Mike Mentzer and High Intensity Training

Nothing polarizes proponents of weight training and bodybuilding as much as the figure of Mike Mentzer. Mentzer was a professional bodybuilder who won the Mr Universe title in the 70s and the heavyweight category at the Olympia. He last competed in the 1980 Olympia and was favoured by many to win. This was the year of Arnold's comeback as part of his preparation for "Conan the Barbarian" and the Austrian Oak won amidst controversy. Mike Mentzer came fifth, despite being in the most awesome shape of his life. He retired from professional bodybuilding in disgust.

Mentzer continued to write his "Heavy Duty" column in "Ironman" magazine and produced books and other media promoting his "Heavy Duty" training system - high intensity training in which the volume of training is reduced, rest periods are increased, and heavy weights are favoured, often using intensity increasers like pre-exhaust, negatives, and forced reps.

Mentzer likened the training stimulus to other stressors on the body, including exposure to the sun. Too much sun exposure results in sunburn and the destruction of skin rather than the desired tanning effect. Too much volume in weight training, coupled with insufficient rest, leads to over-training and muscle atrophy.

Mentzer recommended training infrequently and he advised cutting down the volume, often as low as one all-out effort working set for a particular body part. Some of Mentzer's protocols were adopted successfully by seven-time Mr Olympia Dorian Yates.

Mentzer has come in for a lot of criticism, however. Charles Poliquin, for one, says that it is impossible to completely exhaust all available motor units with just one working set. Another problem is Mentzer's insistence on taking every set to failure and beyond - something which has been shown to reduce testosterone levels and thus decrease the anabolic environment needed for muscle growth.

Mentzer was right, however, to reduce training time (anything above 45-60 minutes generally results in an increase in cortisol levels which results in catabolism and gluconeogenesis). He was right to indicate that many bodybuilders trained too frequently and were thus prone to over-training syndrome.

During his professional career, Mentzer initially followed the high volume training associated with Arnold et al. He later identified the need for less frequent training but seem, in his later writings, to have reduced training frequency ad absurdum.

If Mentzer's insights are married with the high volume approach and a middle ground is sought his ideas start to bear fruit. Ideally, training protocols need to be varied, periodised, so that high intensity, low volume (in terms of total reps performed) work gives way to periods of lower intensity (load) higher volume work. Rest intervals between sets, number of sets and reps, and number of training days are all factors that need to be manipulated in order to ensure maximal training effects.

In general I like to change training protocols every 6 weeks or so (for example, six week periods of accumulation, increasing volume; strength work at higher intensity, lower over-all volume, and longer rest intervals; fat stripping periods of high volume, higher reps and incomplete rest between sets etc).

It is best to avoid the polemic on either side of the high intensity vs high volume debate. We need aspects of both, and more, for continuous progress. Mentzer was a thoughtful, intelligent, trainer who may have had personal and political reasons to wage war against the protocols promoted by the bodybuilding "authorities". He offers insights into some of the pitfalls that have always plagued bodybuilding - such as the psychological reasons for too frequent training, but his own views often need tempering.

The key is to understand how each stage of training relates to specific goals. Understand what you are trying to do and how to get those results safely and effectively. There is no perfect programme that can continue to reap rewards indefinitely. One of the most interesting things about training (and a real pain to those who are mentally lazy) is that it has to keep evolving if the body is going to continue adapting.

Training Infrequently

When I first started training with weights I was influenced by the high volume approach advocated by, amongst others, Arnold Schwarzenegger. I found myself in the gym for two to three hours six (sometimes even seven) times a week.

Initially I made some progress. Mostly this was due to moving from a sedentary to a very active lifestyle and the caloric deficit created by hours of training. After a few months, however, the progress stopped/ By now I was psychologically addicted to training and found myself going to the gym even when I knew further training would be counter-productive.

During this period I discovered the writings of Mike Mentzer whose "Heavy Duty" training system (High Intensity Training) recommended brief but extremely intense bouts of exercise followed by long rest periods. I tried this for a while but found training for only twenty to thirty minutes once every four to seven days unfulfilling. Whilst Mentzer might have commented that this was due to a psychological need, I was never fully convinced of his infrequency principle.

Over time I completed my Personal Training course with YMCA F.I.T. and continued to read as much as I could on weight training: Denie's"Psycho-blast", Stuart McRobert, Charles Poliquin, John Hansen etc.

The approaches and theories are somewhat conflicting and bewildering. Up to a point you can achieve results with any of them. Some are safer than others, and this leads to the possibility of long-term progression. Others are more suitable to experienced trainers or elite body builders. Stuart McRobert's approach is extremely sensible and he provides excellent advice on technique and steady progression, but, for me, his approach is mechanical and uninspiring. I also found the rate of progression a little too slow - although I agree with using very small weight increments for progression at times.

In my own training I have evolved a somewhat eclectic approach that focuses primarily on compound exercises (squats, dead lifts, bench press, bent over rows, chin ups, dips, and bar bell biceps curls). I now train each body part for 4-8 sets once per week (formerly I could do anything up to thirty sets for chest twice a week). I currently use a three day split, although recently whilst setting up the F.I.S.H. studio I've been limited to two workouts at home and have been surprised at the growth achieved with relatively lights weights and lots of rest.

So Mentzer had a point about infrequency but perhaps too much of a point. I find that resting at least 48 hours between workouts is keeping me growing and that three (sometimes four) workouts per week allows me the time to hit each body part effectively and does fulfill my (pathological?) need to train fairly frequently. Taking seven (or even up to fourteen) days of rest between workouts seems excessive and may actually interfere with the habituation which is essential to continuing with an exercise programme.

I still throw in the odd super-set, pre-exhaust, post-exhaust, drop set or rest-pause, but whereas before I would use these techniques at every workout I now use them only occasionally (often not for weeks). They have become plateau busters and novelties that keep me interested. Sometimes they are time savers and enable me to do an effective and intense workout in under half an hour.

In conclusion, for drug-free body-building (from my experience) it is effective to train three to four times a week with at least one whole day off in between workouts. If you are forced, through circumstances, to take an extra rest day don't be disheartened or frustrated. See this as an opportunity to recover and grow. This cognitive re-structuring has been a key to my recent progress - being able to see rest days in a productive light.