T Nation

Extreme HIT 30-10-30 Metabolic Challenge

Note. Officially starting Monday. This was a trial to try to dial in weights properly. Too heavy on super incline. (Substituting for shoulder press which I don’t have). Video got cut off before biceps. https://youtu.be/Q7SBf-sI0y0

1 Like

image

My waist is 35.5

1 Like

I just subscribed to your YouTube. You’ve got a lot of great training videos and probably the best home gym I’ve ever seen!

1 Like

Thanks. I do actually train people from my home studio. (When I’m not in lockdown)

1 Like

Don’t forget waist size.

I will be taking twice daily InBody body composition readings.

Your study, but if it were me, I’d do both waist and InBody, just because you can always choose to ignore a measurement. But you can never go back and get it after the fact.

1 Like

Point taken @average_al. 35.5 for me… will update my son’s later. :slight_smile:




2 Likes

ricky,

I like your form on each of the six exercises. What was your time for the entire workout?

1 Like

Video was 13 min and 16 seconds… still struggling with moving 1-2 pos/neg but I’m hoping this speed is nice balance? so grateful for your feedback… I’m actually happy to pay for your coaching… just let me know… richard@sustainablesuccess.ca (feel like I’m getting something for nothing here)

Your technique and speed in the 1/2 part looks fine to me. Smooth and controlled .
What was your impressions of the workout ?

Mark

Not finding it as difficult as some others are describing metabolically yet but I see that coming as exercises are added and time is reduced.

Although I didn’t always do so, I fairly frequently employed close to rush factor even when training to failure. I didn’t think of it that way, but when videotaping workouts I watch the video afterwards in order to count tul/reps. I guess I’m fortunate to have enough equipment to pre load everything and not have to wait in line behind anyone.

I have maintained but not put on significant muscle in last 2 years I’ve owned Inbody device though I have increased weights. The prospect of actually gaining significant muscle in the next 34 days is exciting whatever that might be so I’m trying my best to follow program to the letter.

image

Starting point above… showing where I was 2 years ago, a few days before 35 day HIT 301030 and going forward each day…(these are morning weighings only)

2 Likes

My updated results
image

My son’s updated results
image

To be contrarian, I might add that from the included Dr. Darden’s chart entitled “Gains Over the Last 8 days, “ shows fluctuations in weight. I do not have any facts or logic to ascertain if these weight fluctuations were muscle tissue, or water fluctuations due to glycogen usage and replacement thereof. The final increase of measured size indicates a gain, however without reported strength increases. The same weights were reported to be used, as perhaps more repetitions were performed to indicate strength gains.

Another point of contrarianism, is that metabolic conditioning must meet certain goals. The purpose of metabolic conditioning is to maximize the efficiency of a particular energy system to perform better in sports or develop your desired physique. 90 seconds TUL exercises followed with 20-25 second rest intervals will target the endurance/aerobic pathway at the expense of the alactic and glycolytic pathways. Training the aerobic system via circuit resistance has been proven to extract lesser cardiovascular results than other methods.

I don’t know if they drank all the Plazma and other supplements recommended but it seems there’s so much drinking of them through out the workout day and days off combined with what they regularly ate and drank that it would be tough to figure that into weight gained or water gained?
Scott

1 Like

It is interesting to see the amount of variation in the numbers over a short stretch of time. That reinforces my concerns about the value of comparing single measurements that were widely separated in time. A 3 or 4 lb increase in SMM, if real, would be a significant accomplishment. But it looks like you can get that much variation in the numbers just from measurement noise, hydration level, glycogen variations, etc.

BTW, that is more of an observation than a criticism. I think a lot of body fat measurements are subject to the same degree of fluctuation. I know that I see a lot of daily fluctuation even in my morning weight measurement. I think you’ll be better served to make a plot of the data over the course of the experiment, and look at the trend line.

Do you have one of the more expensive InBody models?

1 Like

Your observations are imo dead on. Having done almost daily readings for about 2 years, I can cherry pick a start date and an end date to make me look really good, or really bad… unless there is very significant changes that can be maintained over time, they should be taken with several grains of salt. Water fluctuates tremendously and muscle is 70% water. Doesn’t actually mean it’s not accurate per se. Bodybuilders seek to manipulate water content to “peak” for a competition, knowing that too little and they will look “small” and too little and they will look “smooth”… their goal is to find the balance. so they can look “big” and “cut”. But what the inbody has taught me, is that this isn’t just appearance… muscles do fluctuate a lot from one day to the next, and even during the same day. Some muscle “growth” is sometimes referred to as “edema” (I think that’s the proper term) which is really just water retention. I see that the day after a hard workout, particularly involving heavy leg work… if I took it at face value, it would indicate that I should work out the very next day, as my muscles appear to have not only recovered but grown significantly… also, note that creatine, steroids, and I think plazma and mag-10 work, in part by driving water into the muscle… here’s the part I’m still trying to sort out… chicken or egg… does actual muscle growth cause water retention, or does water retention appear to show muscle growth? Incidentally, my InBody 270 model and even the more expensive models “measure” water but “calculate” fat… so, on days when my water is high, fat will look low and vice versa… I know that water can fluctuate by multiple pounds daily, but not fat, so this is a shortcoming of the measurement… I have speculated that comparisons of days where my water is the same or very close are more indicative of true growth… but going back to chicken or egg dilemma, I’m not sure. Finally, I also wonder about whether fibre distribution can change without actually having bigger muscles, i.e. more faster twitch vs slower twitch as response, but still maintaining overall same amount of muscle. My body (everybody’s) looks for ways, I believe to avoid making the metabolically expensive adaptation of adding more actual muscle tissue? Enough of my rambling… thanks for your input

3 Likes

What I would add to above are

  1. The value of before and after photographs, but again, depending on water retention… yet again, it is another “control” to compare to.

  2. Increases in weights/reps/tul would be another “control” but again, our body can be extremely efficient, and the form/speed/etc. have to be identical…

  3. I am really excited about doing this with my son, as he serves a bit of a “control” to see how my age 62, differs to his at 41. We should have similar genetics, but he is only half me, and I believe his genetics are superior to mine based on his mother and her relatives.