RE:HST, my experience was that it was good for maintenance! I think the whole thing was contingent on Strategic Deconditioning actually working and hence growing from sub-maximal weights. Also, it seems that fatigue is an important part of optimizing hypertrophy not just mechanical load so spending so much time with sub-max loads/ intensity of effort isn’t too great from a growth perspective. Of course, once you bump up the intensity of effort/ fatigue then it’s much harder to recover from such frequent loading past the beginner stage. So like you say…it just doesn’t work that way!

For advanced bodybuilders I think some form of auto-regulation looks promising. I’m making small but consistent improvements by working up to a top set for the day and then using some rest pause/clusters and/or higher rep drop sets to get in some volume and fatigue. A lot like DC except I don’t train to failure.

Any way, sorry for the brain dump! Look forward to more of your articles.

Sure you do, I like communicating with my readers (especially if they can name Wernborn et al. :P).

DC – I plan on mentioning it in the last part of the series, among the programs which I like, and which only require a short commentary, instead of an entire article.

HST – no idea. Frankly, I don’t know what to think about it. It’s a program based on terrific principles that got totally screwed up by its periodization scheme. I can understand it for a very advanced bodybuilder who can hope to bump his weights up once a month or even once every two months, but for less advanced folks, doing 8 weeks at the same 1RM, and then deloading to hope to grow on those same weights… It just doesn’t work that way.

HA HA, that’s what I get for just finding your articles and posting in the first one I read! Really enjoying reading more of your stuff.

Are we going to get ‘A bodybuilder’s perspective’ on HST & DC training?

I use the Wernborn meta-analysis as my main source for basing intensity, volume and frequency recommendations (the general ones, of course, such as recommendations given in

http://evilcyber.com/fitness/training-variables-application-in-training-design/

and

http://evilcyber.com/fitness/playing-fire-part-1/).

I just wanted to be more direct here, and list studies that dealt with this issue (single vs multiple sets) more specifically.

I too was a fan of HIT before. It just appealed to me, all those shock techniques and no need to repeat sets, just a few exercises, and so on. And luckily, like yourself, I started disliking the (lack of) gains, and moved on to more productive training. 🙂

The data (from over 100 studies if I remember) showing 40-60 reps per muscle group per workout being the optimal volume for hypertrophy and each muscle trained around twice a week for anyone past the beginner stage.

The meta-analysis shows that one set does in fact create a response but it is not optimal. Same with training a muscle once per week, which even with greater volume seemed to produce about half the growth of training each muscle twice a week. Three times a week with matched volume showed no improvement past the beginner stage.

There absolutely is a dose-response relationship but the optimal for most seems to lie in the middle of both HIT and high volume camps.

Thanks, Rani!

Yeah, that was kind of the impression I got as well.

I’ve been aware of the Rhea meta-analyses for a while, but didn’t know that anyone objected them, until I ran into Clarence Bass’ articles which promoted Carpinelli and Otto’s work. Upon reading their latest article concerning the issue (it’s linked here), I had the impression that they really were onto something, but then again, further research brought me to the ACSM and Krieger’s work (which has also been objected, as can be seen from the discussion posted next to the article).

In the end, I decided to remain fairly neutral – it is my belief that current evidence are in favor of multiple sets approach, but I still wanted people to get the entire picture (if there’s anyone out there crazy enough to sift through that much material to settle a strength training issue). 😛

Good to see the debate finally end. Anyway, quality article Wolf!

Eh, if only people could learn to apply such mindset to all their gym work. Not having enough willpower not to slack on your exercises is like running in place while attempting to reach a distant goal.

Quality efforts