A Response to the Butch Leibowitz Article - "One Set to Failure. The Lazy Man's Way to a Crappy Physique"
Iron Man Magazine - October 1997
By Roger Schwab

Dear Butch:

The following is a response to your final catharsis - One set to failure The Lazy Man's Way to a Crappy Physique.

I would guess that I am one of the "Gilligan's" you refer to who chose the one set to failure route you so passionately disdain. And I also must admit that at 5' 10" and 178 lbs, at 52 years of age, I will not be entering or winning any of the top I.F.B.B. contests of which you seem so enamored. However, at my age having tried just about every conceivable routine from my late teens through mid-twenties, including competitive Olympic and power lifting (a Pennsylvania State Bench Press record in 1964; 365 lbs. at 180 1/4 lbs. bodyweight with a two second pause at the chest) and having paid heavily in shoulder and spinal injuries, I do feel competent to speak of my experiences.

Subsequently, training to me has been about strength - getting stronger, sensibly without producing injuries. Making every workout progressive, looking for that extra rep. I found out quickly, that for me, there was an inverse relationship between the intensity of my training and the amount of exercise I could tolerate. Every time I reduced that amount of weekly exercise, the stronger I became. It was obvious to me that exercise performed intensely was capable of stimulating strength increases and that adequate rest allowed that response. Common Sense! Perhaps not after reading your article. Split routines were not the solution because while individual muscle groups might recover quickly, my overall system took days to recover from hard, heavy exercise, sometimes many days. Understanding this "cause and effect" of exercise has enabled me to actually get stronger into middle age, training injury free.

On my 50th birthday, I performed 6 chin ups with 100 Ibs. strapped to my waist in perfect form. My body fat has stayed below 9% since 40 years of age with no conventional aerobic work. Cardio-vascular benefits result from moving from machine to machine with little or no rest. A stress test at 50 years old placed me in the top 1% of my age group on the treadmill, though I have spent less than an hour on a treadmill in my life. My blood pressure was 110 over 76, resting pulse 54 and cholesterol 170. I spend less than one hour per week training. There is no need for "periodization." If I train hard with plenty of rest between workouts, I'm ready for the next one - stronger. Of course, there are no drugs here, I haven't even tried creatine monohydrate. And although 178 Ibs. is puny in your world, my dad at my age was my height at 150 Ibs. I'm hesitant to mention this since genetic potential seems far outside the scope of your writing. My view is if you are training hard, you literally cannot stand a lot of exercise. At least if strength gains are your goal and if you are not taking "growth drugs".

Other Iron Man readers might find the following incidents interesting.

1. Preparing for the 1971 Mr. America Contest, Casey Viator squatted 13 repetitions with 502 lbs. after "pre-exhausting" his legs with 20 repetitions with 750 lbs. in the leg press and 20 repetitions with 225 lbs. in the leg extension machine. All three exercises, leg presses, leg extensions and squats were performed in succession, with no rest between sets. In twenty five plus years since, I am not aware of anyone who has even approached this type of intensity. Obviously, there was no further hip and thigh work performed during that workout or that week. This type of training must be experienced to be understood. It would have been far easier to reduce the intensity, cut out the last couple of reps and add more sets. It's basically quality vs. quantity. The pro's with long muscle bellies have their choice. They will respond either way. And only if one's confidence, social capabilities and, "joie de vivre" precipitously fall off outside the gym, is there a realistic choice.

2. In 1980 when Mike Mentzer was training for the Mr. Olympia competition, I happened to view one of his workouts at the then Gold's gym in Venice, California. He was working on arm crosses (pec-deck flyes in bodybuilding circles) with the entire weight stack on one of those old blue Nautilus machines that you "like to puke on". Close-by an aspiring young bodybuilder (you, perhaps) was performing endless sets of cable crossovers and was pumped to the max (albeit with a weight he probably could have worked with all day). When Mentzer started the set, all eyes were on him and anticipation filled the room Even our aspiring bodybuilder ceased the cable crossovers in mid-set. Mentzer did 8 full reps from full stretch to full contraction to muscular failure. Slow reps, no heaving the weight. When he finished, he was sweating freely, his chest was flushed and he was breathing heavily. There was no second set. Most of the trainees just stood there sensing that they had witnessed a strong statement. Our young bodybuilder, momentarily Stunned, grasped the handles of the cable crossover and proceeded with the near zero intensity exercise which he had previously been doing.

And finally, just for the record, a bit of bodybuilding "background". During the late 1970's and early 1980's, I was the head judge of the professional division of the I.F.B.B. and judged several Mr. Olympia Contests. Here are some reflections.

1. Casey Viator, in my view, was larger, heavier with bigger muscles in 1971, drug free and trained by Arthur Jones on Nautilus machines than he ever was while competing in the I.F.B.B., even at his "chemical best" in the 1982 Mr. Olympia which I judged where he placed third (I placed him second). Yes, he had, as you said Butch, gone back to more sets, more exercises and free weights at this time. Big Mistake!

2. Boyer Coe. I judged him throughout his career - a great physique and an intelligent man. But, in my opinion, Boyer was at his best very early in his career, at the time of his Teen Age and Mr. America Victories. Boyer, I believe, once said in print that the "muscle mags" and "fans" expected body builders to improve annually, which Boyer did not consider realistic. And in fact if you look at today's pro's, there is no one muscularly improving by leaps and bounds except Dorian Yates. And though I don't know him, my guess is that his thinking is much closer to a quality approach than to a quantity approach.

So there is another view-point out there, Butch. I respect your opinion and your right to genuflect over Nasser's "friggin" chest. There just happens to be another way for men (and women) who want to train hard, who have the mental capacity to realize that "some can and some can't" get huge, muscularly. And those who can, will get there through hard, smart sensible training regardless of the tool (barbell - or machine). Those people who would also like to have a life outside of the gym; those who have places to see, books to read and people to meet. And that quality time in the gym allows that quality of life outside in the world - injury free, drug free, physically and mentally strong.

Roger Schwab