1 Set to Failure (HIT) VS High Volume for Size & Strength (27 Studies) 

This one took me a while to make, I hope you found the video interesting and cool in some way! :) Timestamps: 0:00 Intro 0:48 Part I: History of High-Intensity Training 1:56 Part II: Common Themes of High Intensity Training 5:14 Part III: The Colorado Experiment: 63lbs of Muscle in 28 days 9:06 Part IV: Training to Failure vs Not 19:14 Part V: Low Volume vs High Volume 22:58 Part VI: Low Frequency vs High Frequency 30:53 Part VII: Positives of High-Intensity Training 35:37 Part VIII: Conclusions

My experimenting in almost every program has taught me this. All programs work. I have done high volume training 5 sets. I have done nucleus overload 100 reps very low weight in a huge set. I have done only bodyweight. I have done only resistance bands. I have done only dropsets. I have done heavy duty 1 set to failure 6-10 reps. I had gains with ALL OF THEM. The one thing that will alter your results is the quality of reps, your food, you daily life and the curret state of your fitness level. Dont try for the ultimate program. Just do what you like o what your time allows you. When i work too many hours i prefer HIT or dropsets because i can finish a workout session in 20 mins.

One aspect of heavy duty HIT training that seems to be not mentioned here is that of momentum. Mike Mentzer taught to have no momentum when raising and lowering the weights, which dramatically increases the time the muscles are under tension.

Can we all take a second to appreciate the effort put into this video, very nice.

What I find most informative is that 1 set isn’t less effective and it takes 1:5th the time. Most normal gym goers have careers, families, etc so hit training even if equal is far superior in practicality

In my experience, have done high volume, bro splits, HIIT etc, I, at 52 years old, have seen more gains, rapidly, doing a high intensity ( HIT ) style workout than any other workout in my life. For me it’s all about intensity and ample recovery!

The amount of research and work put into this video is truly extraordinary. Unbiased, scientific, evidence based and visually beautiful presentation? You cannot get better than that.

Once you actually work out as intensely as Mike intendet, youre not ever gonna question the low amount of volume. When i go to complete failure in my one set I cannot imagine doing another.

HIT training works insanely well for people with a good mind/muscle connection. 90% of people don't have the mind/muscle to actually train to failure.

One thing that needs to be pointed out in part 5: low volume vs high volume is that high intensity typically involves much slower reps than the traditional rep, usually 4 seconds concentric, 2 seconds peak contraction hold, and 4 seconds on the eccentric. So roughly 10 seconds per rep, which means six reps is going to take at least one full minute. The studies provided were comparing a single traditional set not taken to failure vs 3 traditional sets of the same nature. So in that case, yes, 3 sets would certainly be better for muscle growth. But that study did not reflect a single set as outlined by HIT protocol. Volume is just the total amount of work performed within a given training session, so time under tension would be a valid measurement of total volume. Now compare a set of 10 reps using a slower HIT style, 4-2-4 cadence vs a standard 3 set of traditional training, where you would perform maybe 1 second in the positive, 1 second in the negative. So 20 seconds per set approximately, for 3 sets you’re looking at about 60 seconds total where the muscle is under mechanical tension, whereas the single set of HIT training for 10 reps at 10 seconds per rep would last for 1 minute and 40 seconds. So, in terms of time under tension at least, HIT would actually be MORE volume than traditional 3 sets. This of course is only when directly equating time under tension to volume. I’ve never really considered HIT as “low volume” for this reason. It’s less reps and sets than traditional training sure, but in total time for the muscle to be performing work it’s moderate - typical training volume compared to other forms of training

I am 62 and have 45+ years of drug-free bodybuilding behind me. This does not mean that I have gone balls to the wall for 45 years, I have tried many routines and started writing routines years ago. I now run 3 days a week on. Day 1 all front muscles (Quads, abs, chest) Day 2 all back muscles (hams, glutes, calves, back) Day 3 shoulders and arms. I run a HIT method where at least the last set in each exercise goes beyond positive failure and only 2-3 exercises are used per body part. After a lay off, I put on 15lbs in 3 months and became leaner, but this was my body just getting back to where it was less than a year prior. It took me many years to put on the muscle that I have. Sets are Warm-up, Hard warm-up, hard-working (very possibly to positive failure such as dips), set 3or4 goes beyond positive failure with ETUT (various methods). After finishing the first exercise per body part, the next exercise, a warm-up is not needed, and possibly only 2 working sets can be utilized. Your body has great memory that will last up to 2 weeks for strength, so training the same body part in 7-8 days will maintain your positive movement till a stall comes. When a stall comes, cut way back and cruise for 2 weeks. I just hit a point like this and that was after 6 months of moving forward. An example of this training might be: Ex 1 - dips or weighted dips 3-4 sets, last sets PF and beyond PF. Ex 2 -Incline DB press moving from wide and elbows back to narrow and straight-up (in the same set) till the weight can no longer be moved, possibly only 2 sets. Finishing Ex 3 with say, dual cable squeeze for 2, past positive failure sets. Total of 8 sets for chest. I even run my time like this- Quad Ex 1 -finish - chest exercise 1 -finish - quad ex 2- finish and so forth. I will extend a set for longer than normal, going from bench lying tricep extensions to the DB's then pressed together, push press off the chest, sit up and start to curl both DBs till failure and then go to single arm hammer curls to finish one set without stopping. This is great heart training as well. Generally, I do each WO day in just under an hour and perform around 20 total sets with warm-up sets. Resistance training is the greatest training ever invented, go hard when you are lifting and lift drug-free.

This was very well made. I've personally tried many different workout programs and always ended up exhausted (and not having enough time) doing a regular 3/4 times per week routine. The 1-2x a week routine keeps me on track with progress, I have much better energy levels and have more time to do important things outside of the gym. Overall, even if I lose 10-15% in gains, I'm happy to trade that for the time, energy and ease to follow the program.

What many fail to realize is that the "three sets of ten" NEVER referred to 3 "working sets" but instead actually meant two warm up sets followed by ONE working set, which was written in the old barbell courses.

Both systems are equally effective. It really comes down, for me, how long does one want to spend in the gym? Either basically live in the gym or have a life outside of the gym. Personally, I’ve used both methods of training and in my case, have experienced greater results ( by far ) doing a HIT program. Plus, this allows me to go on morning walks with my dog, surf, go fishing, hang out with my daughter, cook nice dinners for my family, work, enjoy time with my wife… how? Im not spending 2-3 hours, 6 days a week in the gym . Up to the you, what are your priorities.

The biggest issue I have, is not the type of training, but not leaving enough time for recovery or working too hard/long and therefore, not recovering in time for the next workout. I think that recovery is the biggest factor for success. I think "that" is where Mike Mentzer's secret was.

I absolutely believe during the time of a study that higher frequency training would have positive effects probably beyond that of low-frequency training but that is not a year, 3, 5, and so on! This is for the rest of your life if a lifter comes to a correct understanding of what the goal is; of course, goals can vary; so something about goals must also be stated. Genetic potential as given by God and desire plays a huge part in all of this. I understand and appreciate trying to use a methodical approach and as I have said, what an information-packed video! I just smashed the subscribe button. Many people can draw but there are few artists as not all have the drive or discipline. High frequency and volume lifting takes its toll in time, particularly with the drug-free lifter, believe me, been there! Keep up the good work!

Thank you so much for this video i can’t express how discouraged and overwhelmed i was before this video please never stop what you’re doing as long as you’re enjoying it.

HIT to and beyond failure not only trains your muscles, but equally importantly your mind, which is priceless.

Great work dude. You put so much energy and time in this. Respect and thanks!

I almost never comment on youtube but after all the effort you put in to deliver such an info-dense video the least I can do is to compliment you. Thank you for your amazing work

What an amazing, detailed, backed by studies and well-animated video. I am amazed you put so much effort into one single video. I applaud you!

I truly appreciate your videos. I'm an advocate of HIT and you have done an excellent job of presenting valuable information of many variables while also alluding to the possibility of different strategies being optimal for different physiological responses. Good work!!

Haven't looked the actual studies through, but I always have a feeling that failure in these studies isnt the same as the complete failure the hit guys speak of. I'm guessing it's in most studies at worst the point when you really don't want to make another rep, and at best the point when you can't make another rep with your ~80% one rep max.. which would leave plenty to do running down the weights until the utter and muscle complete failure of which hit people speak.

The amount of work you put into these is amazing. This one in particular is a doozy. I've been considering a HIT style workout, not because I think it's better but because with a baby and another baby on the way I'm trying to write a program that can hit all of my muscles in as little time as possible just until life gets a bit less mad

I stalled in growth using traditional training methods and I have had so many injuries over the years that eat into my gains. I started HIT training one set to failure twice a week and started making gains again. This maybe just because I was over training but making gains while having so much extra free time for hobbies (BJJ and basketball), while reducing my risk of injury has made this the perfect fit for me. I am glad I found it.

Great video, detailed and well explained. I askd about this a few months back and you delivered. Thank you, definitely worth the wait.

I’ve been doing 1 set to failure every 2 or 3 days and I’ve been seeing amazing growth from short workout sessions. I don’t have to be a gym rat to reach my natural limits and I haven’t ran into any plateaus because I let my muscles recover and adapt.

This was quite in depth and I much appreciate your dedication. Thank you.

First and foremost, thanks for a great video. I'm 60 years old and have just started training (about 4 months ago). A month ago I was recommended to read Mentzer's book and have started trying to train to failure and taking 10 seconds (approx) to complete each move. For me, as a novice, training to failure seems better (simpler) because I'm probably too inexperienced to know when I'm 'n' number of reps from failure. I've also decreased my frequency of training. I find I'm much more tired after training to failure, but I am seeing reasonable gains in strength and muscle size, so for now it's working, but it's early days. The problem is the lack of or conflicting research, plus difference between individuals results that make it all so confusing.

I've been training for about 6 months now, and am doing low frequency to failure training. I've found for personal experience that my muscles hurt for 3 or even more days after the workout, and in this time my strength Is drastically reduced. I feel like in the studies they didn't push hard enough when they failed.

This video is very interesting, congratulations. The only thing I want to point out in favor of high intensity training is that, even if it produces slightly worse results than high volume training, it produces them with a much smaller investment of time. My opinion is that a mixture of the two methods is ideal for individuals who do not intend to compete but only to maintain a good body by training as little as possible. The real question we should ask ourselves is what is the MINIMUM number of sets to gain mass and not what is the maximum!

Very well done video. Great well rounded perspective.

Brilliant video! Perfect job conveying all the important info with great quotes to match.

Both ways work. As far as study's go, I've read many and most of them are flawed. They either used people who were untrained and it was the adaptation of their CNS which caused the quick growth or used the "RIP" idea which is impossible to determine. An example of study's gone wrong is the one done by Brazilian and Swedish researchers into pre-exhaustion super sets. They found that after one such set, the monitored EMG of the Pecs were lower proving it didn't work. Yet, the idea behind pre-exhaustion super set was to temporarily make the delts and triceps stronger pushing the chest past the point of failure. This test really proved it worked but the researchers didn't understand the exercise principles themselves and were unable to see it. Beware trusting study's. They are not created equal. At 66 years old I've done both types of training throughout my life. The volume workouts are much easier than the all out full intensity workouts which really push your muscles and mental stamina to the limit. While volume is easier on the body as a system, all the reps add up over time and your joints will start to complain. However, High Intensity work will wear your system down over time so be careful if you go that route. The bottom line here is no matter what you choose, the body doesn't want to change. That muscle is practically useless in every day life and trying to grow bigger muscles is not a normal human activity. There will be drawbacks when you train for size and there is a price to pay no matter how you do it. It's all a trade-off. Don't confuse muscle size for health. They are not the same. Both styles of training will build muscle and yes ... if you're going to train to failure you can't do many sets and if you're not willing to push yourself to the limit doing less than maximal work, you must pile on the volume. Like I've said both ways work. Choose the way according to your mental stamina and ability to push yourself and all will be good.

I just want to say I absolutely love your videos' unique aesthetic. The vibrant colors on the black background, the simple but aesthetically pleasing models - I can't quite explain why, but I think it looks fantastic. I really hope to see more like it from your channel. Thanks for all the great content!

Wow, best video I’ve watched in a long time on youtube! Keep up the good work!

I think it really comes down to your body, goals, the lifts you do & genetics. For example, if I’m going to do lunges, extensions, side laterals, dumbbell flies & hammer curls in a workout I’m obviously going to need 3-5 sets minimum to do any work, whereas if you do barbell squats, dumbbell overhead press, machine bench press & barbell curls all to complete failure with partials or drop sets, the muscle will be just as damaged as it was from the other workout with 1-3 sets.

phenomenal video, containing a wealth of knowledge rivaling a whole semester of university classes

Very well put together, rational, reasonable and balanced vid on a tricky subject given all the varying data. Thank you for taking the time and effort to produce it. Very helpful.

As a former medical scientist, who is into bodybuilding since 20 years I want to thank you for your effort and congratulate on content!

It works. I’m bigger than my friends who go the gym everyday. I go once or twice a week and go hard fast.

This is a really complete research. Thanks for your work here man!

Thanks for the excellent video and big effort put into it!

I've done and tried various methods of weight lifting over the past 30 years. But the biggest and widest my body ever got was the three weeks i worked at Fed Ex as a package handler, loading and stacking boxes into a truck. The boxes were usually on average about 35 lbs a piece? Some boxes were much bigger and heavier, some smaller and lighter. I worked 4 hours a day, 5 days a week doing that. It was brutal. I made sure to eat alot after my shift. My previous exercise regimen of lifting weights for 45 minutes per day did not prepare me for Fed Ex lol.

An anecdotal training split that I came upon was 5 day full body, 2 sets per exercise. 1st set is a warmup set, second set is the working set. Warmup set is anywhere from 30-50% of 1rm and generally leaves about 5-6 rir, second set is 80% 1rm done to complete failure. I would do this every day during the workweek. My results were great. The reason I came up with this program was to stimulate muscle protein synthesis as much as possible. I think this deserves to have some studies done on it. I gave it up because I have major issues with sleep and therefor just about anything I do results in overtraining, however when I was doing it I got the most compliments about my physique I ever have. Next thing I want to try when ready for it is to use 1-3 rir on the working set and see if that keeps me from going into over training (the closer we get to failure the longer it takes to recover) etc. what was also good about this program was the amount of exercises I could get done in a day. There’s no need to rest along time after the warmup set, then after the working set I am off to another exercise immediately. This makes the workout rather challenging since I could easily fit in 10-12 different exercises per session.

Wow, you did an incredible job on this video! Subbed

This channel is bringing the smoke. Great job.

Awesome! thanks for your deep highly detailed video! can you please go further and put a research about recovery times based on nutrition?

Love these vids. For me, I think the take away when it comes to the macro of bodybuilding is do better every week. Lift a little heavier. Add an extra rep. Progress as much as you can and you really should be alright. No need to over complicate.

This is an amazing video, the quality, the explanation and the diagrams clearly highlight HIT, its principles. The scientific explanations are very well spoken and are clear, as well as the unbiased explaining make the video amazing. Good stuff I’m subscribing 👍🏼👍🏼

Great video, this was very informative and very well put together!

The main problem that can arise when trying to argue that one set to muscle failure may not be enough is the terminology of what people in research mean by the word failure. In studies, the word volitional failure sometimes appears, which means a refusal to work when a person felt that he could not continue to do it, while the followers of HIIT use the word failure to mean momentary muscle failure, that is, physiological muscle failure ( You can read James Steele "Clarity in Reporting Terminology and Definitions of Set End Points in Resistance Training" where the issue of muscle failure terminology is discussed). Perhaps that is why the stimulus in fact from one set of momentary muscle failure (0RIR) may be higher than from, for example, three sets that are performed to volitional failure ,since the first option of failure implies a real failure of the muscle to do the work, while in the second case, the person stops the set when it just becomes difficult for him (even if it is, for example, 5RIR). In this case (if, for example, we are talking about stimulating repetitions) , we can assume that the volume from one set is higher than from three.

Great stuff. Also to consider is some of the techniques used to go beyond positive failure, such as: negatives, forced reps, pause reps, etc. This might lead to a more significant stimulatory effect and results for strength and hypertrophy (and additional recovery required) as many HIT advocates claim, especially in trained athletes. Research addressing these factors would also be very interesting. Dr. Stan

Thank you for the tremendous time and effort in putting this great video together. As someone with limited time and no aspirations of competing- it seems if the low volume/high intensity route produces no more gains - or frankly even only 75-80% of the gains of a higher frequency routine - the time savings alone both in terms of trips to the gym and time spent while there would make the high intensity route very appealing… As the adage goes - the most effective form of a medicine is the one the patient will actually take!

Wow.....what a fantastic presentation. I got more from this then 100s of other videos from gurus. 100/100

I think the last slide is important to note. Different lifters probably have different experiences. I tend to gain more with 1 set to near failure than doing multipe sets. I will perform lighter warmup sets though.

Great information, i am pretty sure in the hit audiobook by mike mentzer he DOES state that HIT is more for trained individuals who have plateaued. HIT would definitely work with untrained people as that is when you make your most gains, perhaps that foundation is different to training a newbie with high rep in terms of either strength or size, it would seem logical that high rep would train a newbie for strength, just an observation of what ive seen.

I appreciate your work on this video. It is clear you made this without bias. I really think part VI of the video does prove HIT is worth it- even if only for the time you’ll save in the gym haha. I’ve done high volume most of my life, and I recently switched to HIT. Honestly I just feel better with high intensity, low frequency.

I just found this channel and boy oh boy it is AMAZING. I have never seen better production quality. Subbed, liked, also I smashed the bell enough time with 3 reps in reserve !

For general fitness the Pareto principle kicks in. 80% + of the gains for 20% of the time. 1 set 10 movements 3x / week. 1 1/2 hours of training time a week. Add weight when you can do 15 reps, no warmups needed.

Thanks for the detailed analysis. If anything, this validates the need for following a progressive overload program. 3 to 0 RIR deload, wash, rinse, and repeat.

This is the best researched summary I've seen on this topic. No bias, just facts based on today's science.

Great job on the video man 🤙🏾

I do believe Mike Mentzer and Arthur Jones pioneered a training philosophy that will stand the test of time.

So, if mechanical tension is the primary driver of hypertrophy, why aren't power lifters more muscular than bodybuilders? Wouldn't increasing mechanical tension or at least the quest to increase be the ultimate driver? Plus, 0 RIR is failure. BTW, how does anyone gauge 3 RIR let alone 5 RIR? Do they perform sets to failure and then back off 3 reps for future workouts? A person does 12 reps to failure and then decides to back off to 9 reps for the future sets? If so, where are the progression gains made if not pushed to true complete failure? If always stopping 3 reps short of failure, how is data complied to account for progress? Adding weight to progress then resets the number of reps which would be 3 reps short of failure. The discussion switch to training frequencies is somehow leaving the intensity factor out. I would agree if training intensities are the same which I assume is NOT training to true failure, the capacity is there to train more frequently and allow more gains. Take the lower frequency group and mandate they take advantage of more recovery time by making them work at a higher level of intensity and then compare the results. True HIT does require more recovery time and if it doesn't, the intensity level is not high enough. .My post is NOT to contradict your fantastic videos, it is just to offer substance for additional discussion. Thank you.

This is a fantastic summary. A lot of High intensity people advocate a slow concentric and eccentric rep cadence between 4-10 seconds each way. They claim this reduces the sheering forces and reduces the chance of injury when going to failure. This is something I’ve employed myself. I am kind to a hybrid. I like the whole one set to failure but with a much higher frequency.

AMAZING content bro! Super helpful! Keep up the amazing work

Another great video. 👌 I personally get the best results working up to a single top set to fatigue for 2-3 exercises per body part twice a week. Any more than that does not provide additional progress in muscle or strength & often leads to more overuse injuries & feeling run down.

Loving the vids HOH, can I request/suggest a video in the works on kaatsu/occlusion training? The research is very interesting, keep up the class content bro!

Great video. Very interesting and informative. Subscribed.

If I could like this 100 times, I would. Thank you for your work.

I will do whatever training method works for me! Whatever that might may be, but I can guarantee you it WILL never be just on set of anything. I will continue to do warm up sets for my joints and then work to failure.

In my experience as a non-competitor and as a natural, HIT is the best program for gaining the most muscle with the least amount of time in the gym. Only, it requires a lot of effort in a short time, and it is not within everyone's reach. You have to accept to suffer, to suffer a lot. When I see videos of bodybuilders, even very famous ones, as if they were at their maximum for hours, I think to myself, either they are not going to the maximum, or they are doing this because they are filmed

Marvelous work! This deserves more views!

A fantastic review! Thank you!

Best video of all time, honestly, this is how peer reviewed, scientific/statistical studies should be presented on all subjects. Very much appreciation to all the incredibly hard work you put into this tremendously high quality presentation. Also - for the comment scrollers. Long story short, based on the literature, the most important things are a) you are training, b) you are not giving less than about 70% - 90% of your all when training, c) you get adequate rest and that additional factors including mental and physical health paired with dieting can directly affect your results and d) that keeping a journal of your own personal experience over dozens of weeks with different modes of exercise will help you determine which regiments/routines and levels of intensity/frequency work best for your body. With a simple reminder that training and training relatively hard is the true key to strength increase and muscle hypertrophy. My small piece of advice to additionally state is that not only is training above 69% optimal, progressive overload is most definitely an integral and fundamental part to the longevity of your success for both strength increase and muscle hypertrophy.

I lifted for years with some gains, but not particularly impressive... but when I switched to low volume, I very quickly increased in both size and strength. I now sometimes add more volume, but still keep it on the low side - - 1 or 2 sets of usually 2 exercises per muscle group. I had thought I was training to, or close to failure before, but training with just one set taught me what going to failure really means and the value of going beyond failure, with static holds, forced reps, partial reps, ending a set with a few negatives... It's very hard to accurately judge how close 3 reps short of failure is, so even if that's good enough, if going to actual failure doesn't hurt hypertrophy and strength, it seems logical to aim for failure. I've done both the Arthur Jones/Casey Viator style full body workouts (though with free weights and basic pulleys, not Nautilus), and the Mike Mentzer split. The full body produces the best result in short time, but after a month or two becomes too draining and is less sustainable than Mentzer's spilt system. I like to do a month or 2 of full-body at least once per year, doing a split for the rest of the year. I think my body favors low volume, but I think adding an extra set now and then can also help, as can an occasional period of doing high volume. You might consider doing a video on periodization - - how changing the system and levels of volume used, now and then, can help get past plateaus. Still I think my baseline workout works best at low volume - - anything else is just to shock past a plateau. People who feel they respond better to high volume may find HIT good for breaking through their plateaus and teach them true muscle failure. Going to failure isn't sustainable with high volume, but the lesson may help reach higher levels of intensity. I like more frequency than Mentzer used - - closer to Jones' but doing a split, instead of full body. I'd also add, that if you are not aiming to be a competitive bodybuilder, if you have a time consuming job, family, school, etc. the short duration, less frequent HIT workouts are more efficient and accomplish, if not the same results as high volume workouts, very, very close... close enough for any hobbyist or health-conscious trainer, and in a fraction of the time.

I agree with your opinion that Mike Mentzer used information available to him at the time to formulate his program. There are a lot of assumptions about muscle growth and recovery in his book. I followed his training program for several months before switching to Dorian Yates' program. I trained with a fairly large and lean bodybuilder who was a HIT proponent so I have reached failure the way HIT prescribes it. Those single working sets to failure make you want to die rather than continue the set. I found that I was gaining some muscle on Mentzer's program but there was little definition BC of low frequency and not much increase in size because Mentzer didn't believe that 1 g of protein/lb (or similar) of bodyweight is needed, let alone aggressive caloric surplus. So my progress was slow. The conclusions I got from my experience with HIT is to be hyper focused during my workouts, document progress and of course knowing what true failure is. Also, I find it important to mention that generic elites such as Mentzer and Yates respond differently to training than 99% of people. HIT works for them but so would every other program.

Very good all around. Good content, good editing. Gonna watch more

Bruv! Who are you and where have you been!? How has the RU-vid algorithm failed so miserably and not suggested your channel to me years ago, although I’ve been watching Biolayne’s and rp strength’s content for years?! Anyhow: thank you so much for this perfect video. Every second was well used, the information presented perfectly both regarding timing, explanation, putting in context, cross referencing, comparing, length, depth, volume and last but not least: your voice and flow of language. I’ll spend the rest of the day watching every video in your channel. Cheers !

Genetics is the flaw in weight-training studies because it's a powerful variable that can dramatically skew results, identical twins' training would deliver better analysis.

Higher frequency also has higher chances of putting yourself in a catabolic state rather than anabolic. Not everyone responds the same but over using the muscle can absolutely cause catabolic reactions. As far as hitting you one rep max , most people call their one rep max at the point the pain is too much rather then complete failure.

Super excellent video! Well done

Great work as always,invaluable even. thank you for all your videos

I’d be interested in seeing studies done on the efficacy of myo reps/rest pause versus straight sets. When I do rest pause, I’m doing 0-2RIR per mini set and resting anywhere from 20-40sec rest to allow myself to at least get 5 reps on the next mini set (since that 4-0RIR range generally induces more hypertrophy than 5+RIR). So within one big set, I’m approaching failure about 4 times. I wonder if this would be less hypertrophic or the same as doing 4 straight sets close to failure.

Interesting studies. Some of this when translated to the real world might also depend on people's ability to train. As in making the time to train. HIT might be better for busier people as it may mean less time in the gym therefore, increasing success in consistency. HV might be optimal for athletes since part of their daily routine whether school sports or professional sports/bodybuilding is already calculated in their workday.

Wow, so glad to find this. I remember the Jones book from when I first started lifting, decades ago. I followed HIT and got pretty good results. I hit a plateau eventually and moved onto other strategies, but I always wondered how that book would hold out in a controlled study. What a great video and detailed examination of all the evidence. Superb and unbiased.

Great video! Thank you so much for this. Leaving a comment for the algorithm!

Coclusion: Current literature does not suggest high-intensity of training. Training to failure isn't essential. Higher volumes tend to be better than lower volumes Higher training frequency are perfect for muscle gains Still high intensity training will build a substantial amount of muscle and strength

I greatly enjoyed this video and learned a lot. I'm wondering which method is the most efficient by time. I'm over 50 and I only have a certain amount of minutes to work out per day. I split my workout time by cardio and body weight lifting. For my lifting I do supersets mixing body parts so that I don't have to rest. One superset would be squats, abs, pull-ups, and pushups. I do about 5 supersets. I do the same number of reps for each of the sets. I'm assuming that multiple sets like I do takes longer time than fewer sets taken to failure. Thus, when fixing the time (such as 30 minutes total for the entire workout) which method would your recommend? I'm wondering if I can save time by doing less supersets and more reps taken to failure.

Great Analysis and awesome video. :)

Brilliant video, thank you kind sir!

HIT also benefits the general population that doesn't have the time or desire to put in the extra sets. I would rather someone work out 3 days a week for 30 min than not at all. So for very busy or sedentary people I usually recommend the 1 set to failure program. Once they see change then the feedback loop might push them to experiment or decicate more time. Too often newbies are given a 70 min a day program needing 4-6 days at the gym which can be discouraging.

I prefer HIT since its saves time and makes me focus more on proper and save execution

Thank you! You did a really good job!

This vid is really well done, my friend. *Chef's Kiss*

My strength has exploded by doing HIT with 1 set to absolute failure i.e. your training partner helps you do 1-3 reps past technical failure plus an additional negative hold. This is the approach Yates does when people train with him; , rest pause can also be used for exercises where you can't get assistance to go past failure. I don't know the science behind it, but I'm training 4 times per week, once per body part, only 1 hour per session and the progress is really good.

HIT I’m 3 weeks in. 3x a week strength training. Same results as high volume and less trips to the gym. Mentzer was all about minimal optimal dose! Who wants to do more sets for net zero gains?! Also strength increasing. My plan is to add in fst-7 principles 6weks in for muscle burn and ROM.

Excellent. You da man. Liked. Subscribed. Notifications on.

@27:52 I started HIT training ~10 weeks ago (after not training for 20+ years) and I didn't start feeling sore or weak until about the 8th to 9th week. The exact opposite of your chart. When I was a teen I would do HVT but never HIT. In the last ~10 weeks I've seen more gains than I ever did doing HVT as a teen. Possibly HVT will become useful after my HIT newbie gains end?