I recently finished reading this excellent book. Here is a summary from the author, himself: Most bodybuilders operate under a simple misconception: To build muscle, you have to wear yourself out with long, draining workouts. The first edition of Training for Mass showed that this notion is false and it explained how growth comes instead from the stimulation of brief, highly intense exercise. The Second Edition brings an even greater depth of analysis to what may be the most effective and efficient strategy of mass-building ever devised. Just like the original, the Second Edition is not a picture book. It's filled instead with serious information and thoughtful analysis aimed at challenging its reader to think. All bodybuilding books tell you how to work out. Almost all offer some rationale for their advice. However, the great majority of these books commit the fatal error of basing their rationale on correlation rather than cause-and-effect. Thus many books offer poor advice, because their authors don't understand the mechanism of growth stimulation. For ages, bodybuilders have been using long workouts in an attempt to build their muscles. A few lucky individuals have success with this strategy, and immediately jump to the wrong conclusion that their training is optimal. What they don't realize is that they could have had equal or better results by performing a fraction and in some cases a small fraction of their workload. High-intensity training was designed to exploit the scientific finding that intensity is the only important factor for muscular growth. The Second Edition of Training for Mass explains, in detail, this mechanism of growth stimulation. It also describes the ideal way to apply this knowledge in the gym. But this isn't all armchair theory. The author and several other notable figures have used these techniques to become champion bodybuilders. At least one achieved the status of world champion by using these methods. You can read a few sample chapters by going to the site and clicking on the links: http://trainingformass.com/
The author, Gordon LaVelle, focuses on high intensity training and validates it with a unified theory based on scientific research. The references are a bit light, but the case for HIT has already been amply made over the years by researchers across the globe. What I liked about the book is that LaVelle doesn't dismiss volume training out of hand, and subjects it to the same scrutiny as he does to HIT. And upon similar inspection and assessment, he reasonably concludes that there is no cohesive theory or premise that supports the high volume approach. It really was an interesting read.
I learned something about going past momentary muscle failure that I didn't know before, and evidently what I thought I knew was wrong. In the past, my post-failure work was limited to drop/descending sets, whereby I would do a set with a certain weight, go to concentric failure and then immediately reduce the weight and within a few seconds go again to concentric failure. (In the more distant past, I incorrectly referred to this as rest-pause.) LaVelle explained that drop sets are a flawed or suboptimal concept because you are just repeating concentric failure on the same exercise, and with perhaps less true intensity, which is redundant according to HIT. A better idea is doing a forced rep, whereby you reach concentric failure and finish with a slow negative, and then "force" an additional concentric rep with either a training partner or otherwise, and then focus on one more very slow negative/eccentric rep to thoroughly work the muscle. The rationale is that we have more eccentric strength than concentric strength, so simply stopping at the failure of the concentric component may leave some intensity on the table. I liked the idea and tried it for my weighted pull ups & dips. I would do my work set to concentric failure and finish with a very slow negative, and then step back up on the platform (and jump a bit for the pull up) to get to the top of the position to be able to work another slow negative. (In the past when I went past failure, I would just reduce the weight and do another set a few seconds later.) For exercises where forced reps may not be convenient, I found that going to concentric failure, finishing with a slow negative and then doing a partial rep or 2 to the sticking point, each time going extra slow on the negative, seems to also pack a good punch. Needless to say, after doing these set extensions for 4 of my exercises on my twice-a-week full body workouts and going all out, I found myself approaching overtraining territory after a few weeks. And so, it came down to either dropping the set extensions or reducing the frequency. I had experimented with reducing frequency to 3 times every 2 weeks last year with no ill effects, and so I will be doing that again. In time, if I find the trade-off to be less that idea, I will drop the set extensions and just up the frequency. It will be an interesting experiment reducing the frequency (again) but doing post-failure work "properly." LaVelle makes a good argument against working each muscle thoroughly as often as twice a week, so it's worth another try. As an aside, and further to what I had written in my earlier post, LaVelle takes some volume training concepts, often referred to as Weider "principles," and systematically deconstructs them. One such concept is the idea of "supersets." There appears to be no sound theoretical or physiologic basis in support of supersets. If you give your all during the first part of the super set, you risk aerobic rather than anaerobic failure during the second part, and so the second muscle will be trained suboptimally. (Personally I never understood the attraction to supersets.) And so on.
That's the problem with ultra-high intensity training: You need a partner, or in the case of squats or leg presses, a couple of partners to help you after you've reached the first failure point. I work out from home so having a crew of people on standby to help me isn't even possible. But with that said, I will be trained by high-intensity guru Ellington Darden this Wednesday. He said he wants to show me some new "backloading techniques" he's been working on. Ellington has authored over 50 bodybuilding books, and worked with Arthur Jones at Nautilus for many years.
Although I work out at the gym, I don't like to work with a partner or ask others for help. So I know what you mean. But as I mentioned, forcing a concentric rep (to capitalize on the negative) is not hard to do for pull ups and dips. LaVelle mentioned that anyone doing forced reps and such should be especially aware of the onset of any overtraining symptoms, of which he listed a dozen. With that in mind, and depending on how things progress, I may do the forced stuff every other or third workout. I'll see how it goes. Please let us know how your training with Darden goes; that should be interesting. I visit his web site from time to time. I read two of his books in the later 1980s and liked the idea of brief and infrequent workouts (though at the time his recommended frequency was 3x/week full body workouts if memory serves). However, at the time, I just couldn't wrap my head around such low volume workouts in the face of what the Weider books and magazines were spouting. Unfortunately, I had already been indoctrinated years earlier. I wish I exercised better judgment and paid more attention to Darden rather than the so-called Weider "principles." Better late than never, eh?
What are the signs of over training you look for? I am more inclined to start experiencing restless sleep, anxiety, and loss of appetite first, and then comes the fatigue and weakness in the gym itself. Went through all of that last year. Long road back at this age.
The author lists the following: General fatigue Persistent muscle soreness Joint soreness Elevated heart rate Irritability Loss of motivation Depression Insomnia Loss of appetite Weight loss Decreased sex drive Susceptibility to infection or disease In my case, I know I'm overdoing it when my sleep is compromised. However, before such a definitive sign, I suppose a few of the other symptoms may have already made themselves subtly known, like irritability, joint soreness (shoulder), and general fatigue. Seeing as how I have reduced volume from my earlier routines in the past, and now my revisiting reduced frequency, I want to make sure my intensity compensates. But as I'm sure you know, that's a trial and error thing, and to make it even more challenging, an evolving one. But there's a really good thing about HIT that I learned in the book and elsewhere. Volume training (HVT) says everyone is different on so many levels that there is all manner of variables that must be juggled. HIT says...not so much. If we were all so different, medical science would be completely untenable. Our physiology is the same. Our stress response is the same. The only true variable in HIT is one of recovery. That is where we are unique and must determine our sweet spot - one that can and does change over time. There may be a relative few exceptions out there, but they are not the rule and therefore not part of the model. So the variables are not so much in the way of volume, although there is some modest discretion to be had there, but on the level of intensity and the corresponding length of recovery. A reasonable balance allows us to achieve our genetic potential at whatever stage of life we find ourselves in.
I posted links to a two-part interview of the author, Gordon LaVelle, in another thread that is now closed. Since this thread is about LaVelle and his book, I thought I'd include those links again: http://muscleandbrawn.com/interview-with-gordon-lavelle-training-for-mass-part-1/ http://muscleandbrawn.com/interview-with-gordon-lavelle-training-for-mass-part-2/ This interview was conducted before the book's second edition was published.
I just finished my session with Ellington Darden. We talked about a lot of things, so I will keep the comments within the context of this thread, which is building mass. He definitely emphasized that two workouts per week is plenty to build significant mass over time, and that was because neither him nor his colleagues couldn't measure any additional muscle development from workout frequencies above that. However, he said that you can only build muscle if you're sitting on your ass the rest of the week. If you're filling in your rest days with cardio and/or sports, the most you can hope to achieve is to maintain the muscle you already have. No matter what though, he said the intensity has to be high to maximize results from the two weekly workous, and he showed me examples of how to achieve that intensity with 5 exercises without the need for someone to help me or spot me, which was really cool. An example of this is the standing shoulder press using a barbell with 50lbs of weight. First of all, he advocates the use of an extra thick bar or the use of Fat Gripz on a standard size bar. The following is the one and only shoulder set: Take the bar and press it overhead. Now slowly lower the bar in 30 seconds, yes 30, until it rests in the lowest position at the collar bone level. Then do 10 traditional reps, each with a cadence of 1 second up, 2 seconds down (pretty much normal reps). When you get the last rep up to the top, once again lower the bar slowly over 30 seconds until it reaches your collar bones. That's it. Mission accomplished. Shoulders fried. He had me go from the shoulder press to dips, and then to bicep curls, followed by chinups, and finally leg presses..... with virtually no rest whatsoever in between and each set had a similar level of super slow brutality. As you can imagine, My muscles had a very deep level of stimulation. So much so that I can't even remember the last time they felt that way. It's that feeling you got on the first heavy leg workout you ever did. You know, you sit down for a second after the workout, and then when you get ready to stand up, your legs feel so weak that you're not sure if they can get your body up and hold it upright. And that was just my legs. My shoulders felt like if the police came in and told me to put my hands up, I'm not sure I could actually do it. My arms and lats were trashed as well. The whole thing from beginning to end couldn't have been any more than 15 minutes, and let me tell you, it was disturbing how I felt. He did comment on my actual body structure, saying "After seeing countless people, I can tell you that you're not elite level but you're definitely above average. And for 180 lbs., you look damn good." It was cool session to say the least and definitely an eye opener.
Thanks for sharing, Baron. Is this the kind of routine that appeals to you? I recall he liked SuperSlow, but I didn't know he combined regular rep speed with SS in a set. While my reps have slowed down from my higher volume days, and I'm paying more attention to the negative, especially on the last rep, "traditional" SS for just doesn't appeal to me. Were the other exercises only SS on the first and last negative, or was any of the concentric movement in the set also SS? From what I gather from your post, Darden views twice a week full body routines as the upper limit, since he suggests you have to essentially be doing nothing for the rest of the week. Does that mean he favors a lower frequency in the normal course? I ask because in a 2010 post on his site he wrote the following: My last chapter, "I would've trained less," in The New HIT (2004) started me thinking more in the less-is-best manner. Old friends, Jim Flanagan and Joe Mullen, shared with me that they had gone almost exclusively to training their clients one time a week. Thus, in 2007, when I started my Intensive Coaching business in my private gym in Windermere, Florida, I began training my clients twice a week, rather than my normal three times per week. Results? I noted the same, or better results, with twice-a-week workouts. After training these clients in this manner for six months, I cut each of their frequency to once a week. And guess what? Just like Flanagan and Mullen recommended a year earlier, the results were the same, or even better, than twice-a-week training. Today, in 2010, once-a-week training is what I apply with most (not all) of my trainees. But the duration of these workouts is not Mentzer's consoladation-type routines. I use whole-body routines composed of 8-9 exercises performed in the high-intensity style. Why have I moved to this frequency of training? Because I've seen with my own eyes that it works equal to or better than three-times-per-week and twice-a-week training. Ellington http://www.drdarden.com/readTopic.do?id=558360 If you should ever speak to him again and the topic comes up, I'd be interested to know what, if anything, changed in his thinking over the years. Also, did you guys discuss any post-failure work? I'm especially interested to know since I already slept quite poorly 2 nights in a row following my last workout during which I did forced reps and such, which I had been doing for a number of workouts in a row. (It seems I keep biting off more than I can chew, so although I will continue with the newly reduced frequency of 3 workouts every 2 weeks from twice a week, as I noted in a previous post, I will only go to full concentric failure and finish with a pronounced negative. Forced reps, at least as a matter of course, are a bit much for me at my desired frequency level. I should point out that LaVelle, who likes forced reps, only works each muscle group every 10 days or so using a split routine. So perhaps the reduced frequency per muscle group is one reason that makes forced reps more tenable as a more regular feature in a routine, all else being equal.) P.S. Didn't you mention recently that you didn't like shoulder presses because of a clicking sound? Was it perhaps using a lower weight and making it count that made it more doable?