Anyone follow Mike Mentzer's muscle building theory?

6tren

Member
He talks about doing only 1 set to failure per body part and taking more rest days between workouts.

Any thoughts?
 
I like high volume workouts personally. I get great results from it too. If my CNS gets fatigued I take a rest day, but usually I can train high volume, intense, balls-to-the-wall style training 5-6 days a week

Note: I train strictly for hypertrophy now. If I was interested in strength training I'd probably train different, but the high volume style suits me, builds good muscle endurance and cardiovascular endurance, and burns a lot of calories

I just don't like the feeling of leaving the gym like I still had more to give. I want every last drop of adrenaline to be utilized
 
High intensity training is awesome. But a single set to failure is not ideal, nor is it actually how mentzer trained for most of his career, the "1 set is all you need" was the bastardized extreme version.

Mike got a remarkable amount right, way ahead of his time, but the glorified extreme of what he promoted (1 set to failure) was never ideal or optimal.
 
It worked for me until I reached my 50's, then it's an injury waiting to happen and 100% will for older lifters. One of my biggest challenges is having to choose between "heavy duty" (which has always worked well beyond other methods for my body) and certain injury (100% with high intensity, heavy, low rep approach even with enough rest once the lifter hits 50). I have chosen to change my approach to avoid injury which means I now use higher rep, lower weight, moderate intensity methods just short of failure. It works, albeit not as effectively as heavy duty training, at least for me. But its better than being injured...

As an aside, I have always believed that Mentzer's approach works best for endomorph and mesomorph body types, who gain mass and strength easily but struggle more with cuts (like myself).
 
Last edited:
Back
Top