HIT sphere, very few of whom look like they've ever touched a weight in their lives.

You also constantly make various bold claims without providing any form of evidence whatsoever to back them up.

Given the above, who would appear to have the most credibility?...

Open User Options Menu

Grant D

Illinois, USA

FOLKS (still) at HOME

HIT was popularized in the 70's by Jones to rescue folks from the devastation thrust upon us by high volume ballistic monkey-at-the-typewriter training. It progressively evolved into the best state-of-the-art resistance exercise (aka pure exercise) protocols we have today. In the past ... elements of HIT did exist, but never presented in such a way as to be understood by the general population ... or it was lost to History.

The Progressive Evolution of these Revelations were/are ...

Nautilus (Jones)
Nautilus/HIT (Dr. Darden)
HIT/Heavy Duty (Mentzer)
SuperSlow (Huthcins)
SlowBurn (Hahn)
Static Contraction (Little/Sisco)
Advance Static Contraction (Little/Sisco)
Max Contraction (Little)
Power Factor (Sisco)
Advanced Max Contraction ... includes Omega (Little)
Max Pyramid (Little)
DoneinOne (Little)
303030 ... includes 301030 (Dr. Darden)
Mach1111 (Student Grant's Compilation)

Progression was required as erudite trainees "maxed" out the benefits of each new protocol within months (if performed correctly). Thus, Humanity needed newer advanced revelations.

Shout-Out to Dr. Darden and John Little who continued to advance the science and realized the limitations of their earlier works!

Turpin's "techniques" have no inclusion in the above, and should be avoided.

Recall ... the above recent reveAls of Dr. Darden and John Little require but 20 minutes a week or so and will assure gains forever on a healthy nutritional diet. If anyone disagrees they need to get the brains going and the books out for "THE NEW HIT REVOLUTION"

Grant
Open User Options Menu

Grant D

Illinois, USA

That stuff belongs in TZone or in a Weider m(r)ag.


[/quote]
Hi Gimmick, let's look at this way:

Turpin has been completely transparent about his training methods and results, and has also provided solid evidence of such along the way.

You, the other hand, spout a load of pseudoscientific horseshit from various 'authorites' in the HIT sphere, very few of whom look like they've ever touched a weight in their lives.

You also constantly make various bold claims without providing any form of evidence whatsoever to back them up.

Given the above, who would appear to have the most credibility?...

[/quote]

Open User Options Menu

sirloin

Grant D. wrote:
FOLKS (still) at HOME

HIT was popularized in the 70's by Jones to rescue folks from the devastation thrust upon us by high volume ballistic monkey-at-the-typewriter training. It progressively evolved into the best state-of-the-art resistance exercise (aka pure exercise) protocols we have today. In the past ... elements of HIT did exist, but never presented in such a way as to be understood by the general population ... or it was lost to History.

The Progressive Evolution of these Revelations were/are ...

Nautilus (Jones)
Nautilus/HIT (Dr. Darden)
HIT/Heavy Duty (Mentzer)
SuperSlow (Huthcins)
SlowBurn (Hahn)
Static Contraction (Little/Sisco)
Advance Static Contraction (Little/Sisco)
Max Contraction (Little)
Power Factor (Sisco)
Advanced Max Contraction ... includes Omega (Little)
Max Pyramid (Little)
DoneinOne (Little)
303030 ... includes 301030 (Dr. Darden)
Mach1111 (Student Grant's Compilation)

Progression was required as erudite trainees "maxed" out the benefits of each new protocol within months (if performed correctly). Thus, Humanity needed newer advanced revelations.

Shout-Out to Dr. Darden and John Little who continued to advance the science and realized the limitations of their earlier works!

Turpin's "techniques" have no inclusion in the above, and should be avoided.

Recall ... the above recent reveAls of Dr. Darden and John Little require but 20 minutes a week or so and will assure gains forever on a healthy nutritional diet. If anyone disagrees they need to get the brains going and the books out for "THE NEW HIT REVOLUTION"

Grant


Lol, its all old hat, MCT was based on overstated German research from the 50s, and strength enthusiasts have been utilizing strong range partials and static contractions for centuries.

Jones recommended 2-3 full body workouts, with a high effort main set on each exercise...basically what many had been already doing for decades. Funny how at the end of it all, he said you can get all you need from squats, chins, dips and a calf raises.

You need to get your head outta the books and learn to stand on YOUR OWN two feet.




Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

Castiron wrote:
Just to share my evolution, I started off as a teen following a basic schedule in one of those Robert Kennedy books (Hardcore Bodybuilding), made some progress, nothing dramatic. About a year or so into it, I found "the magazines" and made HUGE mistakes - followed those routines. Yep, ran myself into the ground. Being the academic type, I sought knowledge in other books - found Darden's High Intensity Bodybuilding - started to make progress. Somewhere along the lines (in my 20s), I found the Nautllus bulletins, and started to follow those, although didn't do very well, admittedly. Entered my career, but still chasing the iron dreams, I discovered Mentzer, and with a busy career, his "philosophy" fit well. And I did OK. The (not so) "Ideal Routine" worked reasonably well for me. I should qualify, this whole journey of mine was always a fixation on strength and not physique, per se (but yeah, can't say I wasn't interested in how I looked). So...did that for a while...tried the "consolidation routine", etc...but my training life to that point - minus the start with the Kennedy books - was HIT principled.
Career got busier and saw nice success, and well, life happened and training became on and off. Watching folks become "middle aged" I saw the importance of training - especially in my opinion, strength. Seeing older folks struggle to get along, I realized something really simple, a 70-year old who can deadlift 400 at any time never has a tough time getting out of a chair, based on strength. So...my mission was clear and in my late 30s I began to train again consistently, HIT. And with my new career budget, was able to buy really nice toys, hence my nautilus collection (which I eventually sold and went back to barbells). Again, I made progress using a HIT approach - and in my late 30's/early 40s was "amazed" that I hit (no pun intended) very, very similar maxes on the big three that I did in my early 20s, so I was stoked. But...progress slowed and stopped and frankly, Mentzer's approach to reduce frequency and all that was probably the worst thing I could ever do. I became frustrated and stuff and started to loose interest, but pragmatically knew how important strength training is as one ages. But balancing family, career, etc... I found myself in a dark place, concluding that I gave this my best shot, did better than average, but never really would reach those dreams. Just the way it is, I reconciled.
Somewhere, I can't remember where, I came across an Reg Park article on his interpretation of 5x5 (2 warm ups and three sets of five with the same weight), not training to failure ever (how dare he suggest that!). But what caught me was the "basic" routine: hyperextensions, squat, bench, deadlift following the 5x5 scheme described, and no curls or anything else until you can bench 300. At first I was like, yeah, that's BS...but then I figured that I needed a "template" and had little time to train, so maybe I'd give it a try, but do one exercise per session; 3 days a week, and see what happens. So, I did it, never did more than 5 reps when I could do more, and just progressed, linearly and slowly. Guess what? Numbers started to go up, and up, and up. And while I trained "hard", it was nothing to how I did with HIT and my vintage nautilus toys. Eventually I stalled, but interestingly, I was at a level of strength performance greater than when I was in my early 20s. I hit numbers that I never did before and with better form and technique. So, I was onto something. I then discovered Wendler and his 5/3/1 progression model, and adapted that to my big three, done one day on and two days off. Differing from Wendler, on the AMRAP sets, I just do one more (when I can) then the specified number on the final set - and I progress slowly as he indicates. I focus now on three main lifts: barbell squat, bench press, trap bar deadlift, and on bench press day, do one arm dumbbell rows (2 sets of 5) and each day use a neck harness with one high rep (30-50 reps) set. That's all now. I do light one warm up with 10 reps, and maybe 2 low rep (to get the feel; 3 reps) increasingly heavier warm ups, then my three 5/3/1 sets. Each session lasts about 20 minutes. Works like a charm for me - and my training numbers now, in my late 40s, are well beyond where they were in my early 20s.
Just sharing my "training journey". Find out what works for you - and pursue it. I wish I was able to do that years and years and years ago. Best to all.


VERY cool! thanks for posting that.
Open User Options Menu

oldbutsteady

Cast,

Interesting read. TBH I think your post is representative of most experienced lifters.

We all get side tracked, injured, or stagnate. We stop lifting and begin again.

But, if you take accurate training notes you learn which exercises work best for you and those that don't. Which routines give the best results and which don't. I also think you learn to cycle training methodology. Again I say changing your routine regularly keeps the boredom and plateaus to a minimum.

Lastly, a training routine that didn't work for you years ago doesn't mean it won't work now. I keep reading about "training science" weight training science beyond the basics is non existent. This is why so much confusion exists with lifting weights.

Grant is a good example of this point, he discards proven training methods each time one of his "A" list authors shits out some new discovery which can be traced straight back to someone else decades earlier. His grasp on weight training history is as weak as his body.

Spice of life is variety and I think that is true for weight training too.

OBS
Open User Options Menu

Frank Scott

If a demonstration of the efficacy of heavy weights for reps for muscularity and strength were required, Turpin is it.At over 50.
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

== Scott==
What Turpin does is confusing to you because you have no concept of what it?s like to really work out and put forth effort . Turpins routines have enabled him to become as strong as a bull where as your routines, if in fact there really is one enables you to???? Uh, hmmm,,, I guess you are like the snake oil salesman espousing the marvels of how your elixir will cure everything from gout to cancer but you produce no evidence that it does anything except take money from some poor saps pocket.
Open User Options Menu

Gainz

Guys, when are you all going to realise that this Grant character is a gimmick account who espouses all of the extreme HIT hyperbole out there purely to get a reaction.

Hands up from myself, yes I've responded to the clown too, but we're all simply continuing to feed the troll by doing so.
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

Gainz wrote:
Guys, when are you all going to realise that this Grant character is a gimmick account who espouses all of the extreme HIT hyperbole out there purely to get a reaction.

Hands up from myself, yes I've responded to the clown too, but we're all simply continuing to feed the troll by doing so.


== Scott==
I watched periods where he got no response and he just keeps going on anyway. I think if he doesn?t see doubters he assumes people agree with him . The sad thing is he persists regardless of what we do . All he has to do is keep saying how great Darden and Little are and he will be welcomed here no matter how stupid his stuff is.
Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | 3 | Next | Last
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy