Mike Mentzer Heavy Duty 2 Mind And Body Pdf
File Name: mike mentzer heavy duty 2 mind and body .zip
Mike Mentzer Heavy Duty 2 Routine
Before he can act, man must know in abstract, conceptual terms what goals to pursue and how to pursue them - and then he must proceed to act on this knowledge. It is through the volitional adherence in practice to conscious knowledge that man experiences his freedom of action.
Subconscious Motivation in Literature. Despite the considerable number of articles and books written on the subject over the last several decades, most bodybuilders today still don't know that a bodybuilding program should be geared toward the development of strength. Developing stronger muscles is a prerequisite to developing larger muscles. There is definitely a relationship between strength and muscular size. Most obvious is the fact that heavyweight lifters are stronger than lightweight lifters, and that everyone reading this who ever developed larger muscles observed an attendant strength increase.
No one who ever lifted weights grew larger without increasing his strength. It just doesn't happen. It was discovered by exercise scientists a long time ago that the strength of a muscle is proportional to the size of its cross-sectional area.
Many are still confused on this point because there are some who are smaller, i. The mistake here is in attempting to draw a meaningful comparison between two different individuals. The fact is that the man with smaller muscles will grow larger only as he grows stronger, and likewise, the bigger man will grow larger only as he grows stronger.
The "apparently" greater strength of the less heavily muscled individual can be accounted for by the presence of certain mitigating influences such as more favorable tendon attachments which give him a leverage advantage; superior neuromuscular efficiency and, thereby, greater contractile power per the same cubic volume of muscle; and, last but not least, is the fact that as a muscle becomes larger it grows increasingly distant from the bone, causing its "angle of pull" to be less efficient.
So while the muscles of the more heavily muscled individual are capable of contracting with greater force, in some cases they may not "demonstrate" as much strength - and usually for the reasons described above. Don't make the mistake of comparing yourself to others. The only person you may accurately compare yourself to is--YOU! You will grow larger only as you grow stronger. And as long as you're increasing in strength as a result of each work-out, your training program is headed in the right direction, which brings us to the subject of nutrition You will grow stronger each workout as a result of following the workout suggested in the previous chapter.
When a person grows stronger week to week, it's proof there's a positive "change" taking place inside his muscles. Since muscles, by definition, lift weights, a muscle growing stronger can't be the same muscle week to week; if it were, that muscle would be limited to lifting the same weight.
The point to focus on is that as a muscle grows progressively stronger over a period of time, it is changing during that period. I am not specifying at this moment what kind of change. For now, just remember: it is in a process of positive change. If, during this period of change, the bodybuilder continues to consume only a maintenance level of calories, by definition, he will maintain his existing physical mass; he won't gain mass, he won't lose mass, he will maintain.
It's the laws of physics, or more precisely, of thermodynamics. You can't build new muscle mass out of thin air; certain nutritional and caloric values are required. By consuming only a maintenance level of calories, the bodybuilder will be frustrating - to some degree - the needs of the growth mechanism.
He did train to failure; therefore, he did trigger the growth machinery into motion. Also, he is growing stronger; therefore, the muscle is changing. There are a few who claim that a positive calorie balance is not necessary to build new lean mass while on a body- building program.
They say that the body can literally "steal" calories from fat and shunt them to the muscles for growth. In fact, this is precisely what Arthur Jones alleged was the case when Casey Viator gained 62 pounds of lean body mass dur-ing the one-month Colorado Experiment, which I described in my last book. He postulated that the number of calories Casey consumed that month weren't sufficient to account for all of the weight gained.
Casey was not on a weight-loss or a maintenance diet. According to observers of the experiment, Jones literally force-fed Casey everything he could shove down his throat - including the kitchen sink.
It was calculated that Casey was fed only enough food calories to account for 45 pounds of lean mass increase; therefore, that 17 pounds of Casey's fat was sacrificed somehow to build the muscle. While there may be some truth to this claim, I am skeptical. So while stolen calories may account for some of the lean mass buildup, I believe that the steroids helped, too.
I conducted an experiment years ago, in which I went on a calorie-deficit, or weight-loss, diet while training without steroids, and the first week I lost nine pounds. Then I went on the same diet with steroids, and gained two pounds the first week!
Then again, the stealing of calories from adiposity would be a genetically mediated trait, and like all genetic traits, its expression i. Prior to my emphasizing the caloric dimension of nutrition to my clients, most would grow stronger, but didn't gain the mass and bodyweight they desired. Since reducing the volume and frequency of their training, and emphasizing the need for a positive calorie balance, my clients' bodyweight gains are finally keeping pace with their strength gains - and in the majority of cases, little or none of the weight gain is fat.
As mentioned earlier, whereas one, two, three or four years ago, I would only occasionally have a client gain pounds in a month, or pounds in three to four months, now it is no longer the occasional or exceptional case - it is the rule.
To do so in a method- ical and predictable fashion, start by keeping a five-day food diary. Write down everything you eat for five days; at the end of each of those days, after consuming the last bit of food for the day, sit down with a calorie counting book and tally the day's total.
At the conclusion of the fifth day, add up the five daily totals for a grand total, then divide by five, and you'll have your daily average calorie intake. If you didn't gain or lose weight during that five-day period, your daily average is also your daily maintenance level of calories. Let's assume, hypothetically, that your daily maintenance level of calories is Upon embarking on the suggested routine, make a conscientious daily effort to keep a positive calorie balance of approximately calories - but not more than - above the maintenance level.
So that you're serving the needs of the growth mechanism. The level of your strength increase will serve as a relative indice of how much growth was stimulated.
If you're only increasing a rep or so here and there, obviously there is less growth stimulation than if you're gaining in leaps and bounds. There's a little more than calories in a pound of muscle. If you are stimulating three pounds of muscle growth a week, you will require X 3, or calories per week above maintenance.
That translates to calories per day above maintenance, but you're taking in calories above maintenance. Since minus would equal 47, those 47 excess calories above growth production need would turn to fat; however, since there are calories in a pound of fat, a calorie-per-day excess would amount to only a pound of fat gained every 74 days.
If you stimulated one pound of muscle growth per week, instead of three pounds per week, you'd require 85 calories a day above maintenance; therefore, the calorie excess would amount to approximately two pounds of fat gained per month. If after two months on a positive calorie balance of per day you see fat accumulating, use your best judgment and reduce calorie intake somewhat. It has been suggested that there is a "metabolic cost" in creating new muscle, so not all the excess calories would necessarily turn to fat.
For those interested in losing fat, reduce your caloric intake by a day below your maintenance level of calories, and you'll lose one to two pounds of fat a week. And as long as you're training on a proper high-intensity program, you won't lose muscle and may even gain some, depending upon a constellation of genetic factors, none of which you can visually detect. The loss of bodyweight would have been predominantly fat, with certainly none of it being muscle, as he did grow stronger and increased the size of his arms.
This gain of muscle mass while losing fat on a calorie-deficit diet does not prove that his body stole calories from fat necessarily and shunted them to the muscles.
It demonstrates that when you're in a modest negative calorie balance, the fat can be starved sufficiently to be used for fuel, and enough nutrition provided to maintain lean mass and to allow for at least some growth production.
I told my client that as well as he did in terms of strength and lean mass increases, he most likely would have done better on a positive calorie balance. When you reach the desired weight, go into a slight positive calorie balance of or so, and see what happens. As a bodybuilder continues to gain muscle mass and bodyweight, his maintenance level of calories will go up, and weight gains will slow down and eventually come to a halt.
When you see that your weight gains have slowed down, increase the calories by to a day, and you'll resume gaining. Likewise, as a person continues to lose weight, his maintenance level goes down, and the weight losses diminish and eventually come to a halt. When that starts to happen, decrease calories by another or so per day, and the weight loss will continue.
When a bodybuilder is gaining muscle mass as well as getting stronger, he should see a reciprocally reinforcing relationship between the two. In other words, his muscle mass increases will facilitate even greater strength increases, which in turn facilitate greater growth stimulation.
If, at some point, you believe you may need more than a positive calorie balance of per day, go to or above maintenance. Be careful, however, as not too many bodybuilders will ever require that many extra calories above maintenance levels. If you grossly miscalculate on the side of a positive calorie balance, you'll know fairly quickly, of course, as fat deposition will be appreciable.
It has been suggested by most reputable nutritional scientists that when on a weight-loss program, the individual should not go below a total daily intake of calories, because it is impossible to consume a healthy, well-balanced diet below that level, and the chance of sacrificing lean mass increases. By "lean" mass, I mean not just muscle, but all organic tissue mass. In cases of morbid obesity, it may be necessary to reduce the calories even further, but then only under a physician's supervision.
The Actual Relationship of Nutrition to Bodybuilding In early I received a phone call from a young man in New Jersey who was obsessed with the idea that his lack of bodybuilding progress was due to a nutritional problem. As soon as he got me on the phone, without even announcing his name, he launched into what seemed like an endless series of questions about different supplements such as phosphogain, vanadyl sulfate, Hot Stuff and MetRx.
In the midst of this catechism, it occurred to me that since he was so confused about the subject of nutrition, it wasn't likely that he understood anything about the science of high-intensity, anaerobic exercise either. Initially, he disavowed this, exclaiming his lack of bodybuilding progress was due solely to faulty nutrition. In fact, this is rarely the case, especially in this country, where most people are not just well-nourished, but overnourished--especially bodybuilders.
Upon further questioning, I found I was right. He was violating all of the laws of nature here. He knew nothing about the principle of intensity, or the necessity of training to failure; therefore, he wasn't stimulating much if anything in the way of meaningful growth. And even if he had been, he was so overtrained from his two-hour workouts five to six days a week that his body couldn't have produced any worthwhile results whatever his diet.
I said to him, "Young fella, you remind me of the man who earnestly desires a suntan, but continues to make the mistake of going outside at midnight, then wastes thousands of dollars on different suntan lotions, thinking the next one will solve his problem.
In other words, you can't obtain a suntan sitting in front of a watt light bulb for an infinity of eternities, even if you're rubbing phosphogain suntan lotion over your entire body all the while.
Nature sets the terms. While nutrition is, of course, important in the daily life of everyone, in the context of bodybuilding, nutrition is a consideration secondary to a proper high-intensity training program. One must stimulate growth first, via the imposition of an anaerobic training stress, and then adequate nutrition must be provided during a sufficient rest period between workouts so that the growth mechanism may produce any growth stimulated by the training.
Home Welcome Consulting Articles Books.
Heavy Duty II: Mind and Body
I first got interested in bodybuilding back in , at that time Mike Mentzer was rocketing up the bodybuilding ranks. He won the Mr. Universe and became the first bodybuilder in history to get a perfect score from the judges, the next year he placed second to Frank Zane at the Mr. Olympia, some felt Mike should have won that contest. His last contest was the infamous Mr. Olympia, where Arnold himself came out of retirement, the rumor was that Arnold was tired of hearing Mike say that Heavy Duty was the only way to train, and that by beating Mike he would prove him wrong.
Mike Mentzer espoused doing just 1 hard set to failure of exercises per bodypart every 10 days or so. Duty… Read more. He previously had been spending up to 3 hours a day in the gym. The key to high-intensity training is the Stick to the basics and train Intelligently. Does it mean that everybodys different?
MIKE MENTZER HEAVY DUTY II: MENTE Y CUERPO. Copyright © "a healthy mind in a healthy body" comes to us from the age of classical. Greece, 23.
mike mentzer heavy duty journal pdf
Note: This document was compiled in memory of Mike Mentzer and to provide his fans a historical record of courses once published in the late s and early s. The opinions contained herein do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Mr. Mentzer before his untimely death, nor that of the I. General Training Guidelines General Training GuidelinesContraction ControlThere is a vast difference between performing reps fast and performing them slowly.
Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. Want to Read saving…. Want to Read Currently Reading Read.
The Heavy Duty site provides the latest information on training, nutrition and the mind's relationship to bodybuilding. Mike Mentzer Heavy Duty mike mentzer heavy duty It was going to be a revolution. For the year between the and Mr. Olympias, as high-intensity training rode the crest of its foremost adherent, Mike Mentzer, it seemed on the verge of transforming bodybuilding.
Before he can act, man must know in abstract, conceptual terms what goals to pursue and how to pursue them - and then he must proceed to act on this knowledge. It is through the volitional adherence in practice to conscious knowledge that man experiences his freedom of action. Subconscious Motivation in Literature. Despite the considerable number of articles and books written on the subject over the last several decades, most bodybuilders today still don't know that a bodybuilding program should be geared toward the development of strength.
- Полагаю, что. ГЛАВА 111 В комнате оперативного управления раздался страшный крик Соши: - Акулы. Джабба стремительно повернулся к ВР. За пределами концентрических окружностей появились две тонкие линии. Они были похожи на сперматозоиды, стремящиеся проникнуть в неподатливую яйцеклетку.