If exercise is performed with a sufficiently high level of effort very little volume is required to stimulate the maximum possible improvements in fitness and functional ability. Although the optimum training volume varies between individuals based on genetics and other factors, on average it is far below what most people believe is necessary and what they are told by the mainstream fitness media and most personal trainers and “experts”. Compared to what most people believe is necessary for an effective workout the high intensity training workouts I recommend are very brief.
During a recorded phone discussion with several HIT trainers host Dave Durell asked us about how clients respond to the very brief workouts we have them do when most people believe results are proportional to the time invested and usually expect hour long workouts, especially more advanced clients who may only do a few exercises per workout. My favorite response was from Dave Mastorakis, who said he tells clients they pay him for results, not his time. I would go a step further and say the client is paying to get better results with less training time. The reduced time required is one of the benefits of a proper exercise program.
To understand this it is important to keep in mind the workout does not directly produce any improvements in fitness. If properly performed the workout stimulates the body to produce the improvements. How effectively exercise does this is directly proportional to the intensity of the workout rather than the volume of exercise performed or time spent working out.
The body then requires adequate time between workouts to produce the improvements the workout stimulated. If too much exercise is performed over a period of time the stress on the body will exceed what it is capable of recovering from and adapting to, and if the body isn’t allowed adequate time between workouts the process of recovery and adaptation will be interrupted. The optimum training frequency also varies between individuals based on genetics, diet, sleep and other factors, but like workout volume it is also far below what most people believe is necessary.
It is also important to make a clear distinction between exercise and recreation. Keep in mind what we are selling as trainers is not the process or experience of working out, but the physical changes the client wants. We are health professionals and educators, not entertainers.
When you pay to see a concert, movie or sporting event you are paying for the experience, and you expect to be entertained for a certain period of time. If the band only played half an hour or if the movie were edited down to half it’s advertised length or if one of the teams or competitors forfeit after only a short period of play you’d feel ripped off.
However, if your dentist told you a procedure you required was only going to take half as long as expected, or the auto body shop told you your car was ready several days earlier than estimated, or if your physical therapist said you only need to spend half as much weekly time in therapy to regain function you would be happy.
Although some people enjoy the process of working out or experience legitimate benefits from time spent exercising like stress relief, if questioned the majority of people who buy personal training would tell you what they really want is a change in their body. Most want to look better, feel better, and perform better.
A properly performed high intensity training program will produce results that are equal to or better than what is possible with typical, higher volume exercise programs in a small fraction of the time and with far less frequency. Most high intensity training programs consist of only two or three weekly workouts requiring less than thirty minutes to complete, and some trainees get better results working out for as little as ten to fifteen minutes once weekly or less.
This efficiency benefits both clients and trainers.
By giving clients the results they want with a smaller time investment you are giving them more time to spend with family or friends, pursue other interests or earn money. Shorter sessions also mean you can train at least twice as many clients per day as trainers who schedule by the hour, increasing your potential income, or if you prefer you can make roughly the same amount of money working half as long. Less frequent training is also more affordable for a larger number of people, which significantly increases your potential market.
Some trainers try to earn more by working with more than one client at a time. While this is more efficient for and increases the potential income of the trainer it does so at the expense of the quality of instruction clients receive and the effectiveness of their workouts. Many personal trainers who do this don’t actually train their clients so much as they direct their workouts. They tell them which exercises to do, how many reps, etc. but with their attention divided between two or more people they are not providing the kind of detailed instruction clients should expect when they pay for training.
During the initial consultation, I use the sun tan analogy to explain the need for brief, infrequent workouts to new clients.
The Sun Tan Analogy
Exercise is a type of stress we apply to the body to stimulate an adaptive response. The key word being “stimulate”. Exercise does not directly produce any improvements in the body, it stimulates the body to produce those improvements as an adaptive response to enable it to better handle the same stress in the future. In many ways, it is like getting a sun tan.
Exposure to sunlight does not directly produce a tan. The ultraviolet radiation in sunlight stimulates melanocytes in the skin to produce more melanin as a protective mechanism, darkening the skin. The brighter the sun, the more intense the radiation, the stronger the stimulus. The same situation occurs with exercise or any other stress – the more intense the stress the greater the stimulus for adaptation. If the sky is cloudy you can lay out all day and not stimulate any noticeable tanning because the intensity of ultraviolet radiation would be too low, but if the sun is high and the sky is clear you only have to lay out a little while to stimulate a tan. The same thing happens with exercise. If the level of effort is low you can do a large amount of exercise but not stimulate much in the way of improvements, but if the level of effort is very high very little is required for good results.
If a stress is intense enough to stimulate a significant adaptive response though, there will be a limit to how much the body can handle within some period of time. Up to a point, intense sun exposure will stimulate a tan, beyond that it starts to damage the skin, causing a burn. Up to a point intense exercise will stimulate improvements in strength, metabolic and cardiovascular conditioning and other aspects of fitness, but beyond some point the demands of the workout exceed what the body is able to recover from and adapt to and eventually can cause a loss of strength and conditioning, a situation called “overtraining”.
If you lay out to tan or use a tanning bed, when you’ve finished you don’t go back out or back to the bed and do it again five minutes later. The body needs time to recover before being exposed to the same stress again or the process of recovery and adaptation is interrupted and you risk damage. The same is true of exercise. After a workout your body requires time to recover from the effects of the workout and produce the improvements the workout stimulated. Although the amount varies between individuals, most people underestimate how much time they need for recovery between workouts.
If done properly the most exercise anyone requires for best results is around three half-hour workouts per week and many people get better results training only twice weekly or less. Longer or more frequent training will not produce better results and eventually leads to plateaus and overtraining.
Many people are skeptical at first, but it usually only takes a few workouts for them to get it. One of the things I brought up in our discussion of this topic was that I suspect a big part of the reason so many people have a hard time with the idea that workouts should be very brief and infrequent or that single set training is effective is most people have never really done and therefore can’t appreciate how hard one, properly performed, all-out set to failure is.
I’ve been in a lot of gyms over the past two decades, and watched thousands of people work out. Outside of a few private HIT studios I have almost never seen proper form used or taught, and personal trainers were usually some of the worst offenders. Sadly, watching a lot of youtube videos it would seem even many HIT trainers don’t really understand proper form or know how to teach it. That’s a discussion for another time, though.
In my experience if you teach your clients the difference between stimulating and producing results and the relationship between intensity, volume and frequency of training and train them properly so they get the results they want they will understand and even appreciate the necessary reductions in training volume and frequency as they become more advanced.
Comments on this entry are closed.
One thing I always wondered about the topic of ‘suffiecient revocery time” was if you were to do say 4-5 sets of bench press to failure you would theoretically need more recovery time then if you had done only one to failure, is it worth it to do more vloume and wait longer between workouts?
second, what about drops sets, say I do three sets with 4-5 seconds rest in between with decreasing weight, does this “extend” intesitity to any valuable level or too much voulme?
Thnks, Im a big fan of this site
Hey Mike,
If the first set of an exercise is done properly additional sets stimulate little or no additional growth stimulation but increase the demands on recovery. More volume almost never helps and usually just increases the likelyhood of overtraining.
Drop sets performed in the usual manner increases fatigue significantly but does little to improve the more important factors of tension and microtrauma. The only time I use a drop set is if the initial resistance selection was too high and the trainee fails three or more reps short of the minimum number I want them to be able to perform. I cover drop sets, forced reps, forced negatives and other “advanced” techniques in the ebook on exercise form I’m writing, which will be out in mid June.
Also big fan of the site…
I like the idea MikeG raised in the original post…It would make sense to say that doing multiple sets to failure AND increasing recovery time significantly would create an even large threat upon the body such that it would have to “Overcompensate” to a larger degree than if you were to do a single set to failure…. Wouldn’t that fool the body into thinking that the multiple sets under “High Tension Load” is a more serious life and death situation that it would need to overcompensate for with larger muscles (as long as recovery time is increased significantly)…….something that 1 single set couldn’t possibly accomplish.
Hey Serg,
If the intensity of training is high enough you hit a point of diminishing returns very quickly as volume increases, but the demands on recovery increase proportionally to the volume of exercise performed. Also, if you perform the first set properly you will not be capable of performing a second set with anywhere near the same resistance for a similar number of reps. If done right, with proper form and an all out effort, one set is all you need.
Thanks for this holy grail information. Its not the first time I heard about this information and I couldnt help but agree after seeing my personal results but then again, your account reassures me. But if what I want is long hours of physical endurance and ability to recover fast; as is in the case of multi-day mtb races, wouldnt some extended hours of workout to fatigue help assuming i will give myself ‘enough’ time to fully recover afterwards OR even cut myself a bit short of a full recovery to stimulate my body’s recovery mechanism to work harder next time?
Steve,
If you want to compete in endurance events of any type, especially ultra or multi-day events, then it is also necessary to perform specific practice and training for that event. To avoid overtraining you would need to balance the demands of both your HIT workouts and your race training, by paying close attention to how you feel and perform and making adjustments as necessary.
Hi Baye,
Excellent report as always,
Im a HIT trainer from the the UK (a rare breed) and am a fully qualifyed personal trainer since 1998, but learned far more from my own research and others questioning and refining outdated training methods. I have worked in gyms on and off for over a decade but am currently on a career break after travelling until I get my own premises setup and let the results do the talking.
Seeing as most people in life want “quick fix results” you would think HIT training would be the easy sell i.e. time invested for results,instead of media gimmicks such as power plates, kettleballs classes, zumba etc. which are massively popular here….that is until the next wave of class inventions.
But NO (at least not yet)
It takes great courage to challenge and do the complete opposite of the masses.
Keep up the great work, you are an inspiration!
Many thanks
James,
People do want quick results, but they’re rarely willing to work as hard as required to get them. HIT isn’t popular with different groups for different reasons, but mainly because it is really hard work and it isn’t fun, and a lot of people’s heads have been filled with the idiotic idea that their workouts should be entertaining.
The Dose response relationship is most discussed but often overlooked. If trainees and trainers were to focus on this important factor, results will be guaranteed. Nice article drew and many congrats on being called upon as a speaker at the hit conf.
Karthik
Would also like to add to your previous comment. If properly performed to failure, one will not be able to perform a second set.
Karthik
Well said Drew. Most of our new clients are a bit skeptical that 2 30-minute workouts a week (or less) is all they need–until they try their first workout. A typical response is “I’ve never felt anything like that in my muscles before!” What they mean is they are used to performing momentum-assisted reps with light weights, and as you mentioned, intensity is the stimulus required to make gains, not duration. Once the new client “feels” that for themselves, they believe there might be something to this method; and a few weeks later, when the see the results, they are hooked.
Regarding the question on multiple sets and/or drop sets, I’d like to throw my 1.5 cents worth in (down from 2 cents due to the recession): performing multiple sets to failure of the same exercise will do nothing to stimulate additional gains; all the additional sets will do is tear down the body’s limited recovery ability. Once you flip a light switch and the light goes on, you don’t have to stand there flipping the switch on and off for the next 10 minutes. Regarding drop sets, that technique actually increases the duration of the set, which actually decreases the intensity, since duaration and intensity are inversely proportional. A much better alternative would be a couple forced reps if you are training with a partner, or a static hold or a few strongest range reps if training alone.
Great post Drew, and it was great talking to you and the other guys on Saturday, once again I appreciate your time.
Dave D.
Hello Drew. During the summer I do a lot of tree cutting with hand saws. I need endurance more than strength. I would like to be able to get through a large log without stopping. What would be the best exercise protocol for me? Thanks.
Doug,
A high intensity training routine hitting all the major muscle groups and done with little or no rest between exercises will increase your endurance and stamina along with muscular strength and help prepare you for tree cutting during the summers. If you don’t already do them, I recommend adding torso rotation and gripping movements to your workouts.
Thanks for the great post Drew!
It is really hard to convience people that these short sessions is all that’s necessary.
Hey what do you think of HIT in combo with just good old fashioned body building. I usually do a HIT session and then pick a body part…say biceps and just do a few sets of different bicep exercises…more for show than true fitness…thoughts?
Hey Marilyn,
There is no need to perform multiple sets of an exercise or more than one or two exercises per muscle group in a workout. If a person performs a proper high intensity training workout additional exercise would be counterproductive rather than beneficial. If someone wanted to emphasize a particular muscle group they should find ways to work that muscle group harder (negative emphasized or negative only reps, rest pause, hyper, etc.) rather than increase the volume of exercise.
Hi Drew-As far as benefits go, I’ve always thought that the focus for HIT trainers should be on the efficiency of the system first, the effectiveness second. While everyone goes into it expecting to get something out of it, I’ve found that people are just astounded at how little they actually need to do to get stronger and more toned muscles. And this efficiency allows the trainer to charge less for the service (if they want), making things affordable as well. My tag line is thus “efficient, effective and affordable personal training for busy people.”
Also, I appreciate your contribution to the HIT world. You are one of the most honest and least dogmatic HIT guys out there, which means a lot and will leave you a trusted expert for as long as you’re involved.
Nice round table group. While I’m not as familiar with Mike Bradley or Dave Mastorakis (I listened to his interview on HINation) You have a very nice well rounded group on guys with high education and experience in the HIT world. Dave Durell and Doug Holland are class acts, and Doug Holland has been nice enough to help me personally with several training and business issues. I’m glad to see him out there getting some well deserved publicity.
Looking forward to your book, and I’m enjoying your recent ebook. Have a nice Holiday.
Thanks Thomas,
Dave put together a really good discussion and I was glad to be a part of it. I think people will find it interesting and I will post a link here when it goes up on HighIntensityNation.com
I understand intensity and duration are inversely proportional. It would seem that the logical direction would lead to a one rep set with a maximum or near maximum level of resistance. I can see where this could be potentially more injury prone as you are at or very close to the bodies current structural limit? Just thought this could make for some interesting discussion.
Ryan,
There are people who have experimented with this with good results, however I prefer to have people do at least a few reps for several reasons. I believe multiple negative excursions would produce more microtrauma thus a greater stimulus for growth than a single, slow negative, and although fatigue is not the primary goal of an exercise it is a contributing factor to microtrauma (fatigue reduces ATP stores and when ATP use outpaces production myosin heads can’t detatch and are torn during eccentric contractions).
Drew,
Although my clients do pay for results,not gym time,it was Dave M. who brought it up during the phone call,not me.But thanks for giving me the credit!
-Doug H
Hey Doug,
I fixed the error in the post. Thanks for letting me know!
This may be a little off topic but here i go. What is your opinion on Nautilus Nitro PLUS machines. Im debating wether to use these machines for a type of big five workout or free weights and bodyweight. By the way great post the sun tan analogy is really great, super easy to understand.
James,
The Nautilus Nitro Plus machines are pretty good. I’d recommend them over free weights and bodyweight. In my opinion the Nitro line is Nautilus’ best since the second gen.
Thanks alot for the response Drew.
I think you may have answered my other question about “shouldn’t the amount of weight be heavier at the beginning of a set?” If i’m understanding you this would only be beneficial if one was wanting to extend the length of a set? Which of course is a step in the wrong direction if the goal is to get stronger.
Hey Ryan,
I will be addressing your other question about variable load in an upcoming post. Ideally the resistance during exercise should be balanced to both the strength curve of the movement and momentary strength of the involved muscles, but this is only practical with motorized resistance like that on the ARX Fitness or DCR-Tech machines.
For more on motorized resistance read my post on hyper-loading the negative.
By reducing the load the drop set extends the duration of the set. If the set was of adequate duration to begin with there isn’t much benefit in continuing with a lighter weight, but if the initial resistance is too high a drop set allows you to get enough additional reps to be in your target range.
A small comment to express my opinion: my experience tend to agree with a properly performed one HI set to exhaustion with a resistance that will allow 8-9reps. however, more than one set with enough rest in between or the extreme single rep to total exhaustion with maximal weight all sound laudable theory with respect to physiology of adaptive response to stress. I feel that rather than theorizing this issue, one should try out with other factors carefully controlled to see which actually produces better objective results. measurements should cover several desirable improvements and not just one. I believe the result will vary from one individual to another slightly depending on their genetics.
Steve,
Any method of training that is done hard and progressively will produce results as long as the volume and frequency of training does not exceed what the individual can recovery from and adapt to. What is optimal in terms of volume and frequency varies between individuals, but the majority of research shows no advantage to multiple sets, even when the study design and exercise protocols used favor multiple sets. Even for the rare individuals who would benefit from slightly more volume (those with the the II genotype for angiotensin converting enzyme, for example) the total volume and frequency of exercise required for optimal results is far below what most believe.
Dear Drew,
There is one dillema I have with my shoulders. You mentioned to our lumber man that to improve endurance, one should still do HIT with minimal rest between sets. When it comes to my shoulders no matter explosively i train them with heavy weights I have difficulty sustaining light loads for extended time(like over a minute) in everyday life like carrying a bucket of water over my head. A friend of mine who does not weight lift regularly and who can barely lift 2/3 the weight I lift for shoulders can sustain light loads much better than me. fyi, my general aerobic capacity is also way better than him. Do you have an explanation/remedy for this?
Steve,
The difference between yours and your friends’ overhead carrying ability could be due to a lot of factors, leverage, fiber type, etc. Also, moving explosively during exercise would reduce rather than improve the effectiveness of exercise. Rather than trying to move in a fast or explosive manner you should be moving in a smooth and controlled manner when both lifting and lowering the weight, without any bouncing, yanking, jerking or quick movements to maintain consistent tension on the muscles over the full range of the exercise.
I’ve seen a couple people post here that still seem hung up on wanting to perform multiple sets. For people used to the conventional volume approach, it is a tough leap of faith that only one set is needed. I used to do multiple sets per body part until I discovered HIT. After a few years of HIT, I can honestly say that one set is all I can handle! I generate so much intensity in that one set that anything beyond that would be a total waste of time. For me, it was a shift in philosophy that required me to put EVERYTHING I had into that one set, instead of holding back so I could complete additional sets. To those who still feel that additional sets are needed, I would say that you are not working out to your fullest possible intensity. Once you do, you won’t be able to perform additional sets (or even want to!).
Brian is absolutely correct. Part of this is due to misunderstanding of what is necessary for growth stimulation and what is occurring during an exercise, but a bigger reason is most people overestimate how hard they’re actually training and don’t train anywhere near as hard as they are capable of. The way they do a set is far from optimal, and they’re basing their belief on that. In my experience, once a person has been put through a proper set of an exercise by someone who knows how to get a maximum effort out of them they get it. It’s something that is extremely difficult to help people understand without having them experience it.
I have found if I can get someone to give themselves enough time to learn how we would like them to workout, they have no issue with the amount of time it takes. I realize the results and relish the fact it takes less then 30 minutes to go through a total body workout. The trick is getting them through the learning curve so that they understand the form ell enough so they can start working hard and see and feel the results.
Another GREAT post Drew!!
Dwayne Wimmer
I feel there is a lot of excess training going on out there. Even in HIT land believe it or not. One to two sets an exercises and then doing a ton of exercises is what I am referring too (plus high intensity of course).
Extra intensity via drop sets, etc. should be used very sparingly. I’ve seen great results on one full body workout a week and this works well with athletes as well who need to be recovered to perform on the field/court. There’s way too many 4-5 day a week lifting routines being used that basically will wear a person out especially if they are athletes.
saludos drew, desde la argentina
por cierto, muy bueno le artículo
te consulto para confirmar 2 dudas
primero, ¿es ótimo separar los entrenamientos, por 96 o 120 hs, cierto, por la recuperación, en primer lugar (72 hs mín.) mas 24 a 48 hs de sobrecompensación)
segundo, en el heavy duty – hit, no se trabja aeróbico, cardio o sí?
gracias, saludos desde la argentina
un abrazo drew
Alejandro,
Although every other day seems to be about the highest frequency of high intensity training anyone would benefit from, the optimal time can vary tremendously between individuals. There is no single best frequency that works for everybody. You have to pay attention to how your body responds and adjust your training accordingly.
If training is done with a high enough intensity all of the metabolic pathways are taxed, anaerobic and aerobic. For more on this I recommend reading the chapter on Global Metabolic Conditioning in Body by Science by Doug McGuff, MD.
Hi Drew,
I have just completed a 3 month body composition study with my fitness students, some of the results have been confronting. The students continued their normal training programs ranging from bodybuilding, Cardio, group exercise, bootcamp, personal trained type programs. Most of the bodybuilders are young guys who train at the gym everyday and consume massive amounts of protien and other bodybuilder junk foods. Some of the bodybuilders increased overall bodyweight at the same time significantly increasing bodyfat percentages. Some had no changes so no results from 3 months of training everyday, some lost bodyweight whilst increasing bodyfat percentages. Those who mainly do cardio, personal training and group exercise classes already had high percentage body fat even though overall body weight was low or normal. Most in this group increased body fat percentages even if they maintained the same body weight or lost body weight. I am going to retest again in six months.
The people who trained HIT (one to two sessions per week of no more than 20 minutes) decreased overall body weight, or maintained, decreased body fat percentages and increased muscle mass, on the arm flexed bicep girth most increased the size of the bicep. Also the HIT trainers had been training HIT for at least 2 years and were still making significant increases to over all results.
Note: The people who trained HIT were in the older age group so in real terms results for them could only considered spectacular. In the bodybuilders, cardio group most would be what you would consider in their prime, biggest growth stage, in real terms their results would have to be considered as poor.
An interesting point with the bodybuiders is that increases in overall body fat went mainly to the areas around the body (subscapular, Illiac crest, waist) whilst their was some decrease in body fat in the arms (triceps, biceps), the bodyfat went to the worst place
If anyone is sceptical of these results I am willing to share them.
And the response from some of the students “no I know that I am training correctly”.
Drew another great post.
Steven,
This mirrors what clients have told me about their results training on their own or with other trainers using typical training programs and cardio as compared to the results they’ve had following a high intensity training program with me.
I would have asked the students who said they knew they were training correctly to explain why their results were so poor if that was the case.
Steven, That is GREAT information!! I would love to see the details. Dwayne@vertexfit.com
I look forward to seeing the information.
Dwayne Wimmer
With Steve’s permission I will post them on the site. I plan to discuss the issue of volume and frequency more in another post which will include the second part of the sun tan analogy.
Drew,
I look forward to the post.
Dwayne Wimmer
Hi Drew,
I am in the process of finalising the results and as soon as this is done I will provide you with a more comprehensive break down of the results.
I will also post them to Dwayne
One of the young bodybuilders put on 11 kilograms (approx 24 lbs) in the three month period but his body fat percentage indicated that most of this was fat – shock to him!
In finalising the results I am going to ask the students to provide me in writing what their overall “goals” were and what they expected from their own training programs.
I am pleased that many people are interested in the research. I am in a unique position where I teach fitness courses so I have a wide range of students that undertake our fitness courses. At the end of the day I hope the students learn something from their own body composition results but, I am not so sure.
To me the results were not that unexpected as I have been taking body composition measurments for a long period of time. What I have found that many women whilst body weight and body shape may look good often body fat measurements were on the high side, actually for many their body fat measurements indicated obesity. What type of training are most of them doing “cardio and group exercise classes”.
But now I have results.
Thanks
Drew,
Thanks for the great information! I’ve found it challenging to explain the value of this type of training to clients. The examples you give are incredibly helpful!
Christine
I don’t think there is a right and wrong training system. Every trainer thinks their way is the right way and at the end of the day, all the systems work. Some guys use volume training and get great results and then switch to HIT and continue getting results and then go back to volume and continue growing bigger. Changing a routine and varying the types of muscular tension and frequency is fine. There are many scientific reports that show the advantages of volume and HIT. Unfortunately most people can’t work at the level of intensity you mention Drew so for those people, a slightly higher volume approach might be a better option. HIT is a good system…an efficient system…but not the only system that works.
Serg,
There are right and wrong training systems. A system that violates proven principles would be wrong. Unfortunately this includes most of what is popular.
While there are many systems that work not all of them work equally well, or as efficiently or safely. Even if a person does not train as intensely as they are capable of with proper instruction they are still better off keeping their workouts brief and infrequent. You can’t make up for a lack of intensity by doing more exercise.
Arthur Jones correctly stated in Nautilus Bulletin 2, “…more exercise will never produce the results that are possible from harder exercise – regardless of the amount of additional exercise that is involved; and if much in the way of additional exercise is employed, then growth will be impossible even if growth stimulation is being produced.”
Hi Drew,
In response to Serg – that is why I did my little body composition experiement with people using different training systems. From the naked eye results can be very decieving and what people think good results are can also be very misleading. Teaching fitness courses puts me in a unique position where I have access to people using a wide variety of training systems – “cardio” whilst bodyweight may have decreased bodyfat increased, the high volume body builders body weight increased and body fat also increased.
In relation to improved body composition, time versus results HIT is by far surperior than any other training system.
The problem with the volume argument is it’s unbounded. If volume is the predominant variable, then more has to be better. But, this falls apart just like the idea that you have to “exercise” to burn off extra fat. If the only way to burn off extra fat is to “exercise” it off, we’d never make it. It’s simply not possible for someone to exercise continuously to burn off fat. Similarly, there’s no way one could lift with enough volume to ever stimulate protein synthesis if volume was indeed the dominant factor.
There are many different ways to workout. And, the genetically gifted do indeed respond to almost any protocol. The fundamental question becomes which part of any particular protocol actually works and which part is just superstition?
Hi Drew,
reading previous posts of you I think you recommend a short stop of 1-2 seconds at the point of greatest resistance during single joint movements and compound pulling movements in order to intensify the growth stimulus. Is that correct? Is there something about that topic in your upcoming new ebook?
Thank you,
Andy
Andy,
Yes, the squeeze technique will be covered in detail in the book on exercise form.
Hi Drew,
Following on from js290 this is what I found; with most training systems other than HIT, results are very unpredictable: some people lose body weight, some increase body fat, some lose muscle tissue, some lose strength, results are all over the place a real hit and miss.
With HIT the results are very predicatble, decrease in body fat, increase in muscle tissue, overall body weight increases/decreases accordingly depending upon changes in muscle body fat ratios, increases in strength, AND increases in functioanl ability – this is in all cases.
If I am correct HIT results would be considered statiscally significant – results that would rarely occur by chance alone – results from HIT could be (replicated) repeated.
Arthur Jones stated “Cause and Effect: an understanding of the requirements of productive exercise is essential for the production of good results from exercise”.
The results from Stevens Study are a revelation to some,a shock to others and brilliant for the rest of us…Time effective, measurable and safe exercise.. Go Hit.. Thanks Steven
Look at all those people that use a little more volume in their training. It works for them. Some of them cycle between HIT and volume and keep making progress. How then can you say only HIT works when clearly there are other options. Different muscle fibers respond to different stresses. By cycling through different rep ranges, and volume ranges, you will ensure you hit all the different types. Variety is good and many scientific papers have been published to prove that higher volume training can stimulate more hypertrophy when done in a progressive manner.
Serg,
It seems to work for them, but the fact that it has produced some results for those people doesn’t mean they could not have achieved the same or better results faster and with less training time by training harder, briefer, and less frequently. Why settle for something that just “works” when you could do something that works better, faster, more efficiently, and more safely?
That is the goal of HIT
Different muscle fibers do not require different rep ranges, volume ranges, etc. Research shows even a single, properly performed set to failure, even if only a moderately heavy weight is used, will recruit and stimulate all of the motor units in the muscles worked.
The kind of variety you’re talking about is not necessary. I suggest reading my post on The Ultimate Routine for more on this.
Even Doug McGuff claimed in his book that certain people respond better to higher volume training based on their genotype. AN example I like to raise is the ectomorph muscle composition. Since those people have more slow twitch fibers, they require more volume for growth. I’m not talking 15 sets when i say volume. I am suggesting 2 or 3 sets to failure and 2 exercises per muscle. Slow twitch fibers recover quicker and can handle more volume.
Serg,
Slighly higher in some cases, but not high. Maybe a few more exercises per workout, absolutely not two or three sets to failure, which would increase the volume considerably. Even predominantly slow twitch muscles. With proper high intensity training it takes very little exercise to effectively work all the major muscle groups, and if intensity isn’t high enough the solution is to train harder, not to add more exercises, which is almost always a step in the wrong direction.
The comments in this thread are great! Just want to add my personal experience for flavor (I apologize for the length of post)
I’m back on my 2nd bout of HIT. I did it for 9 months of slow repetition HIT about 2.5 years ago and for the first time gained considerable muscle mass, something I had never done before using the 3×10-12 reps and 2-3/week. I still wasn’t “big” but at least I was actually gaining muscle and the strongestn my life after just 6 to 9 month’s of training.
When my daughter was born I stopped (that was almost 2 years ago) and since then I have not been back to the gym at all (real reason see below). I have just started up again.
Looking back at the charts from my 9 months of training it’s clear that I overtrained last time around (I wasn’t aware of this issue then having just come from the classical school of weight lifting). I started out 1xWeek and 9 different machines and when I stopped making progress on it (after about 6 months) I went to 2xWeek and 6 machines per time. Looking at the charts it’s clear I became weaker when I upped the training. I should have done exactly the opposit but didn’t know it at the time (and having come from the classical gym experience “doing more” always felt right). At 2x week I was tired all the time, lost motivation and started to gain weight (and not muscle as time under load and weights where slowly sinking). In my mind I assumed I wasn’t working hard enough or long enough.
The reason I stopped when my daughter was born was that it was the perfect excuse. The real reason was that I was drained and was getting weaker and more frustrated.
This time when I decided to start again I found Drew’s site (from a SeriousStrength.com’s forum) and your recommendation of Body by Science. Body by Science opened my eyes on over training. I’m currently doing the big 5 once per week and it’s amazing to me how <25 minutes in the gym can create so much results. And keeping it at 5 compound machined once per week allow me to have a few days each week where I feel great (though 3 to 4 day after each session I'm hurting but it's getting shorter each week). I've only done it for a month but already my wife has commented on that my arm's (especially shoulders) look better.
My progress have started to slow down (well more I have probably found the correct weights) but this time I will keep a very close eye on progress and rest even more once results slow down (I suspect my shoulder push is reaching it's limit with "only" 7 days rest as they are starting to feel tired even after 7 days, but other muscles are still making decent/good progress). Sometime soon I will split the routine (and add one or two directed exercises) but will not go to the gym more then 1xWeek. It will be interesting to see how things goes this time.
By keeping the number of lifts down I can work each lift to my max. I can't see doing much more then 5 compound machines in one session as I'm drained after these 5. After the leg press I cannot stand up for at least 20 seconds and I'm more out of breath doing these 5 exercises then after any run I have ever done (and I stay out of breath for about 20-30 minutes after exercise).
I train alone which makes it a little harder as I def. get stuck "too early" on the positive part (while still having strength left). I try to keep the weight at where I can do at least 5-6 repetitions in a row. I try to do the positive part as fast as I can (with out jerk in the beginning) and the weight forced the positive to be at least 3-5 seconds. I try to keep the negative slower at around 4-8 seconds. After the last positive repetition I rest for <10 seconds and then do one more repetition (where I might cheat on form on the positive part to get around sticking points) with a static hold until complete failure.
I hope HIT becomes more known. To me the results you can get from 20 hard minutes of work once per week are astounding (actually shocking)! It's the perfect exercise for us average people, with average goals. Sure those 20 minutes will not be a "fun" or an "experience" (which is what all gym's try to sell) but they will allow us to stay in a (more then) reasonable shape, get much healthier and have much more free time with our family. The only ones hurting from people going HIT are the gyms. My theory is that they are like McDonald's (making much of their profits on the carbonated sugar water and potatoes upsells). Similarly I think many gym's make their money on the sugar water they claim you need and this is why they want you in there so often as possible 😀
So that's my story. I'm learning a lot from this site (and others) and it helps with motivation so thank you!
Hey Robert,
Thank you for sharing your experiences with HIT and I agree with your observation about gyms and “sugar water”.
Hi Steven Turner:
I thought doing any form of exercise at whatever amount of effort for whatever amount of time is better than not doing anything at all. If your studies indicated instances of gaining body fat, losing strength with some forms of exercise other than HIT, is your study suggesting that its better just to sit down and relax than do “wrong” exercise?
My sincere appologies in advance if I sound rude, but may I know your credentials? Would there be a way I could check how you carried out the studies? I am not looking to see a sports science professor at some stage college with government funds with olympic coaching experience, but I want to know who undertook these studies and how scientific the studies were carried out.
All because, what you revealed here is just too stunning if indeed your studies have taken steps to rule out all common errors worth publishing in an academic journal. You deserve a Nobel prize in sports science(should there have been one), considering how many millions of people waste their time, money and effort doing the wrong things with solid faith. Your studies have such a huge implication worth sharing with the rest of the world. If nobody can find flaws in your studies, many many so called fitness studios (taebo, aerobics, etc…)would have to close down, for example.
I am a research physicist(not physician) by profession and I have been working hard to keep myself fit for the past 10 years. I am very keen at doing things that are theoretically sound and has observable results. I am obsessed with finding the most efficient forms of exercise methods, and that is how I landed here: Baye Drew’s HIT webpage.
Hey Steven,
This is a big misconception many people have, that doing something must be better than nothing at all, however it is not true. Many activities people perform because they believe they provide effective exercise are counterproductive and in some cases do a lot to undermine long term health and functional ability while only providing some slight, limited improvements in fitness.
Most people absolutely are wasting their time, money and effort doing the wrong things in both exercise and nutrition. I suggest reading Something is Not Always Better Than Nothing for more on this, as well as watching Mark Sisson’s presentation from the 2011 High Intensity Training Seminar in Indianapolis when the DVD becomes available, during which he spent a bit of time discussing the failure of the “conventional wisdom” of exercise and nutrition.
Hey Drew,
Tons of comments on this article. Always makes for a great read. I have a familiar question for you.
I understand the idea of increasing the intensity of a contraction to stimulate adaptations in strength. High intensity rest pause style workouts have given me some great strength gains.
What I’m finding hard to understand is the reasoning behind taking a continuous set to positive failure. The only idea that I can find that justifies the idea is from a Jones quotes that defines intensity as “the percentage of possible momentary muscular effort being exerted.” So it seems that it is more for measurement of progress then for physiological benefits.
Am I missing out on some health benefits if I just trained for raw strength with rest/pause — more muscular endurance for example?
Although, I would think my endurance would increase along with raw strength….which leads me back to my conundrum; what do I gain from training to failure?
Sorry for requesting the same old explanations. I just have yet to find one that I can relate to in my training.
Thanks for the help.
Vanner,
Taking a set to the point of momentary muscular failure isn’t necessary, but it is more effective and gives you a more objective measure of improvement. For several reasons it is the last couple hardest reps in a set that are the most productive, and stopping short of an all out effort diminishes the stimulus the exercise provides. Just one of several reasons for this is a big part of growth stimulation is microtrauma, and microtrauma increases with fatigue because as ATP use outpaces production myosin crossbridges are unable to detatch and become damaged during eccentric contractions. Unless you go all out you won’t place the greatest possible metabolic stress on the targeted muscles which contributes to this.
Failure occurs during rest pause as well – it is the point where you can no longer complete a repetition in good form after the prescribed rest interval.
Hi Drew,
In response to Steve Han’s question. How did I come across my research I eloborated on how I came across my results in earlier post and what I do.
How did I do my research about two years ago when teaching body composition assessments to my fitness students I started to notice that many of the students were returning high body fat levels regrdless of the type of programs they were doing and as I said earlier most were doing the traditional fitness programs. Was I surprised with these results yes, I was like Steve at first some what confused why this was occurring and like I stated earlier many of these people looked on the outside to be in good condition. Am I trained to take skinfolds yes I am and have been measured to be in about 1-2% of the most sophisticated body compositiom machine – one of the women bodybuilders can attest to this as I measured her shortly after she had her body fat % taken and she to had a high % of body fat.
If Steve is still skeptical all I can suggest go to any commercial fitness centre ask a 20 or 30 people to do their body composition come back in 3-4 months time and redo their body composition. Not only might Steve be surprised but also the people he conducts them might be somewhat shocked in their results for the training time invested.
If Steve can give me a few weeks I will send him all the data once I have collated it all.
Hey Drew,
Thanks for the explanation on taking a set to failure. The idea of increased metabolic stress in the final few reps does make sense. And I guess this could happen at rep 1 (i.e. singles training) or rep 10 if done correctly.
I’m also glad you mentioned that going to failure is not necessary. This lines up with the HIT old-timer Clarence Bass’ idea of keeping one rep in the tank. This idea seems good for movements such as the deadlift, where (from my experience) going to positive failure may compromise the safety of the lower back.
Vanner,
It is not necessary to “keep one in the tank” or “save a little for the next workout” as some trainers suggest. This advice is often given due to the erroneous belief the last rep in a set to failure is the most dangerous, and while that is certainly possible if one sacrifices form for the sake of getting more reps I define failure as the point at which an exercise can not be continued with reasonably good form. There is big difference.
Vanner,
I have also read that you don’t want to go as low as one rep (unless you do it really slow). Different muscle type gets engaged at different times so you need at least 45 seconds under load. I used to do more of a superslow routine and counted seconds more then reps but now I do slightly faster reps and try to keep them between 6 and 10 reps (15 for lower body). I find that if I can for example only master 3 reps then I still have strength left.
Robert,
Motor units are recruited in order of size from smallest to largest, with the smaller motor units being mostly slow twitch and the largest being the fast twitch (type IIB). With most muscles, if the exercise load requires at least 60% of a maximum voluntary contraction all the motor units will be recruited in a relatively short time.
It is possible to recruit and provide effective stimulation for all the motor units in a muscle with a single rep if it is a very slow one, but when using more moderate repetitions speeds or SuperSlow it is better to perform several repetitions, at least around 30 seconds worth, but in most cases not more than 90.
Hey Drew,
You said above good words about Nautilus Nitro Plus machines. What would you say about Nautilus XPLoad line? Its advantage would be cheaper price because of not having a weight stack along. Are biomechanics of XPLoad machines on the same high level as is the case with Nitro Plus? Thank you!
Tauno,
I have not used any of the Nautilus XPLoad equipment other than the deadlift/shrug machine and have not studied photos or diagrams of them so I can’t comment their biomechanics, specifically. In most cases you’re better off spending the extra money on a similar selectorized machine for the convenience, and when considering price you also have to consider the cost of adequate weight plates for each plate loaded machine you purchase.
Would a person train as described above(infrequent, low volume and hard) if they were primarily looking to increase muscular strength and endurance, cardiovascular and lung endurance?
Beneficial for soccer and 6 mile runs with back pack etc…
Wouldn’t we need to increase volume and frequency similar to what is described in many special forces training regimens to get the best value for strength and endurace activities.
Les,
Yes, they would, and it would improve their performance during sports like soccer and activities like special forces training. Rather than increase the volume and frequency of training you would have to balance the volume and frequency against the demands of those other activities to avoid overtraining.
Drew,
My question regards using high volume for intensity, but only doing 2 times per week. I start off with 10 rounds of 5 squats, 10 lunges (5 per leg), 10 jumping lunges (5 per leg), 5 squat jumps, with 30 seconds of rest between each round. I gradually work up to do 5 rounds of 10 squats, 20 lunges (10 per leg), 20 jumping lunges (10 per leg), 10 squat jumps, with 30 seconds of rest between each round. I also do a 3rd workout on a non-consecutive day during the 6 week cycle that focuses on core and upper body strength. I perform this for about 6 weeks prior to skiing season.
Total time for each round is about 90 seconds for the longer round and about 50 seconds for the shorter round. After reading through this article, and knowing your position on high intensity training, I’m curious as to know what you would think of this sport specific program.
From my personal experience, I feel that this is the best workout out there as preparation for skiing. As skiing is a sport of muscular endurance (as with almost all sports), the goal with this workout is to build up muscular endurance by performing a high number of squats and lunges. Do you think this would work or be a good substitute for low volume but high weight for these 6 weeks? Thank you.
Mike,
You would be better off performing a single set of a few basic hip and leg exercises (barbell squats or leg presses or deadlifts, leg extensions, leg curls and calf raises) with a moderate to high rep range or time under load. Done correctly, in strict form and with a heavy enough weight, this will do far more for your strength and endurance than the program you asked about and it will be much safer for your ankles, knees, hips and spine.
Drew,
I typically perform two HIT workouts per week, a push and a pull for 1-3 sets per exercise.
Workout A: Squat or Deadlift, Lat Pulldown or Machine Pullups, Bicep Curl, Grip Work
Workout B: Bench Press or Dips, Standing Barbell Press, Tricep Pushdowns
Main goal is fat loss maintaining and as much strength as possible while dieting hard.
I want to add 10-20 minutes max of heavy bag boxing training each week. I enjoy the stresss relief and skill maintenance.
Do you think this 10-20 minutes of heavy bag work eahc week will interfere with my main goal? If not, should this training be after a HIT workout or seperate day by itself?
Your proffesional advice would be very welcome.
Thank you,
Jay
Jay,
I recommend doing the heavy bag work on separate days. There are a lot of martial artists and MMA competitors who balance their strength training and practice so as long as you’re not overdoing it a few heavy bag sessions a week probably isn’t going to interfere with fat loss or strength maintenance.
Drew,
I just purchased your 101 High Intesnisty Workouts. I am still reading it but I can definitely say you did an awesome job of bringing all of the pertinent training factors/exercises into one book.
My questions are these:
1) Is it normal to get sore knees for a day or 2 after doing barbell squats?
2) I find that keeping my head up helps me maintain better squat form. It allows me to get more even muscle work rather than mostly glute soreness when I just look straight ahead. Is this ok to keep head up a bit?
3) I am so ingrained through inflexible thinking to think I need squats in my routine. Is the regular deadlift or trap bar deadlift a viable replacement for squats? My gym has a poor leg press machine… At 6ft tall I am definitely a more natural (better) deadlifter than squatter.
Your advice would be greatly appreciated.
Jay
Jay,
If your knees are sore after squats but not leg presses or other exercises involving the knees I would back the weight off a little and work on your form, especially the lower turnarounds.
Keeping the head up a little is fine if it doesn’t bother your neck, although I prefer the chin slightly down. If there is a mirror in front of your squat rack, Doug Holland recommends keeping your eyes on your chest to keep the head in the proper position. Wear a T-shirt with a logo across the chest and focus on that throughout the exercise.
As long as your grip is strong and not a limiting factor the trap bar deadlift performed with a more upright posture is a good substitute for the squat. Contrary to popular misinformation, the leg press is also a highly effective alternative to squats for developing hip and thigh strength, but I only recommend it if you have a properly and safely designed machine.
I saw sergs first comment and I wanted to chime in. Not even sure if he will receive it…
Drew never said HIT was the only way, he didn’t say that because…well it’s not. It is however, the most productive way. HIT is logical and scientific where volume training is arbitrary. The obvious reason why others see gains wth more volume is because there’s progressive overload in their training. Their body has the ability to tolerate more, this does not mean they should do more though!
You say look at all the people using a little more volume in their training and how it works for them. Well sure! A few years back I used more volume than what you’re speaking of. I saw gains when I trained 6 days a week hitting all my muscle groups in 3 days time then repeating. I believe my recovery ability is above average so I clearly had progressive overload. However, when I learned about HIT and applied it… I then saw the fastest gains I’ve ever made and got up to 225.
Also as Drew stated you thoroughly work all the fibers with one set to failure. Look up size principle, Serg. Nothing to do with more volume of work…
Bottom line: Progressive Overload. In most cases regarding volume you will never have progressive overload. This is one strong reason why HIT will always be superior.
Hey Drew first of all i really like the advice you give and think the sun tan analogy is perfect for HIT. Now i have a couple questions for you:
1) When you or other supporters of HIT refer to frequency as time between workouts do you mean between working that same muscle group? or workouts in general? because i dont know what to do about having chest, and then shoulders/tris on different days so my tris really dont rest for a full week, is that still productive or should i change something?
2) is 4 days a week lifting too much? i know you say three is optimal but i really enjoy going to the gym, if i was to do 3 days major lifts, and a 4th as light cardio, abs (since it is difficult to train abs to failure), and forearms?
thanks alot drew im a fan
Alan,
In high intensity training the term frequency is usually used in reference to workouts in general rather than specific body parts.
If you are training properly four workouts a week is too much. I wouldn’t even say three is optimal, but rather a starting point from which to cut back as you become more advanced and your workout intensity increases. Three workouts a week is the absolute most anyone should do, and most people would get the same results or even better training only twice weekly. Also, if you’re training intensely enough and performing mostly compound movements there is no need for additional cardio – properly performed high intensity strength training is highly effective for improving cardiovascular and metabolic conditioning.