H.E.L.L. Program Download

[OldGuy]

Originally Posted by SpacecityPaula

DB Good Mornings. I've seen two variations.... one with the DBs on the shoulders another with them being held at shoulder heigth. What's the correct way to do these?

Originally Posted by Leigh P.

I like the rest on rear delt personally for DB good morning but you can also do the variations at side but really this becomes almost a DB deadlift.

Is there a difference in doing them with a bar?

[Leigh P.]

From a physiological standpoint, not really, moderate muscle use difference. In the sense of a trainee putting a barbell behind their neck a bending over, lots.

I took a lot of things in mind when designing this program and making it something that most could use, especially in a execute/common sense aspect. There are certainly things that can be subbed for various reasons from general preference to equipment availability.

[OldGuy]

Hey, I have an inquiring mind. And I have done BB GM's so I don't have issues with the bar there. I will try the DB GM's as written.

Thanks.

[Leigh P.]

It was a great question, not that there are bad questions, but certainly something I could have scratched my head at in a program I read.

In general I also find when I am doing them I get a little more hamstring activation, these could be because of sheer placement comfort with the DB's over the BB.

[OldGuy]

I could imagine the shoulders rounding forward more in the DB version then the BB one. Don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing.

[SpacecityPaula]

Jeebus... those aerobic drills are killer.

[PowerManDL]

Originally Posted by Leigh P.

I wanted to get some points of view and discussion going on the program

Do you want me to be nice, or be honest? :p

Ok seriously:

1) I'm not getting the rationale for throwing in exclusively high-rep work at the beginning, with no heavy muscle-maintaining work. Given that you've got a 10-day cycle going, there's easily room to throw in even something HIT-like (ie full body, low volume, 6-10 reps) without impacting recovery too much.

2) RE: the protein cycling. That's something I've never gotten. Fix your protein at a given level and fluctuate the carb/fat as needed. I know you explained your rationale, but I'm thinking of this from a purely utilitarian and simplification standpoint....anything extra you throw in is going to be a deterrent to adherence.

3) It's good that you did include the points about managing recovery along w/ the training and diet factors. That's something that does get overlooked plenty. IMO and IME, preventing a stress response while dieting is one of the most important things you can do, which means manipulating training as a function of diet instead of the other way around.

My basic template for such things, assuming fat loss is the primary goal, is to move calories as low as you can get away with, incorporate refeeding strategies as needed, and otherwise limit/restrict activity to the bare minimum needed. This might mean you could handle 1-3 "moderate" strength sessions, 1-3 intensive anaerobic sessions (the "metabolic disturbance" stuff), and pretty much however much LI-aerobic stuff you'd care to throw in since it really won't impact recovery. Basically you just have to watch the frequency and volume of your taxing modalities, and adjust them according to the feedback from the individual. It's really easy to get beat up, and the urge to do too much is just as powerful in dieters.

[Leigh P.]

Originally Posted by OldGuy

I could imagine the shoulders rounding forward more in the DB version then the BB one. Don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing.

It certainly is a possibility but I don't think you would see a high increase in DB vs. BB. More so if you are going to round with one I imagine you will follow the same suit in the other.

[Leigh P.]

Originally Posted by PowerManDL

Do you want me to be nice, or be honest? :p

Ok seriously:

1) I'm not getting the rationale for throwing in exclusively high-rep work at the beginning, with no heavy muscle-maintaining work. Given that you've got a 10-day cycle going, there's easily room to throw in even something HIT-like (ie full body, low volume, 6-10 reps) without impacting recovery too much.

2) RE: the protein cycling. That's something I've never gotten. Fix your protein at a given level and fluctuate the carb/fat as needed. I know you explained your rationale, but I'm thinking of this from a purely utilitarian and simplification standpoint....anything extra you throw in is going to be a deterrent to adherence.

3) It's good that you did include the points about managing recovery along w/ the training and diet factors. That's something that does get overlooked plenty. IMO and IME, preventing a stress response while dieting is one of the most important things you can do, which means manipulating training as a function of diet instead of the other way around.

My basic template for such things, assuming fat loss is the primary goal, is to move calories as low as you can get away with, incorporate refeeding strategies as needed, and otherwise limit/restrict activity to the bare minimum needed. This might mean you could handle 1-3 "moderate" strength sessions, 1-3 intensive anaerobic sessions (the "metabolic disturbance" stuff), and pretty much however much LI-aerobic stuff you'd care to throw in since it really won't impact recovery. Basically you just have to watch the frequency and volume of your taxing modalities, and adjust them according to the feedback from the individual. It's really easy to get beat up, and the urge to do too much is just as powerful in dieters.

*Rubs Hands Together* Good questions Matt, pretty much the ones I knew would be thrown most at me.

High reps-I wanted this program to be useful as a break in program for "newbies" as well as present a different challenge to perhaps more advanced trainees. The thought isn't too different than Cosgroves approach in NROL which was something I always enjoyed about that program. The first 30 days of this program is really vicious on your muscular endurance but also really primes you for the rough lifting that is coming ahead, the main goal to prevent injury. You take a newbie in training and put them on a lower rep/higher set scheme and it just leads to problems more than not, even if in between a higher rep layout. So the minimum LBM loss you COULD occur on that higher rep pattern for 30 days is far outweighed by what I consider the "priming" phase.

Obviously this is a generic program and generic programs can't fit everyone but I certainly think it comes close to everyone being able to gain something from it and a large something at that. In general the fat loss approach is diet down, lift harder, diet down more, lift harder, train harder. Its a pattern that does work and this program does follow but with the intentions of setting you up for as much protection as possible from yourself.

Protein Cycle-I new this would be the chief "WTF?" about this program. Being that I work on a caloric and nutrient cycle I felt the need to keep the protein really high on lower days, this is larger due to the women that will be using this program with a lower body weight. A woman at 125 on a low day will get 1125 calories. That's vicious. You take the protein level really high and you are creating a body feeding frenzy on amino acids, raising body temperature levels (assuming quality of protein use of course), helping with fullness, the list goes on. That amount of protein is just not needed on a lifting day when she will be getting 1750 calories to use. Her gram amount of protein on that day will be high enough for repair but she will also have room for a nice carb load.

Some have looked at it an gone "well I mean really its carb cycling isn't it?" Yeah it's all of it. You cycle fat, carbs and protein, nothing stays exactly the same, as it shouldn't in my mind because each day brings a different need and response of the body. I also didn't want to put too much of a focus of carbs yet again being a reason I can't achieve my body comp.

Why take out certain carbs?

Taking away these carbs allows for a almost guarantee that the trainee will get in the really need nutrients in this program (fruit and greens) and the best of veggie starch sources.

'My basic template for such things, assuming fat loss is the primary goal, is to move calories as low as you can get away with,
incorporate re-feeding strategies as needed, and otherwise limit/restrict activity to the bare minimum needed"

That's pretty much the template here as well, its just moving the deficit lower with activity rather then calories. The way this program is laid out the caloric intake needed to achieve maintenance is pretty high.

Overall what is this? Is this some earth shattering everything is about to change program? Of course not. It is though more than just a program but an ideal and/or style of training that values eating more and training hard more so over eating less and training to get by. I have found the latter when done wrong leads to more damage and more of a headache especially for those who are involved in the never ending dieting down process. The average person I get contact from doesn't eat near enough for their training. So I take the problem and reverse it, make you train enough for what you eat. That reversal can bring about a great metabolic advantage...when done right. Can it be done wrong? Very much so. There are always pros and cons. But this program can do a good amount for any trainee in fat loss.

As a trainer I keep seeing over and over again two things.

-Those not achieving results because they are overstressing their body with exercise and lack of nutrition intake.

-Those not achieving results because they keep being taken out of the game due to injury. Usually this is not of a "freak" nature accident, but due to overuse patterns,training styles, too much cardio and isolation work.

To me this program solves most problems in one shot and I believe in works well in both its scientific approach and ease of application.

[PowerManDL]

Originally Posted by Leigh P.

*Rubs Hands Together* Good questions Matt, pretty much the ones I knew would be thrown most at me.

High reps-I wanted this program to be useful as a break in program for "newbies" as well as present a different challenge to perhaps more advanced trainees. The thought isn't too different than Cosgroves approach in NROL which was something I always enjoyed about that program. The first 30 days of this program is really vicious on your muscular endurance but also really primes you for the rough lifting that is coming ahead, the main goal to prevent injury. You take a newbie in training and put them on a lower rep/higher set scheme and it just leads to problems more than not, even if in between a higher rep layout. So the minimum LBM loss you COULD occur on that higher rep pattern for 30 days is far outweighed by what I consider the "priming" phase.

Ok, if that's directed at a raw-noob that changes the equation a little bit and at least makes more sense in my head now.

Protein Cycle-I new this would be the chief "WTF?" about this program. Being that I work on a caloric and nutrient cycle I felt the need to keep the protein really high on lower days, this is larger due to the women that will be using this program with a lower body weight. A woman at 125 on a low day will get 1125 calories. That's vicious. You take the protein level really high and you are creating a body feeding frenzy on amino acids, raising body temperature levels (assuming quality of protein use of course), helping with fullness, the list goes on. That amount of protein is just not needed on a lifting day when she will be getting 1750 calories to use. Her gram amount of protein on that day will be high enough for repair but she will also have room for a nice carb load.

Oh your reasoning makes sense on paper, I'm just looking at it more from the adherence standpoint.

If you take someone new, and a chick especially, then you've got a whole 'nother set of issues to deal with that aren't automatically apparent to those of us that have been doing this for awhile.

While on paper it's at least a well-reasoned approach, I'd be very worried about someone new even digesting all the information, let alone being able to apply it day to day.

It tends to be a lot easier if you just give them one (maybe two, but preferably one) goal to shoot for, let them handle that, then move on to more complex things if/when needed.

Again, assuming we're talking raw-noob here, they can get discouraged by things as easy as "multiply your weight by 12, set your protein to 1g/lb, eat 100g of carbs, and fill in teh rest from fat". It might seem silly, but to someone new and getting bombarded with all this stuff for the first time, I can see how it would be boggling.

Somebody that's got a handle on it, from understanding the macros and being able to create meal plans in Fitday and whatnot will be fine. But it's the ones just learning and starting to develop eating habits that I'd worry about. Simpler is almost always better in those cases.

Some have looked at it an gone "well I mean really its carb cycling isn't it?" Yeah it's all of it. You cycle fat, carbs and protein, nothing stays exactly the same, as it shouldn't in my mind because each day brings a different need and response of the body. I also didn't want to put too much of a focus of carbs yet again being a reason I can't achieve my body comp.

Why take out certain carbs?

Taking away these carbs allows for a almost guarantee that the trainee will get in the really need nutrients in this program (fruit and greens) and the best of veggie starch sources.

Again, I can't really argue with the rationale. It's the practical aspects considering the target audience that would make me think twice.

Overall what is this? Is this some earth shattering everything is about to change program? Of course not. It is though more than just a program but an ideal and/or style of training that values eating more and training hard more so over eating less and training to get by. I have found the latter when done wrong leads to more damage and more of a headache especially for those who are involved in the never ending dieting down process. The average person I get contact from doesn't eat near enough for their training. So I take the problem and reverse it, make you train enough for what you eat. That reversal can bring about a great metabolic advantage...when done right. Can it be done wrong? Very much so. There are always pros and cons. But this program can do a good amount for any trainee in fat loss.

Oh I agree with you there. Women especially if you let them will spend 20 hours a week in the gym, 15 of that on the treadmill, while eating 1000 cals/day. Then wonder why they aren't getting anywhere.

Not to mention a whole slew of bodyfat issues. You've got to be a psychologist more than a nutritionist or trainer in most cases, sadly.

They get down into diet hell where it's a self-feeding cycle of needing to eat more and do less, but as soon as the scale goes up or the jeans start getting tight, they're right back to square one.

As a trainer I keep seeing over and over again two things.

-Those not achieving results because they are overstressing their body with exercise and lack of nutrition intake.

-Those not achieving results because they keep being taken out of the game due to injury. Usually this is not of a "freak" nature accident, but due to overuse patterns,training styles, too much cardio and isolation work.

To me this program solves most problems in one shot and I believe in works well in both its scientific approach and ease of application.

You know it's funny you bring this up, because in looking at "standard" contest preparation for any given physique athlete, the expectation is lots of time in the gym, lots of time doing cardio, and very low-calorie and food restrictive diets. I decided to challenge the dogma and do things differently, based on input from our group over on BR.

So far the results in my admittedly limited test cases have been very good, with the girls doing things like eating candy and drinking beer up until ridiculously close to the show (and only then stopping simply due to the need for water manipulation) and still being in show condition. Also other neat things like setting PRs on the way in. My gf set a bench press PR (she hit 77.5kg easy, with room in the tank for more) around 5 weeks out, was still able to hit her DL PR in terms of weight (~335) around the same time frame.

[Lost Dog]

My off days are usually work days. I could never eat that much P on a work day. I'd be sweating all day long.

I think a lot of people would find that much protein unpleasant. I like it, except for the above "issue." I think you should just make it an option for those who want an extra boost of fat loss.

This last issue might just be my own thing, but I workout at the end of the day, and if I had to change my workout plan from heavy cardio to light or from lifting to cardio (or suddenly take an off day), I've now become non-complaint for the whole day. I just spend the whole day eating the wrong amounts and macros.

Again, that's just me. As long as you know there are people like me out in the world...

[LWilson212]

PowerManDL-

Drinking beer as part of contest prep!?!?! Where do I sign up?

Leah

[LisaS]

Originally Posted by Lost Dog

This last issue might just be my own thing, but I workout at the end of the day, and if I had to change my workout plan from heavy cardio to light or from lifting to cardio (or suddenly take an off day), I've now become non-complaint for the whole day. I just spend the whole day eating the wrong amounts and macros.

this is me as well - I may walk in the morning but workouts are at the end of the day. What I've decided to do is just reckon my "eating day" to begin with post-workout and extend the next 20-24 hrs.

[Leigh P.]

Originally Posted by PowerManDL

Somebody that's got a handle on it, from understanding the macros and being able to create meal plans in Fitday and whatnot will be fine. But it's the ones just learning and starting to develop eating habits that I'd worry about. Simpler is almost always better in those cases.

I think you raise a good point there, maybe I could come up with a Hell lite.

So far the results in my admittedly limited test cases have been very good, with the girls doing things like eating candy and drinking beer up until ridiculously close to the show (and only then stopping simply due to the need for water manipulation) and still being in show condition. Also other neat things like setting PRs on the way in. My gf set a bench press PR (she hit 77.5kg easy, with room in the tank for more) around 5 weeks out, was still able to hit her DL PR in terms of weight (~335) around the same time frame.

You know I have this one client that really responds well to binge drinking. Seems to time it just right and gets the best results.