Im new to forum, but have been reading posts for about a month now. Great to be able to be able to get feedback from fellow HIT advocates.
Ive seen several long threads on this forum debating "3 sets vs. 1 set" and/or "HIT vs. Volume".
One guy claimed PubMeds database provided overwhelming evidence, that the majority of studies "prove" 3-sets beats 1-set.
I have recently come across some good info in The Journal of Exercise Physiology called:
A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ACSM POSITION STAND ON RESISTANCE TRAINING: INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT RECOMMENDED TRAINING PROTOCOLS
RICHARD WINETT, AKA Master Trainer is one of the authors of this HUGE analysis of The American College of Sports Medicine – a meta-analysis of resistance training studies.
According to ACSM′s "Position Stand," the preponderance of studies support the superiority of high volume training over lower volumes of training. ACSM also supports explosive training and other training protocols, which are definitely not "HIT approved."
However, it looks like ACSM′s evidence for higher volume training isnt so convincing after all. Id love to get feedback on this paper, which can be read at
An interesting commentary on the above analysis is at
As a quick aside
I have recently communicated with Mr. Winnett, ( One of the authors of the above paper & known for his "Master Trainer Newsletter") as I was curious if he was still doing Super Slow, which hed shown great enthusiasm for at one point.
He told me that he has gone back to a more traditional HIT rep cadence of 4/4. He said that working on the above paper convinced him there was very little difference in the efficacy of various rep ranges, time under load, rep speed, etc. In other words, within certain limits, it all works about the same!
15 reps will produce about as much strength as 6 reps, slow reps work about as well as faster reps, etc.
Ive read the above paper 3 times and am still trying to digest it. The implications of its conclusions are very intriguing. Its very supportive of general HIT theory, but also challenges some of its main tenants.
Ok, the new guy is rambling
Ill shut up now.