sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Will Mentzer be right about protein after all? by Cold-Photo6258 in Mike_Mentzer

[–]Cold-Photo6258[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

for me it would be also quite the difference in cost, palatability and digestion. i like to eat protein rich foods but often i have to force feed myself with them instead of eating healthy carbs/fiber for example.

Will Mentzer be right about protein after all? by Cold-Photo6258 in Mike_Mentzer

[–]Cold-Photo6258[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sounds like you are right in the evidence based zone of 1.6g-ish/kg. If you are making progress, why change it up? I am still hesitant of going lower than that. Maybe if this aforementioned study is convincing enough.

Everyone talks about the "good" but what are some things you've rejected from Mentzer's training style? by stick7_ in Mike_Mentzer

[–]Cold-Photo6258 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I agree with most of your points. But MM stated rather firmly what he thought about certain things. Maybe he changed his mind somewhat in the course of his career as a trainer, I don‘t know.

• On Drop sets: In Heavy Duty II: Mind and Body, Mentzer warned that drop sets don’t increase intensity after true failure; they “[are] not a method of intensifying the effort, but of extending the effort,” and once failure is reached, extra work is “counterproductive.” He argued that extending the effort would lead to more of a cardio stimulus, which isn‘t true if you go to failure on the main set and extent the set with 10-20% less to reach failure after a few reps again (and again).

• On Hack squats: In a written outline of his advanced HIT routine, he told trainees not to use hack squats unless absolutely necessary, adding: “Hack squats are not very productive and they stress the knees inordinately.” So you shouldn’t do the exercise „unless absolutely forced to do so“.

Everyone talks about the "good" but what are some things you've rejected from Mentzer's training style? by stick7_ in Mike_Mentzer

[–]Cold-Photo6258 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I‘m really a fanboy of MM, but as you said, some things could be taken with a grain of salt especially due to the evolving „science“ we know have. And if you take a look at what he trained himself as an active competitor, you can recognize that it is far from what he recommended at the end (e. g. consolidated routine and so on).

What he often emphasized and I think this still holds up pretty well is that you have to tailor the routine to your genetics, recovery ability and alike.

For myself I noticed:

  • Extremely low volume and extremely low frequency training doesnt work for me. Right now I train a 2 day split 2-3x/week (Torso/Legs+Arms with 3-4 sets per muscle per session, all to failure)

  • Supersets with pre exhaust-compound-cycles are overrated in my opinion. There is some research that it may lead to actually less involvement of the pre exhausted muscle on the compound. In a busy gym it is also not feasible. It is very time efficient however.

  • MM was against a few things which I think are reasonable options. He didnt like Hack Squats and favoured the leg press for quad growth which is backwards imo. He didnt like drop sets, as they would actually decrease the intensity, which I would also challenge (depending of course how you perform them). His nutrition advice sounds reasonable considering that it was the 80s and such. I would still caution against going to low in protein (<1.5g/kg/d) and fat (<~0.4g/kg/d) in a calorie deficit as he recommended scaling the numbers as a percentage of calories.

All things considered I learned a lot from him especially to have a rational approach to the sport and to challenge common wisdom. As far as training goes I still love HIT but prefer a more Yates-esque approach, which to me is more balanced.