Our High Intensity Training Interview for this month features former strength and conditioning coach, and current owner of High Intensity Chicago–Dan Geraci, a.k.a. High Intensity Dan.

Dan’s last name kind of rhymes with this

Dan is a former graduate assistant Strength Coach at the University of Michigan, and former Assistant Strength Coach at the University of Illinois Chicago. He currently runs a very successful personal training business called High Intensity Chicago, where he administers High Intensity Training workouts to his happy, result-getting clients.

Dan learned about High Intensity Training while at Michigan from long-time Strength and Conditioning Coach Mike Gittleson, and has also been strongly influenced by well-known H.I.T. expert Dr. Ken Leistner.

Dan having fun with Dr. Ken

Dan NOT having fun with Dr. Ken

Listen in on our conversation, as Dan discusses:

• What H.I.T is all about, as far as he is concerned
• His extensive background in education and research that has helped him understand what works-and what doesn’t
• Where the term “core training” really came from
• His take on slow repetition speeds (you might be surprised)
• The differences between training athletes vs. non-athletes
• The story behind High Intensity Chicago, and how it got to where it is today
• His take on workout recovery
• What he tells his clients about losing weight (whoa-did he really just say that?)
• And much, much more!

To hear the Dan Geraci interview, just click on the play arrow (the little triangle on the left) below:

Check out the High Intensity Chicago website

Leave a comment about Dan’s interview below…

.

For this month’s High Intensity Training Interview of the month, we have an interview I did recently for Chris Lutz’s SpartaTraining.com website. Chris offers a High Intensity Training personal trainer certification, and I am very proud to have recently achieved the designation of S.P.A.R.T.A. Master Trainer.

In this interview, I had a lot of fun and covered a variety of topics, such as:

• How and why I started training in the first place
• The book you’ve never heard of that motivated me to start using High Intensity Training principles
• The people who have influenced my training beliefs the most
• The weird thing Mike Mentzer did to me, and why I was glad he did it
• My experience using HIT with collegiate and professional athletes
• How I got interested in the internet, and what made me want to start this website
• The routine I used to gain 16 pounds of muscle in 16 weeks
• The one factor that determines success or failure with HIT (you either have this, or you don’t)
• The dumbest thing I ever saw in the gym
• The nature of adaptation, and how to harness it’s power to get bigger and stronger than ever (this was an awesome discussion)
• The new training breakthrough that’s coming soon to the High Intensity Nation
• And much, much more!

***ADVISORY WARNING***

Chris and I got REALLY carried away with this interview–so much so that it’s actually like an hour and a half long, so plan accordingly. I blame Chris.

To hear this interview, just click on the play arrow (the little triangle on the left) below:

Click here to check out the S.P.A.R.T.A. HIT Personal Trainer Certification

.

So I have this video on my High Intensity Nation You-Tube channel showing me taking Java Jon Soto through an intense set of bicep curls.

We start out with normal positive/negative reps, then do 2 forced reps where I give him barely enough help to finish the rep. (This is different than drop sets, where you just take weight off the bar–usually much more intense if you do it right).

After the forced reps, I had do Jon do 2 negative only reps, where I lifted the weight for him (since he couldn’t lift it himself any more) and he lowered it slowly, under strict control, for 2 final reps.

At that point, he couldn’t control the descent of the bar anymore, meaning we had exhausted all 3 strength levels in his biceps. From this, we knew we had stimulated a size and strength increase, so we terminated the exercise.

The video has been pretty popular–it has been viewed 8,949 times as of this writing.

One of those viewers posted a comment, asking me how long the negative reps should take (he actually said “how many count negative?). I responded by telling the viewer that the way we do it is 8 seconds on the negative to start out, we stop when the speed of the negative can’t be controlled.

A few weeks later, I get another comment from somebody else. This one says that my negatives are only 4-5 seconds.

My policy with internet comments of that nature is to ignore them, but this one actually stimulated my thinking.

And my thinking is that lots of people who are into High Intensity Training focus on a lot of secondary, fairly unimportant details–such as whether a negative-only rep takes 8 seconds or 4-5 seconds to perform, or how perfect their turn-arounds are at the beginning and the end of each rep, or whether the gym temperature is 68 or 72 degrees.

Instead, they would be better served to focus on the one element of primary importance, which is INTENSITY OF EFFORT.

In his book Heavy Duty 1, Mike Mentzer defines intensity as “the percentage of possible momentary muscular effort being exerted”.

That’s the name of this game, folks-reaching the highest possible level of momentary muscular effort, on every set of every exercise every workout.

And that’s what we need to focus on. Getting to that last impossible rep, and struggling with every ounce of our remaining strength to finish it.

I have been personally trained by 3 legends of High Intensity Training: Mike Mentzer, Dan Riley, and Mark Asanovich. And while each of them made sure I was performing each rep without the use of momentum, and not cheating through improper body positioning, none of them were timing my reps with a stop watch or telling me not to make faces.

And trust me, in each case, there was absolutely no doubt I had achieved maximum intensity of effort.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for proper form, moving the weight through muscular force alone without momentum. I just see a lot of people getting so wrapped up in timing everything with a stopwatch they forget to go all out.

And all out is what works, when it comes to getting bigger and stronger.

When you have actually gotten to that point after an exercise or series of exercises, you know it. It’s a great feeling of triumph, knowing you have done absolutely everything in your power to achieve your muscle building goal.

Like when you complete a super set of leg extensions and leg presses, and when you get off the leg press you find out you can’t stand up under your own power for more than a few seconds.

Or after finishing your back workout, your arms feel like they’re frozen solid from the elbows down.

When you can train yourself to exert that level of effort, there is no way in the world you’re not going to stimulate muscle growth.

So calm down a little with all the nitty-gritty details. Just concentrate on putting in a maximum effort, following the principles of High Intensity Training, and bigger, stronger muscles will be forthcoming.

.

In honor of my 14th wedding anniversary this month, I’m bringing you a bonus High Intensity Training interview with HIT trainer,  CEO of Discover Strength Personal Fitness Center in Minnesota, and the host of the recent “HIT Resurgence Conference”, my main man Luke Carlson. 

Luke is a nationally recognized practitioner, speaker, and writer on the topic of strength training and scientifically based fitness programs.

In 2002, Luke co-authored the book “The Female Athlete: Train for Success”. And in the Spring of 2006, he contributed a chapter on the topic of physical activity and exercise in the new book “Mapping Your Retirement”.

Luke’s experience in the health and fitness field is diverse and consists of coaching positions at Minnetonka High School and Blaine High School as the head strength and conditioning coach. Luke has also worked as a Strength and Conditioning Assistant with the Minnesota Vikings.

Luke is an American College of Sports Medicine certified Health and Fitness Instructor and has earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Kinesiology from the University of Minnesota. He is continuing his education at the University of Minnesota, as he is currently completing a graduate degree in Exercise Physiology.

In one of the best interviews I have conducted, Luke breaks down for us:

• The Mentor program that led to an Appentice program that led Luke to pursue his fitness career
• How his facility, Discover Strength, came into being and how it progressed to what it is today
• What he tells his clients that surprises them, but increases his credibility with them
• The workouts he puts beginners on vs. the workouts his advanced clients get
• Why he only teaches strength training vs. other aspects of a healthy lifestyle
• His take on the current state of the fitness industry, and the sentence he taught me that is my new favorite sentence (you’ll want to memorize it)
• The “metabolic workouts” he administers to his clients who dare to try them
• *SPECIAL BONUS*–Luke reviews his recent “HIT Resurgence” Conference, explaining what inspired him to do it, who the speakers were, what they covered, and how those of us who missed it can see what happened
• And much, much more!

To hear the Luke Carlson interview, just click on the play arrow (the little triangle on the left) below:

Click Here To Get The “HIT Resurgence Conference” DVD’s

Click Here to Check Out the Discover Strength Website

Leave a comment below

.

One day I was watching some NFL pre-game show on ESPN. The analysts were discussing a certain player who possessed exceptional speed.

One of the analysts asked Sterling Sharpe, former NFL wide receiver-turned TV analyst, what that particular player might have done to develop such blinding speed.

Sterling’s simple, yet profound, reply: “He wakes up like that”.

Obviously, Mr. Sharpe clearly understands the role of genetics in athletic performance.

Sterling Sharpe (L) laughing as Brett Favre explains his text messaging technique for picking up women. 

Don’t do it Sterling.

Similarly, genetics also plays a role in the development of muscular size and strength.

Some people (who are usually trying to sell you something in a bodybuilding magazine) would have you believe that anybody can build a Super Hero type physique if they can just be motivated enough and perservere long enough.

While it’s true that anybody can get better, and everybody can get a lot bigger and stronger than they ever imagined, there are limits. And those limits are genetically imposed.

If an entire football team performs the exact same strength training program, why is it that the kicker weighs 170 and all the offensive linemen all weigh over 300?

Genetics. Genetics always wins.

So what are the individual genetic factors that affect muscular development? Here are some of the main ones:

-Bone structure: An individual with a small, frail bone structure simply will not be able to support the heavy musculature of someone like Casey Viator or Dorian Yates.

 This…..

Will never look like this

-Muscle length: The longer a muscle is from origin to insertion-that is, where it attaches to the tendon at the top and bottom-the more size potential it has.

Short Bicep 

Long Bicep 

Muscle fiber density: Muscles grow via hypertrophy, where each individual muscle fiber increases in thickness. Everything else being equal, somebody with fewer muscle fibers in their biceps than their training partner will not be able to develop their biceps to the same degree.

Motor unit recruitment: Some people have the genetically predetermined ability to neurologically recruit more muscle fibers for contraction during a given task. The people you see or hear about who are average size, yet can perform superhuman feats of strength, usually fall into this category.

Recovery ability: The capacity to recover from stress, and the speed with which a person can do that, are genetically based. That’s why some people can tolerate longer and more frequent weight training workouts than others and still make good progress.

Since limits to individual muscular potential do exist, and those limits are genetically based, there is nothing that can be done to alter them. However, don’t let this discourage you-remember that potential can only be acuurately assessed in retrospect; meaning simply, you’ll never know how good you can be unless you give it your best shot, and then look back on it later.

Also, attitude is a great tool for leveling the playing field. a person with the motivation and will to push to the limit in every workout will realize more of their full genetic potential than someone who is blessed with favorable genetics, but trains like a wimp.

And remember that the purpose of all goal achievement is to develop a sense of mastery-to gain satisfaction from the knowledge that you were able to take yourself from point A to point Z in a given endeavor.

So set a goal to be the best you that you can possibly be, and don’t worry too much about genetic limits. Train with maximum effort, balanced with the proper duration and frequency, enjoy the process, and see what happens.

As we used to say in the NFL: “Prepare-don’t compare”.

.

Welcome to the High Intensity Training Interview of the Month! This month our special guest is Dwayne Wimmer, HIT trainer and owner of Vertex Fitness Personal Training Studio.

Dwayne is a long time High Intensity Training advocate and the owner of Vertex Fitness Personal Training Studion in Bryn Mawr, PA–voted “Best Personal Trainers” by Main Line Today magazine 5 years running. Trust me, when a HIT-only studio can win something like that 5 years in a row, they are doing a waaaaay above average job.

Over the years, Dwayne has learned from some of the very best High Intensity Training minds in the world, and has blended all that knowledge together to come up with his own style. In this fascinating interview, Dwayne passes on some of that knowledge on to us. (Note: Dwayne and I got so fired up about the topics we were discussing, we totally lost track of the time and ran over by 1/2 an hour!)

By the way, Dwayne is also a huge fan of the Highest Intensity Rock band around–KISS.

This picture would be a lot better if Dwayne’s face was painted

 Listen in as Dwayne shares with us:

• How he evolved from using “explosive” lifts to High Intensity Training
• The one event that suddenly caused HIT to make sense to him
• How he makes High Intensity Training work for all his clients, from college athletes to alzheimer’s patients
• Which book is required reading for all his trainers (it’s not the one you think)
• How Vertex Fitness was started, and how it got to where it is today
• The difference between over-training and under-recovering (very good)
• The one exercise nobody should ever do
• His take on the current state of the fitness industry
• And much, much more!

To hear the Dwayne Wimmer interview, just click on the play arrow (the little triangle on the left) below:

Click here to check out the Vertex Fitness website

Check out this video of Dwayne training Shala Sims on the Hammer Strength pulldown (pay attention to all the coaching points he gives her)

Leave a comment for Dwayne below!

.

I need your help with something.

You see, my goal with HighIntensityNation.com is to make it the “Go-To” place on the internet for High Intensity Training Information.

And I want that information to help YOU achieve ultimate success with your training.

But before I can do that, I need you to tell me how.

Help me help YOU.

All you need to do is fill out this this little 4 question survey, which will take you like 20 seconds.

CLICK HERE TO TAKE THE SURVEY

Thanks in advance for helping me make High Intensity Nation the best training site on the internet!

Dave Durell, MS, CCS, PTA
Author of “High Intensity Muscle Building”

.

Introduction

The term strength training refers to a comprehensive program of exercise designed to improve the ability to produce muscular force and increase resistance to injury. Any system of such training which produces an objectively measurable increase in muscular strength can be considered productive. Beyond productivity, there are two additional factors which have been thoroughly investigated in the literature; these factors are safety and efficiency. Assuming two programs were equally productive in terms of increasing strength, logic dictates the program which was safer and more time efficient would be the superior selection. In this article, what the literature says about productivity, efficiency and safety in strength training programs will be reviewed.

Productivity

Strength training has been shown to be an effective way of producing increases in muscular strength and size and decreasing body fat (Carpinelli and Otto 1998; Fleck and Kraemer 1997). Fleck and Kraemer (1997) reported that increases in lean body mass with concurrent decreases in body fat were shown in studies ranging from 6 to 24 weeks in duration (p. 155-156). These studies represented a wide variety of training protocols. Fleck and Kraemer concluded that “Because of the variation in the numbers of sets, repetitions, exercises and relatively small body composition changes, it is impossible to reach concrete conclusions concerning which program is optimal for decreasing percent fat and increasing lean body mass” (p. 154). Zatsiorsky (1995) also reported that a variety of methods are effective for increasing muscular strength.

It is universally accepted among experts in the field that a high degree of intensity of effort during strength training is required to generate increases in muscular strength (Durell 1999). Successful weight training programs are characterized by the inclusion of maximal voluntary muscular contractions at some point in the program (Fleck and Kraemer 1988). Utilizing a high level of intensity will overload a high percentage of muscle fibers; such an overload is paramount to increasing muscular strength (Kelso 1999). Carpinelli (1999) adds that recruitment of muscle fibers is primarily dependent on the intensity of exercise, not how much exercise is performed. This raises the question of how much – or more accurately, how little – exercise is required to produce results from a strength training program.

Efficiency

Many studies presented in the literature compared the performance of different amounts of sets of strength training exercises to determine the effectiveness of each method. A frequently cited study by Berger (1962) compared one set, two set, and three set programs using the bench press exercise with various repetition schemes. Berger concluded that three sets of six repetitions produced the best strength gains. However, subsequent studies failed to replicate these results, including a follow-up study by Berger himself (1963).

A comprehensive review by Carpinelli and Otto (1998) examined all the studies (a total of 35) which have been published, including abstracts, that reported the results of training with single or multiple sets. They concluded:

The opinion that multiple-set protocols are better than a single set of an exercise is not supported by the consensus of scientific evidence; 33 out of 35 of the comparative reports included in this review show no significant difference in strength increase between individuals performing single-set and those performing multiple-set (up to 15 sets) exercise protocols. (p. 82)

Carpinelli and Otto further conclude “There is no evidence to suggest that the response to single or multiple sets in trained athletes would differ from that in untrained individuals” (p. 82).

Other researchers have reached similar conclusions regarding the efficiency and practicality of low-volume training protocols. Starkey et al. (1994) compared strength and muscle thickness changes over 14 weeks of training using 1 set or 3 set programs. Both groups increased strength and muscle thickness with no significance between groups. The authors concluded that a 1 set training protocol was as effective as three sets and “represents a more efficient use of training time” (p. S116). Terbizan and Bartels (1984) compared the effects of 1 set versus 3 sets and high repetitions (10-15) versus low repetitions (6-9). All groups significantly increased strength with no difference between different protocols. The authors stated:

This information may be of interest to coaches determining strength training programs for their athletes, in that the same gains in strength may be accomplished in less time using 1 set vs. 3 set training and by lifting significantly less weight. (p. 267)

Assuming a strength training program has been instituted which produces increases in strength and is time-efficient, safety becomes the primary consideration.

Safety

Strength training, like any physically demanding activity, contains an element of risk of injury. The literature confirms that safety during strength training can be improved by manipulating certain variables such as exercise performance, exercise selection, equipment selection and proper supervision.

One controversial safety issue presented in the literature was the use of Olympic lifts and/or ballistic exercises in athletic strength training programs. Research by Kulund, Dewey, Brubaker, and Roberts (1978) studied the training methods and techniques of two Olympic style weightlifters and interviewed 80 competitive Olympic style weightlifters about overuse problems and injuries. The 80 lifters reported 111 injuries related to weightlifting. The shoulder and knee were the most common areas injured (p. 112). The most common duration of impairment was 2 weeks and 2 months (p.113). One of the two lifters studied fractured a rib in competition during the clean and jerk lift (p. 114). The authors concluded that most Olympic weightlifting injuries are caused by inflexibility and improper technique (p. 111).

The lumbar (lower) spine is another area which is highly susceptible to weight lifting injuries. Alexander (1985) pointed out:

This part of the body is susceptible to injury due to the large forces which must be supported, which include the body weight and any external weights, as well as the forces due to very high accelerations of the body parts. Since the lumbar spine is the only connecting column between the upper and lower parts of the body, all theforces must be transmitted via these structures. (p. 1)

Types of injuries reported to the lumbar spine included strains and sprains, disc injuries and spinal fractures(Alexander 1985). The most severe lumbar fracture injury reported was presented in a case report by Browne, Yost, and McCarron (1990). The authors described a lumbar ring apophyseal fracture which was incurred by a 16 year-old male after performing a ballistic exercise in physical education class. Only 11 cases of this particular injury had previously been reported. This 16 year-old male required 2 major back surgeries as a result of this injury. The authors concluded “Strict control of the amount of weight and types of exercises is essential” (p.535).

Other types of spinal fractures prevalent in those who perform Olympic lifts are spondylolysis, a defect of the pars interarticularis of one side of the vertebrae; and spondylolisthesis, a bilateral defect of the pars interarticularis often accompanied by a forward displacement of the vertebral body (Alexander 1985). Studies show the incidence of spondylolysis in Olympic lifters is much higher than in the general population (Jesse 1977). While referring to an article by Allman (1976), Jesse (1977) commented on the dangers of Olympic lifts and why they are included in athletic strength training programs:

Commenting on weight training programs, he claims that almost all injuries caused by exercise are the direct results of the sudden movement. Sudden lifts increase skill far more than strength, and the present confusion is probably because many strength coaches are former weight lifters themselves, he maintains. They pass on a style of training necessary for weight lifting, but neither necessary nor desirable in any other sport. (p. 65)

Other factors contributing to strength training injuries include lack of proper supervision and improper technique, which can cause both acute and chronic injuries (Reeves, Laskowski, and Smith 1998a, 1998b). Substituting machines for free weights, when feasible, can also be beneficial by increasing the stress on the target muscles, decreasing stress on the joints and increasing user confidence and safety (Friday 1999; Hay, Andrews, Vaughan, and Ueya 1983).

Summary

After reviewing the literature, some general conclusions can be drawn about strength training. First, it appears no one method of training has a monopoly on producing strength gains. In addition, most studies show single set protocols to be just as effective as multiple set protocols, with little or no significant difference between programs utilizing one to three sets per exercise. Decreased training volume can be beneficial to college student athletes as this would leave more time available for sport practice and academic activities. Also, the use of Olympic lifts and/or ballistic exercises was shown to have a high potential for injury and questionable benefit to athletes as compared to safer alternatives.

The rational trainee will be compelled to design the most productive, safest and most efficient training program possible. Relinquishing tradition and personal bias and avoiding commercially motivated sources in favor of the scientific data found in the literature will assure such program design occurs.

References

Alexander, M. J. L. (1985). Biomechanical aspects of lumbar spine injuries in athletes: A review. Canadian Journal of Applied Sport Sciences, 10 (1), 1-20.

Allman, F. L., Jr. (1976). Prevention of sports injuries. Athletic Journal, 56, 74.

Berger, R. A. (1962). Effect of varied weight training programs on strength. Research Quarterly, 33 (2), 168-181.

Berger, R. A. (1963). Comparative effects of three weight training programs. Research Quarterly, 34 (3), 396-398.

Browne, T. D., MD, Yost, R. P., MD, & McCarron, R. F., MD (1990). Lumbar ring apophyseal fracture in an adolescent weight lifter. The American Journal of Sports Medicine, 18 (5), 533-535.

Brzycki, M. (1995). A practical approach to strength training. Indianapolis, IN: Masters Press.

Carpinelli, R. N. (1999). The multiple set myth. In M. Brzycki (Ed.), Maximize your training: Insights from leading strength and fitness professionals (pp. 81-95). Chicago: Masters Press.

Carpinelli, R. N., & Otto, R. M. (1998). Strength training: Single versus multiple sets. Sports Medicine, 26 (2), 73-84.

Durell, D. (1999). Effective strength training- understanding the intensity-duration relationship. Hard Training Newsletter, 6, 2-3.

Fleck, S. J., & Kraemer, W. J. (1988). Resistance training: Basic principles (part 1 of 4). Physician and Sports Medicine, 16 (3), 160-171.

Fleck, S. J., & Kraemer, W. J. (1997). Designing resistance training programs (2nd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Friday, J. (1999). Avoiding injuries to the low back. In M. Brzycki (Ed.), Maximize your training: Insights from leading strength and fitness professionals (pp. 231-244). Chicago: Masters Press.

Hay, J. G., Andrews, J. G., Vaughan, C. L., & Ueya, K (1983). Load, speed and equipment effects in strength training exercises. In H. Matsui & K. Kobayashi (Eds.), Biomechanics VIII-B (pp. 939-950). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Jesse, J. P. (1977). Olympic lifting movements endanger adolescents. Physician and Sports Medicine, 5 (9), 61-67.

Kelso, T. (1999). The basics of muscle contraction: Implications for strength training. In M. Brzycki (Ed.), Maximize your training: Insights from leading strength and fitness professionals (pp. 35-80). Chicago: Masters Press.

Komarek, A. R. (1996). Use of scientific data among high school strength and conditioning coaches. High Intensity Training Newsletter, 6 (1), 12-17.

Kulund, D. H., Dewey, J. B., Brubaker, C. E., & Roberts, J. (1978). Olympic weight-lifting injuries. Physician and Sports Medicine, 6 (11), 111-119.

Mannie, K. (1996). Ballistic weight training dangerous and unnecessary. Hard Training Newsletter, 1, 10-12.

Reeves, R. K., MD, Laskowski, E. R., MD, & Smith, J., MD (1998a). Weight training injuries, part one: Diagnosing and managing acute conditions. Physician and Sports Medicine, 26 (2), 67-83, 96.

Reeves, R. K., MD, Laskowski, E. R., MD, & Smith, J., MD (1998b). Weight training injuries part two: Diagnosing and managing chronic conditions. Physician and Sports Medicine, 26 (3), 54-63, 73.

Starkey, D. B., Welsch, M. A., Pollock, M. L., Graves, J. E., Brechue, W. F., & Ishida, Y. (1994). Equivalent improvement in strength following high intensity, low and high volume training. Medicine and Science in Sport and Exercise, 26 (5), S116.

Terbizan, D., & Bartels, R. L. (1984). The effect of set-repetition combinations on strength gains in females age 18-35. Medicine and Science in Sport and Exercise, 17, 267.

Zatsiorsky, V. M. (1995). Science and practice of strength training. Champaign, IL: Masters Press.

.

Welcome to another High Intensity Training Interview Of The Month–This time our special guest is a bodybuilding icon who, about 3 years ago, converted over to High Intensity Training–at 65 years old!

Presenting: “The Ageless Wonder”, Former Pro Mr. America and Mr. World, Mr. Anibal Lopez.

Anibal grew up in New York City, where he developed an interest in strength and bodybuilding as a kid, and before you know it he was winning every contest in sight, being featured in all the magazines, and traveling the world to compete and give exhibitions to thousands of adoring fans.

During his career he competed against Ellington Darden, and later became re-acquainted with Dr. Darden upon moving to Florida. Later he was introduced to Jim Flanagan of Med-X and Nautilus, who turned him on to High Intensity Training–at 65 years old!

Anibal had been very limited in his training prior to meeting Jim, due to injury problems and multiple shoulder surgeries, but found he was able to train hard again following High Intensity Training principles.

He is now a zealous advocate of High Intensity Training, and now has a fully equipped gym at his home where he trains himself and his personal training clients. He also hosts an Internet Fitness TV show which is quite awesome (more info below).

Settle in and pay attention, as Anibal shares his widom with us and explains:

• Who inspired him to start training, and who his early mentors were
• How he overcame serious injuries with HIT
• How he met Jim Flanagan, and what Jim did to him
• What he once saw a top bodybuilder doing in the gym (this was a new one on me)
• What his sons think about their Dad being able to out-lift them at 68 years old
• His views on stress, nutrition and supplements, and how they relate to each other
• How his training now compares to what he did in his competitive days
• The crazy thing that happened to him once while doing calf raises (trust me, this has never happened to you)
• And much, much more!

 
To hear the Anibal Lopez interview, just click on the play arrow (the little triangle on the left) below:

Click Here To Check Out Anibal’s Website

Click Here To Check Out Anibal’s Internet Fitness TV Show

Leave a comment for Anibal below

.

Many trainees, frustrated by their lack of progress, seek the “latest training breakthrough” in an effort to stimulate new gains. In this article I would like to discuss a concept which, once understood and applied, can set the trainee on the satisfying path of regular progress. Sorry, folks, this is definitely not the “latest training breakthrough”; in fact, it is literally millions of years old. I call it the Survival Instinct.

To better understand the Survival Instinct, a quick review of basic human physiology is helpful. The goal of every autonomic subsystem within the human body is the perpetuation of the survival of the organism. In other words, everything that happens within your body is designed to keep you alive and healthy.

For example, when you cut yourself your blood coagulates to form a clot at the site of the cut to stop the bleeding. If this did not occur automatically, you would obviously bleed to death. Similarly, the actions of blinking your eye, coughing, hunger, acquiring a suntan etc. all exist for the same reason- they are all protective mechanisms responding to potentially harmful stimuli.

Muscular hypertrophy can be viewed in the same light. In response to a potentially harmful stress applied to a particular skeletal muscle, that muscle grows larger and stronger in order to protect the organism from possible future exposure to that stress.

The key point is this: in order for the process of hypertrophy to be carried out, the stimulus must be perceived by your body as a threat to your survival. For this to occur, you must work at or near the limit of your existing capacity.

The practical application of this principle is something almost everyone reading this can relate to. Imagine the first time you ever did a certain strengthening exercise- let’s say it was the barbell curl. Suppose you did 10 reps with 80 pounds. Since this was your first time doing it, that set represented a 100% increase in intensity over what you had done before (which was nothing).

This dramatic leap in intensity will activate your Survival Instinct, stimulating your biceps to grow a little bigger and stronger to protect you from this perceived threat in the future, just in case you decide to do it again. And if you did do it again, and you were fully recovered, it was a lot easier the 2nd time around- the result of added muscle tissue to your biceps.

The next step is very important: if, from now on, you don’t try to do more than 10 reps, more than 80 pounds, or both, you are working well within your existing capacity and your Survival Instinct will lie dormant. Since your body has already built your biceps up to the point where they can handle 80 pounds for 10 reps, anything less than or equal to that is not perceived by your body as a threat to your survival and there is no reason for you to grow, no matter how many sets you do. It is that little extra, moving into new territory in weight or reps, that will cause your Survival Instinct to kick in and propel you toward the higher levels of muscular size and strength you desire.

How can this concept be systematically applied in each workout? By utilizing a repetition range. A repetition range refers to the establishment of upper and lower limits on the number of repetitions that will be performed in any given set.

For example, a trainee may select a repetition range of 6-10 for upper body exercises (I like 6-10 for upper body and 10-15 for lower body). Thus, the trainee would select a weight for each upper body exercise which would cause him or her to reach a point of momentary muscular failure, where no further volitional movement was possible, somewhere between the 6th and 10th repetition.

Doing so will insure the trainee is working to the limit of their existing capacity. If at least 6 reps cannot be performed, the weight is too heavy and should be reduced to allow 6 to 10 to be performed. Once more than 10 reps can be performed, the weight should be increased the next workout to once again allow for only 6-10 repetitions.

Note that the set should not be terminated arbitrarily just because a certain number of reps have been achieved. Always push to your limit if you want to involve the Survival Instinct, then adjust the weight accordingly the next workout.

To illustrate this point, let’s say a person is currently able to perform 8 reps on the bench press with 150 pounds and is unable to complete a 9th rep. Using a 6-10 rep range, this person would stick with 150 pounds each workout until, as the result of getting stronger, he or she is able to perform 10 or more reps with 150.

Once that happens, the weight should be increased to 155 the next workout and as many reps as possible performed. Once 10 reps can be exceeded, the weight goes up to 160 on the next workout, and so on. This system insures that both intensity and progression are being effectively utilized.

In summary, don’t leave anything on the table when you workout. Push to your limit on each and every set, and increase reps and/or weight whenever you can. By doing so you will harness the power of your Survival Instinct and elevate yourself to new levels of muscular size and strength.

.