Its a foundational principle in exercise that more is better, assuming adequate recovery. Want to get bigger? Lift moderate weights for more sets of more reps. Size is a game of recovery, it's really that simple. Want to get stronger? Strength is size plus practice. Practice it more, get better. Want better endurance? Yep, more is better. With all things in athletics, if you recover fully from any two workouts, and one has more time spent on your goals, that one will be better.
My problem is with the absurd ferocity that the S&C community is pushing HIIT. Yeah, I know, most of this is on websites/books/etc dealing with men who like to lube up and flex in speedos for other men, but this shit is really starting to irritate me. Like, I'm getting angry to the point that I want to call these idiots out.
Listen, if you don't trane, HIIT is a fine addition to your routine. If you enjoy it (no one does, but maybe you're a unique flower) then all the better. Go wild. God bless. But if you're an athlete, or want to train like one, leave this shit by the wayside.
HIIT requires recovery. A lot of recovery. If you do it right and are even remotely close to the intensity of something like a Tabata, then it probably demands more recovery than any other form of exercise. But wait... Recovery is a critical component of every important fitness goal. So why in the fuck would you chew it up on an interval that probably doesn't serve your goals any better than the weight lifting you're already doing?? And why wouldn't you do aerobic work which actually develops your endurance and promotes recovery?
HIIT makes you weak. Slow steady state cardio helps you to be strong. And in a fight, I'd be happy to ask any of the prolific authors of this trite bullshit how strong I am when it's done.
You bring up a great point. On top of the lack of recovery that most people who "train" HIIT or HIT when it pertains to weight training is the simple fact that they are incapable of training at the required intensity. Most people don't have the mental will power to push themselves to that threshold. If you train at a high intensity properly, you feel extremely sick due to fatigue and CNS burnout. If you recover from it to do it 3 or more times a week then you didn't do it properly. High intensity training does work if recovery is optimized to where you have the ability to maintain the frequency. The vast majority of the people who are able to do it are enhanced individuals who sleep 8 hours a night, nap during the day, have minimal life stressors, use insulin multiple times a day to restore muscle glycogen, use HGH to enhance recovery, and use AAS to enhance protein synthesis. Dorian Yates is a prime example of this. HIT is ridiculous to be used as the prime strength training or cardio work for athletes in other sports. 
Yea, but HIIT workouts make you feel like you worked hard TODAY. Everything you say only makes sense if you are concerned with long term progress and actually reaching towards goals you may have.
I WANNA FEEL LIKE I WORKED HARD TODAY SO I CAN TELL EVERYONE ELSE NOT WORKING AS EXTREMELY HARD TODAY THAT THEY AREN'T AS HARDCORE AS ME!!!
Great points. The average fitness enthusiast loves the feeling of instant gratification. Periodized training resonates more with experienced athletes.
Sounds like an anti-Crossfit rant (not that I'm necessarily against that!).
Ironically, games oriented X fitters start to periodize their training again...
Yeah, I am now of the opinion that the weekly volume a muscle is subjected to is more important to either strength or size results than the daily volume. Since more can be done in a week than a day, so long as you don't wipe yourself out in that one day, spreading the training out is probably better for most results. HIIT reduces your ability to do that.
Angle 5 - Sounds like an anti-Crossfit rant (not that I'm necessarily against that!).
I don't think Crossfit type training is good for much except for it's own sake. As Eel alluded to, it seems that crossfit might not even be the best training methodology for crossfit....
What if your not training for an athletic event, or to be an athlete.
Is LISS still better than HIIT for health and aesthetic purposes?
vermonter -Angle 5 - Sounds like an anti-Crossfit rant (not that I'm necessarily against that!).
I don't think Crossfit type training is good for much except for it's own sake. As Eel alluded to, it seems that crossfit might not even be the best training methodology for crossfit....
I believe this to be true.
I think Rich Froning and other competitors periodize their training with strength and power cycles, and when they get closer to the Games, they start practicing the skills and exercises that might typically be used during an event.
Even some boxes will have a general warmup, followed by some strength training (e.g., 5-3-1), and end with some iteration of a typical MetCon. I believe that many boxes don't even do HQ WODs and do structured programming.
But regarding "weekly volume" vs. "daily volume", can weekly volume be seen as some sort of "Grease-the-groove" technique?
For example, instead of doing 250 pullups in a day as part of a back workout, it'd be better to do 50 reps a day (M-F), with those 50 reps spread out throughout the day to minimize fatigue, have more practice where each technique is done with the best form possible, while maintaining the same volume in a given week.
acm5060 - What if your not training for an athletic event, or to be an athlete.
Is LISS still better than HIIT for health and aesthetic purposes?
I think if you're doing nothing but training for aesthetics, then doing both is a good choice. If you're lifting a lot it might not be necessary to HIIT, or to do some modified version, like a sprint at the end of steady cardio. Changing things up is good though.
Angle 5 -vermonter -Angle 5 - Sounds like an anti-Crossfit rant (not that I'm necessarily against that!).
I don't think Crossfit type training is good for much except for it's own sake. As Eel alluded to, it seems that crossfit might not even be the best training methodology for crossfit....
I believe this to be true.
I think Rich Froning and other competitors periodize their training with strength and power cycles, and when they get closer to the Games, they start practicing the skills and exercises that might typically be used during an event.
Even some boxes will have a general warmup, followed by some strength training (e.g., 5-3-1), and end with some iteration of a typical MetCon. I believe that many boxes don't even do HQ WODs and do structured programming.
But regarding "weekly volume" vs. "daily volume", can weekly volume be seen as some sort of "Grease-the-groove" technique?
For example, instead of doing 250 pullups in a day as part of a back workout, it'd be better to do 50 reps a day (M-F), with those 50 reps spread out throughout the day to minimize fatigue, have more practice where each technique is done with the best form possible, while maintaining the same volume in a given week.
RE: Weekly volume.
First of all, who the fuck does 250 pullups a workout??
That said I think you've got the general idea but it goes even beyond that.
Let's say that doing pullups with my bodyweight happens to be my 10 rep max. Most people with a body building mentality, and an approach that emphasizes the volume of a given set and the volume of a given workout will do a set of 10, then a set of 8, and then maybe two sets of 6. Each would be to failure. They'd be pretty toast after that. They'd be sore the next day too, most likely. They'd take a week to recover and hit another pullup workout then. That's a pretty typical scenario, and a pretty realistic one too.
With a different paradigm that focuses on weekly volume, you'd avoid failure in any given workout to reduce fatigue. Maybe you have time to grease the groove in a day, and maybe not. But let's say on Monday you hit 2 x 8 with a lengthy rest period. On Wednesday you had more time, hit your 2 x 8 and took it back to 1 x 6 for a third set. Same on Friday. Much like before, this scenario would be very realistic for the very same hypothetical person, but much less typical for some reason.
Now, with the same resistance, in scenario A the person has done 30 reps in that week, and in scenario B the same person did 60.
If this person's goal was to get larger, which workout better served that goal? If this person's goal was to get stronger, which workout better served that goal? If this person's goal was to get better at pullups, which workout better served this goal? If this person's goal was superior muscular endurance in the pulling muscles.......
This is not dissimilar from a pullup workout I did myself. I went from 4 pullups to 14, nonstop in two months. My bodyweight went up as well, ultimately ending at 240. I was stronger, bigger and had better local endurance. If I had done a pull up based workout from the set/daily paradigm instead, I would not have achieved anywhere near those results.
Would it be fair to say therefore that you are a trainer and you hate the people pushing this???
mind blown 
Quoi?
"Trainers hate him/it" the click bait tagline used on all those shit get big quick marketing scams
This man maintains his body in only 8 minutes a week using a secret developed by Japanese scientists...and TRAINERS HATE HIM!
vermonter - Its a foundational principle in exercise that more is better, assuming adequate recovery. Want to get bigger? Lift moderate weights for more sets of more reps. Size is a game of recovery, it's really that simple. Want to get stronger? Strength is size plus practice. Practice it more, get better. Want better endurance? Yep, more is better. With all things in athletics, if you recover fully from any two workouts, and one has more time spent on your goals, that one will be better.Love this.
My problem is with the absurd ferocity that the S&C community is pushing HIIT. Yeah, I know, most of this is on websites/books/etc dealing with men who like to lube up and flex in speedos for other men, but this shit is really starting to irritate me. Like, I'm getting angry to the point that I want to call these idiots out.
Listen, if you don't trane, HIIT is a fine addition to your routine. If you enjoy it (no one does, but maybe you're a unique flower) then all the better. Go wild. God bless. But if you're an athlete, or want to train like one, leave this shit by the wayside.
HIIT requires recovery. A lot of recovery. If you do it right and are even remotely close to the intensity of something like a Tabata, then it probably demands more recovery than any other form of exercise. But wait... Recovery is a critical component of every important fitness goal. So why in the fuck would you chew it up on an interval that probably doesn't serve your goals any better than the weight lifting you're already doing?? And why wouldn't you do aerobic work which actually develops your endurance and promotes recovery?
HIIT makes you weak. Slow steady state cardio helps you to be strong. And in a fight, I'd be happy to ask any of the prolific authors of this trite bullshit how strong I am when it's done.
VU sir. Well FKN said.
chtdrmn - You bring up a great point. On top of the lack of recovery that most people who "train" HIIT or HIT when it pertains to weight training is the simple fact that they are incapable of training at the required intensity. Most people don't have the mental will power to push themselves to that threshold. If you train at a high intensity properly, you feel extremely sick due to fatigue and CNS burnout. If you recover from it to do it 3 or more times a week then you didn't do it properly. High intensity training does work if recovery is optimized to where you have the ability to maintain the frequency. The vast majority of the people who are able to do it are enhanced individuals who sleep 8 hours a night, nap during the day, have minimal life stressors, use insulin multiple times a day to restore muscle glycogen, use HGH to enhance recovery, and use AAS to enhance protein synthesis. Dorian Yates is a prime example of this. HIT is ridiculous to be used as the prime strength training or cardio work for athletes in other sports.VU too sir.
There is far too much sense in your post bro
You all make excellent points. It is the " HIT" training is the new " flavor of the month" club
IMHO. The challenge is as many of you have said the " form does not fit the function" .
Please don't even get me started on CF as well. Personally I think the key missing component
is in the big picture. What are the goals ? What are you training for ? lastly is it effective ,
efficient , and above all S A F E! 50 year old desk jockey has no biz doing speed dead lifts
( wtf some how those word does not go together at all!) or box jumps to failure when they
can't even do a bodyweight squat or push up because they have so many muscles imbalances
for sitting on their a$$ all day. What most of these " Hit" gurus " don't get is simple
term of cycling and planning . " I saw a guy on FB sprinting on hot coals that must build
endurance , lets all do that!!!")