Bodybuilding Forums

Hey all,

New to this site and forum, some interesting information. Some goes against what I've known or done, but I do have an open mind. I am thinking of starting THT, but I am a little confused on the THT versions. What are the differences between 3.0 and 2.0 and what would 3.1 mean?

Also, if training Mon-Fri, one body part per day, that's a whole lotta time between the next workout for that body parts. I guess I need some information from people who have done this and if that much rest will still provide gains?

And, lastly, how would this compare to something like Body For Life, seems similar except the amount of rest between workouts.

Thanks!

bulldogs wrote:Hey all,

New to this site and forum, some interesting information. Some goes against what I've known or done, but I do have an open mind. I am thinking of starting THT, but I am a little confused on the THT versions. What are the differences between 3.0 and 2.0 and what would 3.1 mean?

Same thing, different revisions. There's no real difference between them other than they're iterations of the same program, and there isn't any one of the three 5-day splits that's superior. It does, however, give you 3 handy options, so you can do, say, 2.0 for a cycle, take a week off, then do 3.0 the next cycle, then do 3.1, or whatever you please.

bulldogs wrote:Also, if training Mon-Fri, one body part per day, that's a whole lotta time between the next workout for that body parts. I guess I need some information from people who have done this and if that much rest will still provide gains?

YES, providing that much rest WILL still provide gains. The inverse is also true, not providing that much rest will stunt your gains. The name of the game with the 5-day split programs is volume. You are doing 6-7 sets to positive failure. This literally wrecks the muscle - microtrauma on a cellular level induced by lactic acid. The muscle needs time to rebuild to where it started, biological processes then cause it to overcompensate and grow bigger, and then if no new stress is induced, those same processes will break down the excess growth. You've probably heard of over-training, which is what happens when you induce new stress (i.e. wreck the muscle again) before it has a chance to overcompensate from the last round of damage. That new amount of mass and strength becomes the new baseline when you hit the muscle again, so if you want to make gains, that amount of mass and strength absolutely must be more than the previous workout. Overtraining (i.e. not enough time between rounds on the same muscle group) will at best cut your gains short, and at worst have you re-stressing the muscle at progressively lower baselines of mass and strength.

Allowing the full week to recover, barring health issues, you should be able to use progressive overload each week to ensure gains. This is what actually induces the whole microtrauma-overcompensation-atrophy process we just discussed. Your body does not want to grow muscle. It is not advantageous from an evolutionary standpoint to be muscular, so your body isn't designed to do that easily. It only overcompensates because you push it beyond what it's capable of, and it only overcompensates as little as it possibly can. Progressive overload takes advantage of that tiny little adaptation, and then signals the muscles that nope, sorry, this is not going to be sufficient, and interrupts the cycle as that atrophy back to the beginning is just starting to happen, or ideally right before. Each week, each set, you need to aim for at least one more rep than the prior week. Every. Single. Set. When you can do 12, it's time to up the weight to continue progressing, then force yourself to add more reps each week, until you hit 12 again. When I say add more reps, we're not talking week 1 you pick a weight you can do 10 reps, so week 2 you do 11. We're talking week 1 you pick a weight that rep #9 the muscle feels like it's going to rip itself clean off your body, and rep #10 is not humanly possible - and then week 2 you get that 10th rep in, for more of that happy feeling of OMG-my-bicep-is-going-to-explode (or whatever muscle group happens to be being hit that day).

These are the two most basic principles of THT in and of itself. For more detailed explanations, visit [url]MuscleHack.com[/url] where you can get the free e-book with all the information, and there is a multi-part write-up on the entire program that Mark wrote around the same time that the 2.0 cycle was re-released.

bulldogs wrote:And, lastly, how would this compare to something like Body For Life, seems similar except the amount of rest between workouts.

Thanks!

Two words - WAY CHEAPER.

Body-for-Life is Abbott's program. Abbott makes some decent stuff (ProScience CLA, Creatine, and EAS 100% Whey come to mind), and they make some complete and utter garbage (like EAS ProScience Push which is basically KoolAid with creatine, and Myoplex Original, with enough sugar to ensure an insulin spike to go along with your protein). Body-for-Life is anchored around these products. You have to buy them, or by definition you aren't doing the program. The only supplements you'll see Mark recommend are Whey Protein Isolate, Creatine Monohydrate, L-Glutamine, and ZMA. Some of us on the forum will recommend other things, too - like you'll pry my BCAAs out of my cold dead hands, some guys go for the AAKG (which I'm gonna try next cycle), and some folks don't have the get-up-and-go without their caffeine - but that's all option and up to you individually. Abbott's one-size-fits-all approach doesn't much exist for us in terms of diet and supplementation.

Additionally, some of Body For Life's recommendations are flat illogical. For example, for chest, they recommend flyes and one-armed flyes as among the best to sculpt your chest. There is no truth in this. At the point where the entire muscle should be engaged, producing maximum strain (and thus maximum microtrauma, which in turn leads to maximum growth), with flyes, there is no strain on the pectoral at the top of the rep - it all transfers to the triceps. Don't even take my word on that one. Grab a pair of dumbells, lay on a bench, and hold it right at the top, weights together. You'll feel tons of stress on your arms and shoulders, and virtually nothing across the chest. Looking at their weight training program, that's a lot of cardio. Cardio is extra muscular trauma at the cellular level for absolutely nothing. It is depleted glycogen for the sake of depleted glycogen. Cardio is part of a cutting strategy, and that's all it is. There is zero reason - as in none whatsoever - as someone whose interest is to add muscle mass to do as much cardio as they recommend. I can't think of a reason for the two light sets of 12 at the end of each session they recommend, either. The program looks like loads more work, and I'm just not seeing anything in it that makes it remotely more effective.

Thank you!!!!
I have read on the forum how helpful you have been to others, well, you have certainly helped me. I do need to lose some weight (fat), had some medical issues and gained about 50 lbs over my ideal weigth. I am just about done healing now and need to get back in shape. I think I'll try the TSPA to help woith that, and put on some of my lost muscle as well.

man, this was good stuff, JoH.
I put my TV on mute and read it.

The one study about ZMA that endorsed it is said to be flawed and that the subjects were probably deficient in those 3 nutrients (mag, zinc, B6). Any attempt to duplicate the findings didn't work because the subjects weren't deficient.