|
High-Intensity Training
According to the tenets of high-intensity training, muscular
gains don’t come from sheer volume of training but instead
from factors such as set-by-set intensity and the amount of
weight used. This philosophy represents the classic overload
concept in the purest sense: You must stress a muscle with
heavy weights to induce hypertrophy, or growth, then allow
sufficient time for full recovery. The result should be a
body that compensates for the induced stress by gaining additional
size and strength.
Jones and Mentzer frequently point out that sprinters show
considerably greater muscular mass than long-distance runners,
such as those competing in marathon events, the simple explanation
for this morphological variation is that the sprinters train
more intensely; that is, they do more work in a given period.
Many of the Jones-Mentzer principles are based on what Jones
refers to as self-evident logic. One principal aspect of the
high-intensity training that reflects self-evident logic is
the idea of training to failure. Mentzer and Jones consider
this essential in inducing muscular size and strength. They
point out that the human body has a finite recovery ability,
and the less you tap into this recovery ability, the greater
the gains.
Recovery ability is just another way of explaining the stress
and compensation theory originally stated by scientist Hans
Selye. In short, you impose a stress sufficient to stress
the body without exhausting its ability to recover. The body
will then compensate for the imposed stress by changing something.
In the case of exercise, this change involves additional protein
synthesized in myofibrils or muscle fibers. As a result the
muscle grows.
The problem is finding the right level of stress; in other
words, how do you impose enough exercise on muscle without
stepping over the line? According to Jones, if you overtrain,
you’ll exhaust recovery ability. That leads to either
no gains or a catabolic state, in which you lose previous
gains. Jones and Mentzer’s solution is twofold: 1) Use
heavy weights to stress the muscle fibers most prone to hypertrophy,
the type-2B fibers; and 2) train to momentary muscular failure.
Training to failure, according to the high-intensity school
of thought, makes sure you stimulate the type-2 muscle fibers
while using up the smallest amount of your delicate recovery
ability. Over the years Jones has amended his ideas concerning
the proper frequency and volume of training to promote maximum
progress. When he first appeared on the scene in the early
1970s, he suggested training no more than three times a week,
averaging two sets per exercise. More recently, he favors
no more than one set per exercise.
Mentzer has refined the system to the point that some of his
trainees hit a muscle only once every eight days. Again, the
idea is to allow sufficient recuperation time while minimizing
the expenditure of existing recovery ability.
Critics point out that the recovery ability concept is nebulous.
Scientists trained in subjects such as statistics have problems
with something that can’t be precisely quantified. Jones
and his followers answer that training to failure ensures
maximal muscle stimulation for everyone, regardless of individual
differences, while preventing overtraining.
A recent review of training to failure appears in a 2002 issue
of the journal Strength and Conditioning. The authors of the
review say that it’s more important to use heavy weights
than it is to train to failure. They list past research, indicating
that, according to the majority of studies, multiple sets
are superior to single sets when it comes to inducing muscle
size and strength gains. Weightlifters, the authors say, rarely
train to failure yet are undeniably strong.
The new review also states that consistently training to failure
often results in overtraining in about three to four weeks.
This is a curious outcome, considering that the whole idea
behind one-set-to-failure training is to avoid overtraining.
The scientists say that the cumulative muscle damage imposed
by training to failure sets the stage for injuries because
of the increased fatigue you experience when you train to
failure regularly.
The review concludes by suggesting that if you want to try
training to failure, do it as part of a periodized program
for no more than three weeks at a time.
Arthur Jones would undoubtedly ties one word to describe the
authors of this study: idiots. If anything, the greater rest
featured in present high-intensity-training programs would
tend to increase recovery while minimizing injuries due to
more complete muscle and connective tissue recovery. On the
other hand, I’ve observed that high-intensity devotees
like Don-an Yates appear to have frequent injuries, such as
Yates’ elbow, biceps and shoulder problems.
As anyone who’s trained with heavy weights for years
knows, however, injuries are an occupational hazard. In defense
of Yates and other high-intensity-training proponents, there’s
no proof that he could have avoided his injuries if he’d
trained in a more conventional style. In fact, I’ve
heard Yates say that he’s especially careful to warm
up his muscles before tackling the heavy sets.
As I see it, the main problem with high-intensity training
is not injuries. To get maximum benefit from one set, you
really must train to failure. That’s easier said than
done. In my experience, few people have the mental intensity
to train to utter and complete failure. They may think they’re
doing it, but the reality veers considerably from their fantasy.
People who do only one set without reaching true failure will
only make gains if they’re rank beginners.
Another possible and rarely discussed drawback of high-intensity
training is that you must cut your calories drastically to
lose bodyfat. Since the average high-intensity routine takes
about 20 minutes, you probably burn only 100 to 200 calories
at most. Both Jones and Mentzer aren’t in favor of additional
aerobics, noting that such exercise will adversely affect
recovery ability and either limit or prevent progress.
Thus, if you’re seeking to lose body-fat on a high-intensity
workout, you need to eat about as much as a 90-pound gymnast.
I do recall, however, that Mike and his brother Ray, a former
Mr. America, did plenty of aerobics in their bodybuilding
heyday. I don’t think either Mike or Jones has addressed
the problem of calorie and fat loss in terms of the present
incarnation of high-intensity training.
That said, however and as an anecdotal aside I can report
that I made the best gains of my more than 20 years of training
while using a program similar to the one advocated by Mentzer
and Jones. I used no drugs and trained only two to three times
a week but gained tremendous strength. I was accused of being
on the juice, yet I took nothing but natural food supplements.
Contrary to what some experts say, I suffered no injuries
and certainly increased my muscle size and strength.
I eventually stopped using the system, not for physical reasons
but due to psychological factors. While my workouts were short,
after two straight years of high-intensity training I eventually
couldn’t stand the thought of having to train to failure
with ponderous poundages at every workout. In retrospect,
I think the solution would have involved using the system
during one phase of a longer program. In that respect, I agree
with the conclusion offered by the training-to-failure review
discussed above: True training to failure is most efficient
as part of a year-round periodization system.
Related Articles
10 Tips to Gain Mass
Heavy
or Light Training For Muscle Mass
Making Mass
Gains While Staying Cut
| Popular Products! |
 BSN Syntha 6
Syntha 6 Extended Release Protein Blend is formulated with fast, medium.. |
|
6-OXO
6-OXO™ contains a naturally occurring aromatase
inhibitor that is devoid of..
|
|
 Controlled Labs Green Bulge
Green Bulge is the most advanced creatine matrix volumizer ever to reach the market.. |
|
