View Full Version : Are we really just rebottling old wine?

08-28-2006, 03:46 PM
Although I believe that changing terminology can help us see a concept/idea in a new light, sometimes I wonder if we are getting too wrapped up in creating jargon and simply rebottling old wine?

For example:

*Why isn't "HIT" just called the "doing-as-many-as-you-can-method"?

*Is "the repetition method" another name for "HIT"?

*Isn't "GPP" what we used to call "getting in shape"?

*Isn't GTG ("grease the groove") really just another way of saying "do it a lot and often"?

08-28-2006, 04:36 PM
You can't market it unless it has a cool name :D

08-28-2006, 04:37 PM
I agree, but people don't want to hear that it's the tried and true that works. That's boring. They want the Next New Thing, even if it's just a new name for something.

08-28-2006, 05:31 PM
True, but people have been doing this since language was created, and it does have its purpose: it makes things more specific. HIIT could be called the "do as many as you can then rest for 30 seconds then do it again" method, but that is general and wordy (even more than "high intesity inteval training!")

08-28-2006, 07:55 PM
I think we need to get rid of all the terminology and just say "Lift heavy weight = get strong"

08-28-2006, 08:31 PM
I like how people get to name an exercise (that's been around forever) after themselves.

08-28-2006, 08:38 PM
Yeah, but I think Matt Dimel and JM Blakely are allowed. :D

08-28-2006, 08:43 PM
HIT would be do more than you can

08-28-2006, 09:10 PM
Yeah, but I think Matt Dimel and JM Blakely are allowed. :D

Ok I'll give ya that!

Clifford Gillmore
08-29-2006, 06:06 AM
People ask me what I do at them gym.

'Pick something heavy up and put it back down.'