Hate Mail, Equipment Recommendations, And Honest Training Information

I usually delete hate mail and comments containing personal attacks for the same reason I avoid arguing with idiots; the time it takes to read and respond to them could be used more productively to write articles and books that actually help people. However, some times arguing with idiots and responding to these things can be productive, because even if you can’t help them to understand or win them over, if they bring up an important topic the discussion can benefit other people who are listening or reading.

Last night, an upset and obviously confused reader submitted the comment below:

What a shame and a misleading falsehood that you never encourage people to use the best equipment available, Nautilus and medx. You are not an expert, but another shyster looking to make money without providing the truth while trying to hawk your grossly inferior equipment. You do not fool me.

Apparently he either hasn’t read much I’ve written about the subject or doesn’t understand it. I suspect what got this Nautilus “true believer” worked up was the following comment in my recent e-mail newsletter:

For those of you who asked about the squat rack, I’m still working on the modular hip belt squat/weighted chin-up and dip lever and stands and tweaking the safety spotter design but anticipate it will be in prototype by the end of summer. If you’re torn between a heavy duty squat rack, a UXS, and a Nautilus Omni Multi Exercise, but only have space for one, this is it.

I have always encouraged people to use the best equipment available to them and I have specifically recommended Nautilus, MedX, and other well-designed brands like Avenger, David Fitness and RenEx to trainers who have consulted me on equipping their personal training studio or gym. This is not always possible or practical, however, because not all gyms and training studios have these machines and many people who work out at home don’t have the space or budget for them.

Notice I didn’t say the rack was better than the Nautilus Omni Multi Exercise, but only that it is a better option “if  you only have space for one” because it allows for the performance of a greater variety of exercises.

Fortunately, your results from exercise have far more to do with how you train than what equipment you use. Many free weight and bodyweight exercises can be just as safe and effective as machine exercises when done correctly, and are usually safer and more effective than using improperly designed machines. For my articles, books and videos to be as helpful to as many people as possible, it is necessary to write about training properly using the equipment most people have access to, which is why I have focused a lot on free weight and body weight exercises in recent years. Not because I recommend them over Nautilus or MedX machines, but because they are the best option most people have.

The same goes for my UXS bodyweight multi-exercise station and the rack I am designing. While they may not be as good as many Nautilus or MedX machines for some of the individual exercises they certainly aren’t “grossly inferior”. The UXS provides the ability to perform dozens of exercises in the space of a single machine at a small fraction of the cost of a line of Nautilus or MedX, and even more will be possible with the rack. It is a far more affordable and space efficient option for a home gym or personal training studio than buying a dozen or more Nautilus or MedX machines, and the UXS does what it does very well. In fact, during the first stage of Project: Kratos clients who had previously trained on MedX machines said their workouts on the UXS felt more challenging, and one client wrote,”[it] was BY FAR the most taxing and intense workout I have completed.” The rack incorporates many features of the UXS and is being designed in response to requests from customers for a rack attachment. If you want both it makes more sense to design the bodyweight exercise station around a rack than the other way around.

uxs-chin-dip

If you’ve got forty to fifty thousand dollars to spend on a line of Nautilus or MedX machines and the space for them I highly recommend them. I have used and trained people on both and they’re great machines. However, if you have a very small budget or limited space  a UXS and/or a basic rack and free weight set-up will allow you to safely and effectively perform a variety of exercises for all the major muscle groups.

If you’re buying equipment for a home gym or training studio, don’t forget to check with an architect to determine the live load the floors were designed to support where you plan to place the equipment. You shouldn’t have any problem if you are placing them on a concrete slab in your garage or basement, but most residential flooring is only designed to handle a live load of around forty pounds per square foot, and will not support the weight of most commercial exercise machines. Also, if you are planning to put machines in your basement you need to consider the load your stairs were designed to handle and break the equipment down into light enough parts to move without causing damage.

I guarantee if you took a thousand people and trained all of them using the exact same methods but randomly divided them into one group that only used machines and another that only used free weights, there would be no significant difference in the average strength and size gains between them, and you couldn’t can tell by looking at them which they used. Properly designed machines are great, and there are advantages to using them, but in the long run, again, how you train is far more important than what equipment you use.

As for the question of my expertise, an expert is someone who has comprehensive and authoritative knowledge of or skill in a particular area. I’ve been training and consulting for people professionally for over twenty years, and have worked with and learned from some of the most knowledgeable people in the field, and am highly regarded by many recognized experts in high intensity training, including the late Mike Mentzer who referred to me along with Doug McGuff and Greg Anderson as “leading HIT theorists”, John Little, who said, “Drew Baye is without question one of the premiere personal trainers in the world. His knowledge of exercise science and its application to one’s personal fitness goals and aspirations is exceptional in the health and fitness industry”, Doug McGuff who thanked me and Ellington Darden in the acknowledgements of Body by Science for “[our] excellent web sites and writings”, and Ellington Darden, PhD, who included a chapter I wrote in his book The New Bodybuilding For Old School Results. I don’t claim to be the most knowledgeable or skilled trainer or writer in the world, but I’ve helped thousands of people get stronger, leaner, and better conditioned through my one-on-one training and writing, so I’m pretty sure I know what I’m doing.

Of course I am looking to earn money teaching and writing about exercise, but I do so by providing people with honest information and products and services which are of value to them. My commitment to this has actually cost me a lot of money over the years. I turn down tens of thousands of dollars of potential yearly advertising revenue because I refuse to sell ad space or links to web sites with questionable or fraudulent information, products, or services. I quit my job as the director of education for a national personal training when it became obvious they were compromising the standards for instructor certification and didn’t care, and due to the CEO’s unethical behavior. I gave away hundreds of dollars worth of consultations to people who took a particular certification I was recommending to make up for the mistake when I later found out their testing standards were practically non-existant. When I started taking prescription drugs that increase testosterone I announced it publicly rather claiming recent muscle gains and fat loss are due entirely to training and diet, like many others do. Also, unlike some other trainers I know, I have continued to teach high intensity training rather than go along with many more profitable but less safe and effective trends like boot-camps and CrossFit. If I only cared about money and not about the truth, I’d have a lot more of it than I do. I don’t, because my integrity is more important to me than the money.

Join the discussion or ask questions about this post in the HIT List forum

Like it? Share it!

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • Jake Jul 10, 2014 @ 18:35

    Hey Drew,

    Totally off subject: Did you happen to catch the new show “American Muscle” on discovery channel last night? It had me shaking my head in disgust! It is s reality show of a gym training pro athletes. It look like malpractice with shit he had these guys doing! Those pros should be calling you for training! Any ways keep up the great work!

    • Drew Baye Jul 10, 2014 @ 21:04

      Hey Jake,

      No, I didn’t see it so I can’t comment on any of the specifics, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re doing a lot of things which don’t make sense. Unfortunately, much of what goes on in gyms has more to do with tradition and trends than science.

      • Brian Barlow Jul 12, 2014 @ 9:28

        Hey guys,
        Barwis was the strength coach at Michigan after Mike Gittelson. He came with Richrod and was supposed to turn the FB players into supermen, with his “revolutioary” training. They went on to have the worst records ever at Michigan. Then he got fired. He is Hollywood.
        Brian Barlow

  • Lifter Jul 10, 2014 @ 18:39

    Unfortunately Drew the Net is full of haters who simply hate for the sake of it. My introduction to the Net, 1995, I was threatened in no time. I was shocked why someone would rear up like that, after all we were discussing training, not dating his mother!

    Then messages started to pour in, the kid was a skinny Indian:Sandeep, who didn’t even have his car license. That set me up for the joys to be had with Net Warriors.

    Don’t take it to heart, there is safety hidden behind a keyboard that promotes bravado. Good response though.

    • Drew Baye Jul 10, 2014 @ 21:03

      Thanks Lifter,

      I’m not stressing over it 🙂

  • Angst Jul 10, 2014 @ 19:14

    Drew,
    You’re an honest an classy guy, and you know how to think — such a rarity. I myself don’t always agree with everything you say (in the VERY big picture of fitness for the average joe, which is a really convoluted 3D chess game), but simply watching an intelligent person think and analyze is worth the price of admission. And, you have greatly contributed to my own “solutions”, and I direct people to your site all the time.

    Unfortunately, the general public much prefers to play this ridiculous ongoing game of Simon Sez, with some guy who shreds his abs right before each bullshit video/infomercial he puts out. Thus, lucid thought is rarely appreciated and adequately rewarded.
    I recall a lengthy debate you had with a CrossFit guy, one of the best, most erudite discussions/debates I’ve read on CrossFit. Which of course you won. 🙂 More impressively, you kept it classy, and did not allow it to degenerate, despite provocation.
    The notion of keeping skill OUT of the exercise routine is really profound. Few people understand the impact of this notion.

    Haters will always hate. Hopefully they don’t also know how to hack. lol

    • Drew Baye Jul 10, 2014 @ 20:51

      Thanks Angst,

      It’s easy to get angry with people and want to tell them off – and I briefly considered it – but it’s usually best to stay cool and discuss things reasonably. Then, even if you don’t convince the other person you will have presented arguments and information beneficial to the rest of the people listening or reading.

      Unfortunately, we’ve had a few hacking attempts, but mostly unsophisticated brute-force type stuff originating in Eastern Europe and my web host is pretty savvy and was able to keep them out.

      • Angst Jul 10, 2014 @ 21:45

        I said “one of the best, erudite discussions on Crossfit…”
        Actually, it is the ONLY intelligent discussion/critique of Crossfit I have ever read.
        These youtube commentaries, bullshit WebMD-type articles on crossfit are just drool.

        Slightly off/on topic, re Nautilus equipment:
        What happened to the old Arthur Jones nautilus equipment, with the hammered metal-grey paintjobs, chains, sprockets, etc? That was some well-designed equipment, and then the Bally’s et al just got rid of ALL of it! I don’t see why they got rid of it, when it was replaced with much inferior stuff. And where did it go?

        I particularly liked the ab-crunch machine. I was one of the few people who could rack that machine out, for reps!!! As a skinny guy! More technique than strength, but I did get some attention…. 🙂
        Now I’m old, and don’t get any attention at all…. 🙁

        • Drew Baye Jul 10, 2014 @ 23:12

          Angst,

          I’ve rarely seen discussions involving CrossFit stay reasonable and civil for long, and once reason and civility have been abandoned there is little point in continuing or getting involved, so I stay out of a lot of that unless someone asks about it here.

          Those older Nautilus machines were great, and if they are well maintained they work just as well or better than most of the equipment other companies are making today. Unfortunately most gym and training studio owners don’t understand enough about exercise in general or equipment design in particular to appreciate them and many have sold perfectly good Nautilus machines only to replace them with newer, but inferiorly designed machines from other companies. Fortunately, this means there is a lot of used Nautilus available at very good prices, but if people aren’t buying it they can end up being sold for scrap.

  • Edenn Perez Jul 10, 2014 @ 20:00

    You go, Drew! There are times when you have to stand up for yourself and this is one of those. I enjoy your writing and believe you to be honest and fair. Cheers!

  • Nandan Jul 10, 2014 @ 20:43

    Drew, I have been personal trainer since a decade . have been experimenting with various protocols, have seen lot of trainers preaching false information….. I once and for all agree that you are brutally honest and very very knowledgeable in the field of exercise and it’s application on a client…

  • Paul Jul 10, 2014 @ 20:45

    Good for you. You have legions of devoted subscribers and we have profited from your generous and wise advice over the years. It takes integrity to speak the truth and not spout nonsense in the face of temptation. That’s why we follow you.

  • Tom Jul 10, 2014 @ 20:50

    WOW!

    Drew your articulate gentlemanly response was spot on!

    I’ve grown to respect your writings and professionalism over the last year or so but,
    your response to this dolt has propelled you way up my ladder of respect.

    Thanks for being there,
    Tom

  • Drew Baye Jul 10, 2014 @ 21:07

    Thanks everybody! I greatly appreciate it.

  • Joe Jul 10, 2014 @ 22:26

    Excellent response. Some folks get this feverish misguided commitment to one method, one piece of equipment, one … whatever, and then they are blinded. The world isn’t black and white, and you’re always very clear about this in your writings and your books.

    BTW, if I had the room I’d be interested in purchasing your equipment.

    Happy training!!

    –Joe

    P.S. — Also, really appreciated your honesty about your medical supplementation. Not many people would go to that length in the name of full disclosure. When I read that particular blog post, it told me immediately that you were an individual of high integrity who can be trusted.

    • Drew Baye Jul 10, 2014 @ 22:54

      Thanks Joe,

      Nautilus and MedX make great machines and they have several advantages over free weights, but if you train properly you can eventually get as big and strong as your genetics allow using either, or both.

      Six weeks after starting the clomiphene citrate and anastrazole my testosterone increased from 364 to 1048. I’m responding to my workouts like I was in my twenties and am down over fifteen pounds of fat and up about ten pounds of muscle since the beginning of April. It would be misleading to not mention the drug use and let people believe this was entirely due to my workouts or diet.

      • Roger Jul 11, 2014 @ 8:22

        It must be nice to go from 364 to 1048! I’m 49, workout with the BBS protocol (except with a 4/4 rep cadence), eat a good diet, etc. and my total testosterone level is 375 wth free test at 5. I can’t get my doctor to do anything about it. She says my levels are fine. I insisted on seeing an endocrinologist…he says I’m fine too and won’t do anything about it either. Funny, I sure don’t feel fine, and I definitely don’t get the same results as I used to from my workouts! Any suggestions?

        • Drew Baye Jul 15, 2014 @ 14:20

          Hey Roger,

          It is. I noticed a huge difference within the first few weeks. I strongly recommend seeing another doctor, because with those numbers they should prescribe you something. You might want to look for a hormone replacement therapy clinic in your area.

          • Ben Tucker Aug 22, 2014 @ 21:04

            Yeah, a second opinion is in order.

            I had a painter, who worked on my house, tell me that his doctor prescribed test because his counts were so low. He’s in his 60’s.
            He was wondering why his energy levels were lagging badly. It bummed him out because he’s got to be up-and-at’em as a painter.

            I could tell he was already a mesomorph and ox-strong (his handshake was like a vice). He relayed that the results were like being in his 20’s, had energy all day long and got a wicked pump in gym, as well as size gains.

            I agree with Drew, steroids should be legal and regulated.
            Like any other drug, people will either do it or not.

            My dad is 72 and although his strength from training is good, his size could be improved by test. He knows his test is low but has such a stigma about doing anything about it. He states it “causes cancer”, etc. Typical paranoia fed by the media.

            • Drew Baye Aug 23, 2014 @ 11:30

              Hey Ben,

              If he has it prescribed his doctor should have his blood tested regularly and will monitor for risks. The benefits far outweigh any risks, especially to older people since most of the problems associated with aging are related to sarcopenia.

      • AC Jul 13, 2014 @ 17:30

        Those are crazy results you’re getting, considering you’re not taking this stuff primarily for bodybuilding purposes.

        15 pounds of fat lost alone would make a huge visual difference, but with 10 pounds of muscle gained at the same time, the visual difference must be VERY apparent.

        I recently watched YouTube videos by Bostin Loyd. He’s a drug using bodybuilder and I really like him. Why? Because he’s completely open and honest about his drug use. The amount of stuff he takes is obscene. He won the NPC Contra Costa in 2013.

        I find it fascinating. His videos have re-opened my eyes to how much drugs influence results.

        I can’t remember some of Bostin’s quote but he basically said that his results are 70% drugs, 20% diet and 10% training. He can’t stand the fact that there are people like him who take tons of stuff but trying to convince everyone it’s all about the training and diet.

        In his opinion, when you’re on as much stuff as he is, as long as you go to the gym regularly and do enough reasonably good training, you’ll get results. The extent of the results is driven by the drugs. He doesn’t keep records, use good form, worry about over training, think in any detail about workout design.

        It’s simply a case of thinking “Chest day today. As long as I do a bunch of chest related stuff, I’ll be fine.”

        He went from fat (in bodybuilding terms) to shredded in 12 weeks purely because of drugs. He’s totally honest and says that his diet doesn’t really change. Calorie intake alters slightly but not as much as you’d think.

        When it comes to getting shredded, the drug routine has to change completely. Doses of some things have to be massively reduced and other things have to be massively increased. Listening to him talk about it so candidly was refreshing and made me realise how naive I had been.

        Funnily enough Bostin is honest about hardly doing any cardio either.

        I was aware that bodybuilders in the 70s used drugs to get big and stay big but these days there is a whole range of stuff, not just for size, but for leanness, hardness, fullness, vascularity, water, all sorts. Some stuff is purely to counteract negative side effects of the drugs that they use to alter their appearance.

        Regardless of what other people may think, the training you’re performing still goes against the grain of what anyone else on any amount of drugs is doing. it’s begins to point toward the fact that if an IFBB heavy drug user trained exactly like you do, they’d still look the same as they do now i.e. massive and ripped.

        The volume trainers that bad mouth HIT seem to conveniently forget that at that level of drug use, although you still need to do some training, the fine details are irrelevant and HIT would easily provide sufficient stimulus for the chemicals to do their work.

        I think it’s absolutely brilliant the way you’ve been open and honest about the effect drugs have had on your results. It takes nothing away from the training, because it’s still so minimalist, but highlights that even very light drug use really helps.

        Hopefully it makes people realise that whenever they see an allegedly natural competitor, if they have a certain level of of development and a certain look (which they all do) then they’re at least on something, probably for size and for leanness.

        • Drew Baye Jul 15, 2014 @ 11:33

          AC,

          Even if I were to take the type and amount of drugs professional competitive bodybuilders use, I would not change my training. If different training methods are equally effective, the sensible thing to do is choose the one with the least risk of causing an injury or long term joint problems. If different training methods are equally effective and safe, the sensible thing to do is choose the one that is most time efficient.

          While there are some rare people who are naturally extremely muscular, most people can not develop the kind of physiques you see on stage at NPC and IFBB shows without drugs, and many “natural” competitors are definitely not. I understand why many people would not be honest about their drug use, considering the legal risks, but to imply or falsely claim to be natural so you can attribute your gains entirely to a training program, supplements, or equipment you are selling is wrong.

          My training has not changed much, and neither has my diet, so the drugs are definitely responsible for most of the change. With my testosterone back up I’m responding to training like I did in my twenties. What I’ve done over the past few months might not be realistic for genetically-average, drug-free trainees my age or older, but it would be for someone in their teens or twenties.

          • AC Jul 16, 2014 @ 6:15

            Thanks for the response Drew, much appreciated.

            There’s me being naive again and forgetting that there are potential legal implications around being honest about drug use.

            It always made me laugh that Ronnie Coleman used to be a police officer. How on earth did he get away with that?

            Are you still performing negative emphasized training?

            When will we get to see the before and after shots?

            • Drew Baye Jul 19, 2014 @ 17:06

              AC,

              I hope they legalize steroids and other performance enhancing drugs that are currently illegal, because adults should be able to choose what they do with their own bodies, but I would strongly recommend anyone who uses them does so under a doctor’s supervision with regular blood work to determine whether adjustments need to be made to the dose or specific drugs used.

              Still doing negative emphasized training, and happy with the results so far. The after shots all depend on how strict I am with my diet over the next few weeks.

      • Ben Tucker Aug 22, 2014 @ 20:24

        Drew,

        I too, was just blown away by your candor. Such integrity!
        This is awesome… I was wondering about your results, as well. So glad I found this post! Thank you for sharing.

        15 lbs less fat?! Would you mind giving some details of your diet?
        Eating the same as before (i.e., ” Too many Taco Tuesdays at Tijuana Flats”) or calorie reduction?

        • Drew Baye Aug 23, 2014 @ 11:37

          Hey Ben,

          I’m now down seventeen pounds of fat and up fourteen pounds of muscle since the beginning of April. I have not been as strict with my eating over the past few weeks, thus the slow down in fat loss. We’re still hitting Tijuana Flats once a week, but most of the rest of the time I’m eating meat, eggs, vegetables, small amounts of fruit and nuts, and drinking coffee with butter or heavy cream in the morning.

  • Glenn Magee Jul 10, 2014 @ 22:46

    Drew,

    It takes an enormous amount of patience and understanding to communicate with those who are able to hide behind their keyboard. Keep up the good work.

    Cheers.

  • Jeffrey Muehl Jul 11, 2014 @ 2:29

    Hi Drew,

    All machines are constrained by cost vs. benefit. Depending on what lens one chooses to look at with MedX and Nautilus machines (and pretty much everything) can be considered all junk. Much “better” equipment can be made, but at a higher cost. Nautilus/MedX/RenEx for some is considered the best because nothing better has been built. But that isn’t necessary saying much. Comparing one pile, to the next pile doesn’t really tell one much of anything at all. The more a learn about available machines the more disappointed I become.

    This obsession people have with thinking one brand of equipment is better over the next while they all use basically the same cheap parts, and low precision manufacturing is a bit odd. Get over it and train. The difference aren’t as big as people think they are. And how those difference in the crop of equipment one could use for training in terms of results having and effect are pretty dubious.

    Nothing wrong with some body weight exercise, and a bar, or your multi exercise station. With your multi exercise station, one doesn’t have a bunch of crappy poorly manufactured and designed parts found in all machines with a weight stack getting in the way.

    Cost benefit wise, not a bad way to get some exercises performed. KISS principle does apply for getting the job done.

    • Drew Baye Jul 15, 2014 @ 14:25

      Hey Jeff,

      You’re right, in terms of practical results – how big, strong, and conditioned you can get – in the long run it makes little difference. While it is nice to have well-manufactured machines, as long as the basic biomechanics are correct you quickly hit a point of diminishing returns with improvements in other things like friction and adjustability. If I had a million to spare, I would hire Ken Hutchins to design and build all my equipment. I don’t, though, so I stick with what is affordable and space efficient.

  • The Songster Jul 11, 2014 @ 6:45

    You’re a class act Bro! This world is an interesting place — no time for boredom! LOL…
    “As you were SIR!”

  • François L. Jul 11, 2014 @ 7:15

    I do agree with you and that’s why your website is my current best online reference about H.I.T.. You are doing very well, I encourage you to stay honest and to keep writing!

    • Drew Baye Jul 15, 2014 @ 14:13

      Thanks Francois,

      Will do!

    • Ben Tucker Aug 22, 2014 @ 21:18

      I second that, Francois L.
      I recommend this site to all my clients and many in general.

  • Bill from Boston Jul 11, 2014 @ 9:24

    Drew – For anyone who is questioning your knowledge in this field or your integrity as a businessman, I would suggest they visit YouTube and watch your video, ‘Drew Baye – The Documentary‘. I have that video saved in my Youtube favorites and have watched it at least a dozen times. Although you have many excellent, free videos containing a wealth of information for proper training and diet, this video encapsulates the beliefs and knowledge of a good, decent, and professional man who is freely offering advice to thousands of others (41,888 to date)….advice he has gleaned from years of personal training, study and training of others. I, for one, appreciate all you do and hope to one day visit you in Orlando for a personal workout during one of my trips to Disney World. Keep up the great work, Drew. There are thousands of us out here that value your work and appreciate all you are doing online for the bodybuilding community. Bill from Boston

    • Drew Baye Jul 15, 2014 @ 13:00

      Hey Bill,

      Thank you very much. I’m glad you like the documentary and have found my work here valuable. It’s good to know people are benefitting from it.

  • Bryce Jul 11, 2014 @ 10:23

    Drew,

    Bret Contreras’ hip thruster apparatus has hooks for attaching bands for extra resistance. Have you considereded adding something simple like that to your own squat rack or UXS? Seems a simple way to add resistance to the glute bridge, which might otherwise be quickly out grown.

    Just a thought. Great response to our mutual friend.

    • Drew Baye Jul 15, 2014 @ 14:12

      Hey Bryce,

      I’m not familiar with Bret’s apparatus, but it sounds like a better way to increase resistance for hip raises than holding a barbell across your pelvis. There is a way to perform hip extensions on the UXS using the roller pad and a band looped over the pelvis and under the feet, but attachment points on the outside would make this easier. The squat rack will have holes in the frame for band pegs which could be positioned for hip raises using a bench to support the shoulders.

  • Edward Jul 11, 2014 @ 12:53

    I loved this article! its so werid how people can just make random statements like that without reading your stuff. Im a physiotherapist and trainer based in Switzerland and Norway and have read almost all your blog posts, theyre all great! Personally my preference is for bodyweight only HIT style workouts. Ive made incredible gains with this and I can do it anywhere which is great as I travel a lot. I also have my clients doing mostly HIT style workouts for fitness and rehab and have had great results, all have gotten stronger and i havevent seen one single injury. Making the workouts bodyweight also makes the threshold for clients extremely low, meaning they can do them anywhere once theyve learned the technique which is super important.

    Even if machines were a little better, I think the fact that bodyweight is more acessible and just as challenging make it better overall. Also, although this is difficult to measure, experiencially, i feel our clients develop greater body awareness and movement skill, which is important for them if they dont do sports or move around a lot.

    looking forward to the new rack! as soon as i have space and money, im getting one 🙂

    • Drew Baye Jul 15, 2014 @ 12:38

      Hey Edward,

      These are the reasons I’ve focused so much on bodyweight training over the past year, and from the results I’ve seen with clients and feedback I’ve gotten from people following the Project: Kratos program it’s definitely effective.

      I hope to have the squat rack in prototype by the end of August and will announce something on the site as soon as it is available. In the meanwhile, I’m open to requests for features and attachments.

      • Edward Jul 16, 2014 @ 8:54

        Cool! cant wait for the squat rack – looks great so far – I agree with the poster below it would be cool to have some attachments for bands as well as a setup for doing some sort of hip thruster – big fan of that exercise and a lot of my clients do it as well 🙂 maybe something for TSC neck work also? just some thoughts.. love the design tho!

        • Drew Baye Jul 19, 2014 @ 17:03

          Edward

          All of these are being considered. The band attachment points will be one of the last things added, however, as there are many other design requirements and constraints that have to be satisfied before I spend any time working on extra features.

  • Brian Jul 11, 2014 @ 13:02

    Allow me to quote the “hater” –
    “You are not an expert, but another shyster looking to make money”.

    Oh, sweet, savory, delicious irony. That is exactly what the so called industry experts (like Weider…HA!) and pros and haters back in the day said about Arthur Jones, you know, the creator of Nautilus.

    You ‘fooled’ yourself without even realizing it! DOH!

    • Drew Baye Jul 15, 2014 @ 12:34

      Hey Brian,

      Yes, he has “fooled” himself. What I don’t understand is where he got the idea I don’t recommend using Nautilus and MedX. I don’t think he’s read much of this site, or if he did he obviously doesn’t understand it.

  • Adam Jul 11, 2014 @ 15:11

    Hey Drew, I just had to comment that every few months or so, I get what I call “HIT doubts” that creep into my mind. This is due to the disgusting amount of overload of new exercise trends that litter TV and social media. During these times of doubt, I know that I can return to your written pieces for honest, straight-forward, and scientifically-backed information about what really creates and sustains healthy, safe muscle growth. I’ve been long-distance running for the past few years and have gotten a few marathons under my belt, all with a full-body HIT routine done weekly, and I’ve remained injury-free throughout due to the sustained muscle strength that often disappears in high mileage. Thanks again, keep it up, I really appreciate it.
    Side note–I agree with the initial comment about the TV show American Muscle. Please do check it out, it’s really disheartening to see irresponsible and unsafe methods promoted in the show. It amazed me that these are the methods used with such high-level professional athletes.

    • Drew Baye Jul 15, 2014 @ 12:20

      Hey Adam,

      I’m glad you find the web site helpful and are staying injury-free. I will check out American Muscle and probably write something about it if it’s as horrendous as it sounds.

  • Angst Jul 11, 2014 @ 17:42

    Drew,

    Off-topic Q for here, but maybe still interesting.

    The force velocity curve is graph line going from high loads/low velocity, to low loads/high velocity, in a smooth hyperbola-ish curve, which I’m sure you are familiar with. For those not familiar with it, wiki has an ok article on it..
    The key to this is: each load is lifted at the *maximum speed the muscle is capable of*, for the max power the muscle is capable of, at that load.

    I know that your high intensity protocol calls for very high loads, but according the to f-v curve, the muscle would SEEM to working “just as hard” at all loads, if performed at max velocity.
    Would you agree that this curve then represents *equivalent intensity* at all loads, where high speed creates an equivalent intensity at lighter loads?

    It is true, that at 1-RM, you are really busting your hump lifting that weight, but if you knock out 10 high speed jabs (both extending and retracting), you will be very surprised at the resulting ache in your arm, and possible DOMS.

    If you don’t agree that these are equivalent intensities, how would you compare them, and what adaptive value do you think these ultra-high speed jabs have?

    If one doesn’t have some experience doing these very fast arm motions, one will not get the full exertional effect, but if you do have experience with them, it is surprising how taxing they can be.
    True, I’m comparing 10 high speed motions with a single 1-RM lift.
    Also, these high-speed motions are probably subject to a higher injury rate.

    Just curious, tho, about how you would characterize, compare these “types” of intensities.
    If you have addressed this somewhere, I’d appreciate the link.

    • Drew Baye Jul 15, 2014 @ 12:19

      Angst,

      There are two force/velocity curves. One describes the relationship between the force you have to apply to accelerate a given load (physics), the other refers to the force a muscle is capable of applying at different contraction velocities (physiology). While more force is required to accelerate a load more rapidly, your muscles are capable of producing more force at slower velocities due to greater cross-bridging, meaning you can produce more force going slowly with a heavier weight. People who use the first force/velocity curve as an argument for training faster are either unaware of or fail to consider the second.

      It is both more effective and safer for general strength and conditioning to move a heavier weight more slowly than a lighter weight more quickly, and even if you are moving very slowly as long as you are attempting to contract as hard as possible during the last few reps when you are only capable of slow movement your rate of force development will improve.

      • Angst Jul 16, 2014 @ 16:24

        Drew,
        As always, your thoughtful replies are greatly appreciated.

        Fyi:
        http://clubindustry.com/profits/crossfit-suing-nsca-over-findings-published-study&sfvc4enews=42&cl=article_1_1

        Hilarious!! Reminds me of Scientology, suing the crap out of people. Good ole (gl)Assman.
        Btw, Club industry is a useful eziine to follow, on the comm. fit biz.

        Earlier in these comments, I mentioned your very erudite Crossfit debate with a crossfitter. Do you recall that exchange? It went on for a while.
        I think it would be worth extracting/editing it as its own post, should prove useful to a lot of people, esp. those sitting on the Crossfit fence.

        An article on the (non)physics of those ridiculous kettlebells would be useful as well. Kettlebellers believe that a 20 lb kb is heavier than a 20 lb db… lol

        • Drew Baye Jul 19, 2014 @ 17:01

          Angst,

          The lawsuit will backfire on CrossFit because it brings more attention to the high injury rate they’re trying to stop people from learning about.

          Thanks for reminding me of the CrossFit discussion. I have excerpted the relevant comments and posted them in the article Conversations With CrossFitters.

          A twenty pound kettlebell weighs exactly the same as a twenty pound dumbbell, however, because the center of gravity is outside of the handle, if you swing it the resistance torque will be higher than if you were to swing a dumbbell due to the longer lever. The problem with kettlebells is they are designed primarily for swinging movements, but weights should not be swung, they should be lifted slowly under strict control.

  • Matt Spriggs Jul 15, 2014 @ 21:32

    Drew,

    It has been a privilege for me to learn from you via your consulting service. I highly recommend it to anyone wishing to learn more about exercise, nutrition, anatomy, kinesiology and various other subjects. Anyone thinking that you are merely trying to make a quick buck is simply ignorant and/or misled. Every dollar I’ve spent with you has been money WELL SPENT and I will add that I’ve always received more than what I paid for in terms of time and knowledge.
    I’ve enjoyed discussing various topics with you – at times I’ve disagreed to a point of being recalcitrant, but I’ve always learned a great deal and I’ve profited from your teachings and advice. Lastly, I appreciate the manner in which you have continued Mike Mentzer’s legacy. I believe that if Mike was alive today, he would be very pleased with your representation of HIT and his exercise philosophy. His legacy continues – Thank you.

    Matt Spriggs

    • Drew Baye Jul 15, 2014 @ 21:55

      Matt,

      You’re welcome, and thank you for the kind words.

  • John Beynor Jul 20, 2014 @ 11:23

    Hi Drew,

    With the UXS attachment that your working on, will there be the option to perform a hip belt calf raise and more isometric exercise options? Maybe more roller pads for something like a wall sit.

    Thanks, John Beynor

    • Drew Baye Jul 25, 2014 @ 11:43

      Hey John,

      The rack system I’m designing is modular so people can get just what they want, and not pay for a lot of things they don’t. You can get just the squat rack, and nothing else, or whatever modules you want, based on what you want and your budget.

  • Chief Jul 21, 2014 @ 19:13

    Hi Drew!

    You have stated that (paraphrasing) any training program can effective, if done progressively, consistently while give enough time to recover from workouts (sorry for my english). I believe this to be true.

    Even now, when I have gained lots of muscle and strength with HIT, I’m still sceptic. Not just about training, but in philosophical terms – about everything. I keep wondering “if there is a better way to train” – “maybe doing 2 sets rather than 1”. I’ve read a lot about HIT (research, testimonials etc.) and It’s convincing, no doubt, but I think there is always room for doubt. Critical thinking.

    I’m familiar with selection bias and other errors people make when making up conclusions, but it still wakes up some thoughts when bodybuilders (for example) make statements about using multiple sets over single-set. Some even claim, that “bodybuilders like Mentzer, Yates, Darden (etc.) used multiple sets to build their bodies, and then for marketing reasons they started to ‘sell’ this single-set idea”. Maybe? I haven’t seen Mike Mentzer working out back in the day? These are just my thoughts and doubts, not claims – not in any way.

    Many things about HIT just makes “perfect” sense, and it really works. Reading your blog has changed my views about training, and I really appreciate you sharing this information, but I have to ask few thing, if you don’t mind:

    1. Correct me if I’m wrong, but you stated (maybe in comment section in some of your posts) that “you KNOW that HIT is the most effective way to train”. Do you still stand behind this and why or why not?

    2. Is there any – literally any – circumstances that multiple sets could be more beneficial? 3 medium intensity sets or let’s say 2 sets to failure?

    3. Are you familiar with any hoaxes (etc.) concerning HIT; for example some people using multiple sets to build their bodies and then claiming that single-set to failure is superior.

    I’m a thinker. I’m trying to be as critical as I can, in most objective way I can. This is why I’ve to ask myself: “What if this HIT and Drew Bayes blog is a scam?” No offense thou, I’m not making any claims or attacking you, this is just how my stupid-ass mind works.

    In my opinion, your blog has been most helpful, when it comes to training-information, so thank you for that. I’m trying to make decent conversation, so hopefully I haven’t offended you in any way – not my intention.

    • Drew Baye Jul 22, 2014 @ 12:54

      Chief,

      1. The general principles of high intensity training are the most consistent with the best available evidence, and since effectiveness also involves return on the time invested and avoidance of injuries which can interfere with progress and HIT is the most time efficient and safest way to train, yes, it is absolutely the most effective.

      2. Research has shown that some people respond better to multiple sets, usually those with a high percentage of slow twitch fibers. However, these studies usually involve exercises performed at typical cadences resulting in relatively low time under tension, and what might be needed is not more sets, but a longer set.

      What many people fail to realize is exercise volume has more to do with metabolic stress than mechanical work, and the time under tension of a typical HIT set done at a controlled speed of movement is greater than the total time under tension of multiple sets at typical cadences.

      If you take about three seconds to lift a weight and three seconds to lower it, hold at the top on compound pulling and simple exercises, and reverse direction smoothly, a set of six to ten reps will take you around fifty to eighty seconds. This is more time under tension, more metabolic stress, than doing three sets of ten at a typical, fast cadence.

      3. I am not aware of any hoaxes involving people using multiple sets and claiming their results are from HIT.

      No offense taken. Considering the amount of bullshit out there on the subject it makes good sense to be skeptical.

  • Lifter Jul 22, 2014 @ 18:55

    Chief, I had the same concerns at one stage, despite being an HIT/Heavy Duty advocate all my (training) life. So I went in search of the truth. I asked Elldington Darden, who I have known since 1983. The 3rd Mentzer brother; Dave Mastorakis. And many who were there “in the day”. The results of my research were all positive.

    My best confirmations was from Roger Swabb, who was will to answer anything I asked him. Here is what he had to share (which is quite the eye-opener and should sooth your queries…as it did mine).

    * Mike was a close personal friend. Quite frankly, however, most of everything that he said, he learned from Arthur. The consolidation routine came out of nowhere. I am sure it will add muscle to anyone who works 3-5 compound movements HARD.

    * Believe it or not, when Mike trained with Casey in Florida in 1974, they trained the whole body with 20 plus exercises and trained their upper body first and then their legs. They ate mostly carbs and no protein powders. What their drug usage was I do not know. When he won the Weider version of the Mr America in 1975, he trained his whole body 3 days a week. At the time, he was living in California.

    * I trained both Mentzer’s and Casey. Casey was a bit stronger than Ray. Quite a bit stronger than Mike. None of them anguished over “the perfect rep.” Slow and smooth, but no “craziness.”

    * I trained Mike and Ray on several occasions. I also trained Casey and Danny Padilla once. They all trained EXACTLY the same. They each did 14 exercises. 5 for the lower body and 9 for the upper body. No split routines. Full body workouts. This was the workout that THEY asked for, NOT one that I suggested (with the exception of Danny who was visiting Main Line Health & Fitness with John Balik of Iron Man). As a rule, they rested 2 minutes between body parts. Their workouts were ALWAYS performed in a pre-exhaustion protocol.

    * We trained together probably 50 times from 1973-1980 and it was a whole body workout EVERY TIME.

  • Chief Jul 26, 2014 @ 7:53

    Thank you for answering Drew!

    And Lifter, good info too 🙂

    I started HIT with Heavy Duty routine. 3-way-split; upper body “push”, upper body “pull” and legs. Abs in same workout as legs. Later I switched to full-body workouts, and I guess, there is no going back to split routines.

    I did 1-2 warm-up sets and then 1 set to failure when I first started with that Heavy Duty routine. I don’t do any warm-up anymore, unless I squat or deadlift first, then I do 1 warm-up set first. After that, just 1 set to failure in every exercise. So Lifter, I just wanted to ask some things (not that I would apply them to my workouts but cause I’m curious):

    1. In some articles at least Mike Mentzer talks about doing 2-3 sets in some exercises, so did he do 1-3 sets to failure, or 1-2 warm-up sets + 1 to failure, or 3 not-to-failure sets? Which was the “right way” back then?

    2. I’ve read that drop-sets, rest-pause, forced negatives, forced reps, negative-only and other set-extension/HIT-techniques were used on regular basis – basicly all the time? True?

    3. Anything specifc you can point out about Mentzer’s or Viator’s workouts?

    Mike was pretty open about steroids, and so am I. I’ve used exactly 2 cycles, but I stopped. No problems and really no “superior” gains either, but I tried. I don’t judge, but I don’t recommend them either. Natural is the right way – at least you are “superior” mentally, so to speak.

    Mike and Casey had really high potential, what comes to genes. I don’t. What comes to steroids, they make a hellova difference, with high doses at least. I’ve even read that cocaine was used back in the day, but I can’t know for sure. It’s kinda “odd”, that Mike wrote about (Heavy Duty) split routines and recommended them, as he himself used full-body routines, or similar routines to that.

    http://www.ironmanmagazine.com/heavy-duty-mike-mentzers-most-productive-routine/

    In my opinion, old-school workouts seem to have some “manly atmosphere”, haha 🙂

    Mentzer, as well as Viator, had one the greatest bodies of all time.

  • Lifter Jul 28, 2014 @ 20:12

    Chief, I’m glad it helped. I wish you could have seen Mike, up close and personal, in his heyday. The man was a tank! As impressive as he looks in his pictures, it didn’t prepare me for the spectacleof how he’d look in real life. Even his reported “weak upper chest” was a sight o behold!

    Ray lived here in Australia for a while – actually he “hid out” after he and Benny Podda upset the wrong guys (Mafia) – I had hoped to see him too…but it never happened. Had I had the opportunity I bet his vision would be as burnt into my mind as Mike’s vision will always be.

    From my experience, Mike’s 3-way split stands as one of the most logical approaches. My close friend and fellow Mentzer advocate; John Heart, cycles between Mike’s IR and CR with never ending success. (I usually cycle in 2-weeks of Gironda training, but it quckly grows tedious in that time frame, so next cycle I am going with Mike’s CR.

    Mike took a month to talk me into test driving his CR late 90’s, linking me with Dr. Dave Staplin to aid his argument. At the time I was in close contact with his biggest client; Aubrey Francis, who was 285# and growing! He was down to 2 sets every 8-12 days. That was the final proof I needed to make the leap of faith. I gained all over, with a waist drop, but after a month of once weekly workouts I was going insane being dormant for a week between.

  • Chief Jul 31, 2014 @ 19:09

    Well, I thought going back to Mentzer’s IR from Heavy Duty when I’m leaned down enough. I will start bulking up (lean gains) in october, hopefully, but I will be really strict with my +calories. I really don’t want to get “fat” again. Smart-bulking, for the very first time. Thus far it has not been that smart. I got my weight up to 102 kg last year, with pretty good strength/muscle gains, but my body fat % got too high as well.

    That “ideal” routine might do the job, but I was thinking about specializations too (arms and calves). It might be irrelevant, but I will try the split-routine again anyways. This allows more frequent training which is really good for me, mainly because I would like to train more frequently, not that it would be “better” in anyways. If I was superhuman, I would love to do 3 x full-body workouts (Viator-style) per week, but in reality it would fucking kill me.

    • Drew Baye Aug 3, 2014 @ 13:33

      Chief,

      Whatever you do, keep accurate records of your workouts, your diet, and your measurements so you can objectively evaluate the effects of changes in your training on your progress. If you’re not tracking these things it is difficult to determine what effect changes you make have on your physique.

  • Chief Aug 7, 2014 @ 4:48

    Yeah, of course! 🙂 Autumn will be interesting. I will get a training partner, which I “challenged” to try HIT for at least 4 weeks. An older man wants me to be his trainer, so that will be pretty interesting too. So couple Q’s here…

    1. Former knee injury (not mine). If you have injured your knee (or knees) in the past (surgery done years ago), but you don’t have any problems in your everyday life, is there any exercises you DON’T recommend? Anything else you can point out about this?

    2. Mentzer claimed that bench press with narrow grip (elbows pointing out; to left/right) is better grip for pecs. True?

    • Drew Baye Aug 21, 2014 @ 14:14

      Hey Chief,

      It would depend on the type and severity of the knee injury. Test with a light weight, and if something hurts, don’t do it.

      A narrow grip increases the range of motion of the shoulders during bench presses, but also increases the lever against the triceps causing them to fatigue faster. I prefer to have people use a grip just slightly outside of shoulder width on bench press most of the time.

  • Will Nov 13, 2014 @ 18:35

    Drew, wondering if you have ever considered or used resistance bands for high intensity training? I don’t mean tubing but the flat continuously looped bands. I know many people might use them during a deadweight exercise such as a deadlift or bench but do you think they could be effective on their own?

    • Drew Baye Nov 14, 2014 @ 10:22

      Hey Will,

      While it is possible to train somewhat effectively with bands, they are a poor tool for many exercises because the resistance they provide is not proportional to the strength of the muscles worked over most of the range of motion. They can be useful in combination with barbells during pushing exercises where strength tends to increase towards the end point, but for anything else you’d be better off with free weights or bodyweight if you’re looking for something cost and space efficient.

      Another alternative is to use a non-elastic strap with handles in place of bands to perform timed static contractions. These are just as portable, and I think they would be more effective.