HST_Rihad
Active Member
Since we are all now in the area of guesstimation, I'd say the less atrophy is experienced over a time period, the more shallow the subsequent recovery curve. No magic here.
Rethinking Hst
- Thread starter HST_Rihad
- Start date
mickc1965
Well-Known Member
But did they break the rules of mechanical load, frequency, progressive loads and strategic deconditioning?
I would have to assume Totentanz did not as he wrote a 'free' ebook for everyone to read unless of course he wants everyone to fail at getting bigger and Jester is always more than happy to assist in all aspects of training etc so again why would he bother if he did not believe in HST.
mickc1965
Well-Known Member
Ok, if the 'magic' period is shortened by a shorter SD then surely this means hypertrophy starts sooner?
HST_Rihad
Active Member
Of course not, apart from SD, you'd be hard pressed to break the remaining rules in any kind of training (and I'd mention that some naturals grew the muscle using HIT approach of training each body part once per week or even less frequently).
What I meant was that Totentanz extended 5's for as long as he kept getting stronger, and Jester seems to prefer even lower repetition loads, both defeating the purpose of HST (as a reminder, Bryan believes that working with the same loads for too long and increasing poundages as strength levels permit is suboptimal).
As long as you approach whatever loads did grow new muscle during the previous cycle, and surpass them having gotten bigger/stronger, yes, new muscle hypertrophy will start. Less SD doesn't necessarily mean that 75% of 10RM or even 10RM itself with the same volume as before starts piling up newer muscle on you. The higher you got load-wise during the previous cycle, the higher you'd have to reach for the loads to be effective again using the same volume. RBE sucks.
Last edited:
Bryan's position is unsupported in literature.
You are also inferring that my goal is to always achieve increased muscle mass. It isn't.
Regardless, load has always been the primary stimulus for hypertrophy. Volume is merely a descriptor for the degree of exposure to that stimulus required. Optimal volume, in my opinion, describes that the minimum effective exposure ("volume") should be. Practical application will necessitate that 'going a little over' is probably better than 'going a little under'. At least with exceeding your minimum effective volume you are going to achieve overreaching and super-compensation. Going under and you start to fall into practices closer to those used by mid-80's Olympic Lifters - not great for hypertrophy.
Why do we want the minimum? So we can work out again sooner at the requisite load, and perform that necessary volume.
Neural and/or connective tissue fatigue/damage is the primary limiting factor once you decide what hormone levels you are going to maintain (natural or enhanced (and degree of enhanced) ).
HST_Rihad
Active Member
Is there ever a way to avoid gaining both? Researches/graphs I've come across suggest mutual gains of CSA/strength. Slow recomp can still occur even when eating at maintenance, provided that you're able to progress your training in terms of load/volume.
The guy I mentioned in the opening post gained both size & strength with relatively submaximal loads. No more than 100kg squats/deads for volume-centric phase, going as high as 120kg in strength-centric phase of his cycle. By doing that he could finally lift 185 after an exhaustive workout. The "Big Beyond Belief" book suggests similar technique for effective growth - in essence, reach an overreaching state by getting into more volume in DUP fashion for several weeks, and cut the volume abruptly increasing the loads at the same time for a shorter period. And that's where Serious Growth occurs
Bulldog
Active Member
Is there ever a way to avoid gaining both? Researches/graphs I've come across suggest mutual gains of CSA/strength. Slow recomp can still occur even when eating at maintenance, provided that you're able to progress your training in terms of load/volume.
The guy I mentioned in the opening post gained both size & strength with relatively submaximal loads. No more than 100kg squats/deads for volume-centric phase, going as high as 120kg in strength-centric phase of his cycle. By doing that he could finally lift 185 after an exhaustive workout. The "Big Beyond Belief" book suggests similar technique for effective growth - in essence, reach an overreaching state by getting into more volume in DUP fashion for several weeks, and cut the volume abruptly increasing the loads at the same time for a shorter period. And that's where Serious Growth occurs
It does work. However, the "growth" phase can actually end up being longer than your overreaching/ramping phase. The increased growth stimulus created by the ramping up of volume can last up to 6 weeks (or more).
HST_Rihad
Active Member
It's also unsupported in practice. Lower loads can be used for their metabolic stress and accumulation of fatigue provided higher rep sets & sufficient number of sets are being used, not for the "SD+more sensitivity to previous loads" reason Bryan has put forth.
Last edited:
Phil.
New Member
By "progressing" you mean bodyweight-wise, correct? Otherwise, if I'm using the weights as an indicator, I'd have no way to gauge my progress at all (seeing as the weeks of 5rm stay the same). Also, I agree regarding the micro-cycles. I'm going to do the same thing. If I can push past my previous maxes, why not? Isn't that the goal of progressive load? Otherwise I feel like I'm just working back up to where I was before, like if my PR for the mile was 6:00 and, instead of ever trying to get any better than that, I work backwards from 6:50 (6:50, 6:40, 6:30, 6:20, 6:10, 6:00 [six workouts]) to get back to 6:00. That only ever means that I'm progressing the next time I start a cycle with my max as 5:50, but why not just start the first cycle (instead of the second) aiming for 5:50, then?
But does that mean you're only going to stick to a 5-rep set range? Personally, I plan to apply that across the 15's, 10's, and 5's (15rm becomes the fifth workout, 15rm+5lbs becomes the sixth). It kind of sounds like you plan on progressing as far as you can with 5rm and then resetting as soon as you fail, just like SS except within a 2-week block.
mickc1965
Well-Known Member
edited post
Phil,
Correct me if I am wrong but are you saying that you just repeat the identical loads from one cycle to the next without ever increasing the load, if so this is incorrect. You cannot expect to grow without increasing the load etc.
Do you do a 7th and 8th week as the idea of the extra two weeks (or more) is to increase the loads and therefore after this period all of your rep maxes for each rep range should increase (in fact they will increase over the whole cycle), then you can either retest all your maxes or just recalculate your 15rm and 10rm from your new 5rm (or 3rm or whatever rep range you do in weeks 7 and 8). If you don't do the extra weeks you could always use the last session of 5s and do as many reps as possible and recalculate from there using online calculators etc.
Or as you mentioned you can add 2.5kgs or 5kgs to the next cycle.
Phil,
Correct me if I am wrong but are you saying that you just repeat the identical loads from one cycle to the next without ever increasing the load, if so this is incorrect. You cannot expect to grow without increasing the load etc.
Do you do a 7th and 8th week as the idea of the extra two weeks (or more) is to increase the loads and therefore after this period all of your rep maxes for each rep range should increase (in fact they will increase over the whole cycle), then you can either retest all your maxes or just recalculate your 15rm and 10rm from your new 5rm (or 3rm or whatever rep range you do in weeks 7 and 8). If you don't do the extra weeks you could always use the last session of 5s and do as many reps as possible and recalculate from there using online calculators etc.
Or as you mentioned you can add 2.5kgs or 5kgs to the next cycle.
Last edited:
HST_Rihad
Active Member
I'm going to be using 5% increments counting back from my intended 5RM loads in this fashion:
Workout 1: 75% of 5RM for 10 reps (calculators claim 14)
Workout 2: 80% of 5RM for 9 reps (calculators claim 12)
Workout 3: 85% of 5RM for 8 reps (calculators claim 10)
Workout 4: 90% of 5RM for 7 reps (calculators claim 8)
Workout 5: 95% of 5RM for 6 reps (calculators claim 7)
Workout 6: 100% of 5RM for 5 reps
So intensity will be slowly adding up until my 5RM load. Growth can still occur using these previous loads due to a bit higher than before volume.
Expecting to start on Monday.
HST_Rihad
Active Member
Then the "previous loads" concept in HST is nothing but a cruel joke...
mickc1965
Well-Known Member
Rihad,
You misunderstand me, what I am saying is if you never increase the load at the end of each micro cycle (i.e. the 6th workout of 15s, 10s and 5s) how can you expect to grow.
HST_Rihad
Active Member
Then the priority is the good old "lift heavier to get bigger", not the "previous loads will make you grow again" crap some of us bought into.
mickc1965
Well-Known Member
Again I think you misunderstand the original concept and loads as according to the official website of HST (http://hypertrophyspecific.com/hst_notes.html) it mentions about CNS fatigue etc (not relevant to this discussion I know) and on the final page of the link it states the following:
What most people understand to be overtraining is a result of Central Nervous System (CNS) fatigue. It has been mistakenly believed that overtraining symptoms arise from fatigue of the muscle tissue itself. Research has demonstrated this NOT to be the case. Keeping CNS fatigue low during frequent training allows dramatic strength gains, thus allowing higher and higher poundages to be used thus promoting ongoing hypertrophy
Based on the text above in bold the intention of the original concept was always to keep CNS fatigue in check and to therefore allow you to increase the load to promote hypertrophy, so yes "lift heavier and get bigger" is still "allowed" in HST.
________
On another note, we previously discussed (posts #16 and #17) where I start each block at nearer 90% of rep max you stated this was not 'HST' (you did put a smiley face though) and that is why I grow, I would just like to point out in the link above it also states the following:
"if your 10 rep max is 200 pounds, assign 200 pounds for the last workout of the 10 rep block, then assign weights that build up to your max in 6 workouts. For our example, using 5 pound increments, the weights for the whole 2 week block would be 175,180,185,190,195, and 200"
This shows a starting weight @ 87.5% of the rep max for that block, yes you could drop by 10 lbs and start at 75% but this just proves that HST can be 'modified' to suit the individual, just saying
Last edited:
HST_Rihad
Active Member
I know of that example on the HST page, there are also examples in the HST FAQ (compiled from Bryan's posts on this board I guess) where he used the HST calculator with 10-20 lb increments, with 5 lb left for exercises suited for smaller muscles such as deltoids. How is the individual supposed to know HST isn't working the way it should be? The SD+previous loads are supposed to be doing the trick whether you're getting stronger or not, otherwise what's the point in wasting time on them? New muscle could be gained faster by doing much shorter de-loads. In essence you'd be doing zig-zags for as long as you'll be getting stronger, with no need to SD and go back in loads to recover the lost muscle. It isn't HST in general I'm bashing, but the SD+previous loads idea. It simply doesn't build new muscle. I haven't experienced that.
mickc1965
Well-Known Member
I would say if you are not getting stronger from cycle to cycle then either HST isn't suited to the individual (unlikely) or you have to modify it to suit by trial and error, I found it worked in the 75%, 80% format but when I changed it to how I currently do it (as item 1 below) I found the gains better in terms of both strength and hypertrophy.
How many sets are doing for each muscle group, rest periods between sets?
Possible solutions are
How many sets are doing for each muscle group, rest periods between sets?
Possible solutions are
- Try starting each rep block at a higher load say 87.5% of rep max and increment up from there, this would pretty much eliminate zig zagging, I know some would advise against this but I feel this is the best method for me.
- Keep with the 75, 80% etc but in the early workouts keep the rest period between sets to a level so the second (and third where required) set gets more difficult, for instance at 75 and 80% of rep max rest for 60 or 90 seconds, 85 and 90% of rep max for say 90 or 120 seconds and 95 and 100% up to 180 seconds (or more if needed). This may not work for you as I know that you prefer to use multiple exercises per muscle group with only 1 set per exercise.
- Utilise Myo-Reps / Clusters, so set a total number of reps required per MG, say in the 15s you want 30 reps in total, first set get 15 reps then get the remaining total in 3 sets of 5 (or whatever configuration you want) with 10, 15 or 20 seconds rest or cluster the reps to 30 with as many sets as are required with 120 seconds between sets, again when I trained with myo reps (as recommended by Blade) I got the best gains but I quickly burned out as there was no real recovery time as you are always training close to failure (probably my fault rather than the system).
- Or just increase the volume slightly
Last edited:
HST_Rihad
Active Member
Here's my routine, and also the same one I'm going to experiment with the 2 week long 10@75%-9@80%-8@85%-7@90%-6@95%-5@100% stuff in:
Squats
Bench (incline)
Leg curls
Pulldowns alternated with Seated rows
Dips
1-arm bent-over DB rows
Deadlift
Bis
Calves
Military press
Hyperextensions
Seated Smith press
Rear Delts
Tricep extensions
Lateral raises 45° above
There used to be shrugs right after deads, but not any more. I don't artificially limit rest periods, and I don't unnecessarily extend them either. Going by feel. Rest periods tend to be shorter as the loads are lighter. As can be seen I'm trying to alternate between upper/lower body to spare some time. Quite naturally I rest after squats/deads the longest. I do 2-3 ladder type warmup sets (3-2-1rep) for the first exercise for a specific MG, and usually just one 1 rep warmup set @90% load for auxiliary exercises..
Squats
Bench (incline)
Leg curls
Pulldowns alternated with Seated rows
Dips
1-arm bent-over DB rows
Deadlift
Bis
Calves
Military press
Hyperextensions
Seated Smith press
Rear Delts
Tricep extensions
Lateral raises 45° above
There used to be shrugs right after deads, but not any more. I don't artificially limit rest periods, and I don't unnecessarily extend them either. Going by feel. Rest periods tend to be shorter as the loads are lighter. As can be seen I'm trying to alternate between upper/lower body to spare some time. Quite naturally I rest after squats/deads the longest. I do 2-3 ladder type warmup sets (3-2-1rep) for the first exercise for a specific MG, and usually just one 1 rep warmup set @90% load for auxiliary exercises..
mickc1965
Well-Known Member
Seems an awful lot of messing around doing all those exercises but obviously you are comfortable with that, I also assume that is one set per exercise, how long does that all take, you are aware that testosterone levels drop significantly after 45 minutes or so of weight training.
One thing I have noticed is assuming you are doing one set per exercise and dips are for chest you have two exercises for chest (which is fine for what is in effect a small muscle group), but for the smallest muscle group (shoulders) you have four (Military / Seated Smith Press / Rear Delts and Lateral Raises). Do you consider deads for the legs or back, even if you consider them for your legs you only have three exercises for the thighs (Squats / Leg Curls and deads).
Do you really need that much shoulder / delt work, would it not be better to add another leg exercise?
One thing I have noticed is assuming you are doing one set per exercise and dips are for chest you have two exercises for chest (which is fine for what is in effect a small muscle group), but for the smallest muscle group (shoulders) you have four (Military / Seated Smith Press / Rear Delts and Lateral Raises). Do you consider deads for the legs or back, even if you consider them for your legs you only have three exercises for the thighs (Squats / Leg Curls and deads).
Do you really need that much shoulder / delt work, would it not be better to add another leg exercise?
HST_Rihad
Active Member
The emphasis is on upper body work. I might get rid of 1-2 deltoid exercises like I did with shrugs, don't yet feel the need to. It all depends on how I will be progressing with the new setup. I feel that most of the 2-week long cycle is going to be intense and tough, hope I'll be able to get through it. Some folks have advised me to stick to a few base exercises and increase volume, but like I said I'm a fan of doing one hard set per exercse (not necessarily done until failure) than a few submaximal sets.