You and I probably read the same Bodybuilding magazines, websites
and online discussion groups. I’m sure you’ve noticed how much people
talk about “High Intensity Training” or “HIT“. What I notice is that
nobody has a clear definition of what HIT training is, exactly. There’s a
general sense that it involves “working heavy” and the influence from
Jones/Mentzer leaves most thinking it involves fewer sets than other
training, but there is no litmus test to determine if one workout is HIT
and another is not.
There is some sleight of hand going on here. Let’s just back up and look
at strength training over the last century. Leaving aside all the fancy
names people (including me) have come up with to describe their “system”
of training, what is the one indispensable element of muscle building?
Heavy weights. You have to lift heavy weights or simulate the lifting
of heavy weight in order to build bigger muscles.
Why?
Your body is designed to respond and adapt to stress. Walk into a hot
room and you sweat so the evaporation will cool you. Step outside into
the sunlight and your light skin will adapt by darkening with a tan. Shine
a light into your eye and your pupil will reduce its aperture. And …
(here’s the relevant example) force your muscles to do extra work and
they will adapt by growing bigger. How do you force your muscles do
extra work? By lifting weights that are heavier than your muscles normally
lift. Stated another way: you make your muscles work at a higher
level of intensity. Nothing new there … it’s been like that for a million
years! - long before HIT, PFT, SCT and any other training “system.”
Muscles get bigger and stronger as an adaptation to increased demands
made of them. Your brain will only send the signals to grow more muscle
if there is a good reason for it. That reason must be that your body
needs more muscle in order to survive all the hard work it is doing.
Normally, your body does not have to lift heavy weights. When you do
lift them … your body starts to grow new muscle.

Every Bodybuilding Program is
“High Intensity Training”

So where does that leave us? Well, if you want to make a science out of
Bodybuilding and weight training, you first need to define your terms. So
just WHAT is Intensity? In optics it’s candlepower or lumens. In electricity
it’s amps. In acoustics it’s decibels. Each of those terms has an exact
definition so when you say, “Light bulb A is brighter than light bulb B.”
there is an empirical way to show that it is true. There is a measurement.
Ever read the ads for weight training systems? They make giant claims
about being the “ultimate” the “most intense” the “best” system possible.
Now ask yourself, “Measured how?” “By what standard measure of
comparison is Workout X more intense than Workout Z?”
Hey, when compared to not working out with weights at all, ANY training
system is “high intensity.” And that’s why every training system can
claim some success, because when a guy goes from doing no weight
lifting at all to simple exercises with modest weights … he’ll get some
results. But only for a relatively brief period of time.
There is one crude definition of intensity floating around Bodybuilding. It
comes from Arthur Jones and Mike Mentzer. (Who both did a lot to
improve the science of Bodybuilding.) Basically, it says you must exert
“100% of momentary effort”. This is a start. But if you exert 100% effort
on a day when you are coming down with the flu, have seriously overtrained
or are just worried about some work-related stress … your 100%
effort won’t trigger any new muscle growth because it will be less than
LAST workout’s 100% effort. So the Jones/Mentzer definition of intensity
is subjective, not objective. Science needs objective definitions. It
needs numbers … not feelings.
To get consistent progress you need a better way to measure the intensity
of every exercise. You need a better way to ensure progressive overload
of your muscles. And you need a better way to avoid overtraining.