Answer to negative feedback system questions
Q: What studies or subjects have you read, conducted or observed that support this claim?
Originally Posted by Songsangnim
A: I’ve been around for a long time. As far back as I remember, it was Arthur Jones who strongly endorsed the value of Negative resistance exercise back in the early seventies. I read all of his work. There may have been others before him who touted it but I’m not sure. In other chapters I speak about my years of bodybuilding competition, education, and personal experience with what I call, the new system. I speak about first hand experiences with my own version of negative applied resistance training and the results that I have achieved as otherworldly. I for one have been in the trenches. My training is so brutal that it scares people. No one trains harder than I do. I follow my own system to the letter. I'm not just a talking head.
Q: Hence the "only" term?
A: The negative “only” aspect, as it is integrated systematically with conventional exercise.
Q: However your chapter is entitled negative only.
A: This does not mean to imply a restriction to negative only, but instead refers to the negative aspect or component that is implimented into the rest of the training system.
Q: This is a myth. The "pump" does NOT cause muscle growth. Food, rest and proper training does.
A: I never said that the pump causes muscle growth. If that were the case, a guy could get huge by doing a Friday night arm pump before going clubbin' for the ladies. A pump absolutely does not cause muscle growth, but as I said, the pump experienced from proper training is a happy side effect and an indicator that proper growth stimulation has occurred, that is as long as you dont put the carriage before the horse.
Q: Yet the only programs you outline here are exercises with weights/machines
A: Because the negative only movements are integrated with conventional exercises whether they be done with weights or machines, in giant set fashion.
The negative only movement is performed last. By then the target muscle will have been “pre-exhausted” by the preceding movements. All the resistance possible at this point will not be that much, nor does it have to be. Kinda like “tastes like butter but its not!” Training in this fashion derives the maximum benefit possible from negative only resistance training.
Q: However unless both training partners are familiar with each other's style and both are serious about training, injury could easily occur. Moreover what if you train alone (as I do)?
A: Negative only resistance can be adjusted by the training partner to accommodate for the normally existing natural strength curves; This feature in itself makes this form of negative only application superior to the conventional method.
Injury is not an issue with this form of training either. By the time you get to the negative portion of the giant set, a “weak link” will have been created whereby even when training with maximum intensity, while the resistance used by now though minimal, is adequate and effective. The maximum benefit is now yielded from negative resistance training.
There are ways to implement negative resistance when training alone. For some select movements, I use a cheating method followed by accentuating the negative. Nothing-new here, but you can get creative.
Q: Isolation and dangerous exercises. This does not really support your point.
A: What I am saying is that compound exercises are potentially the most dangerous exercises when the focus is merely to move the weight from point A to point B. There’s a lot more to it. I’ll throw up some more chapters that will bring everything together.
Q: Food and rest are much more important for growth. You can do all the negative training you want, but you will not grow without THOSE "requisites"
A: You are absolutely correct! That goes without saying and I certainly address the importance of nutrition very thoroughly in other chapters; but I am speaking strictly about training here.
Q: Certain exercises can not be cheated in this fashion though. Single limb yes, like curls. But "cheating" with heavy squats or deads is more likely than not to land you in the hospital.
A: You are correct again. I would never recommend anything other than positive/negative (conventional) training for dead lifts; and not even go to complete failure at that! As for legwork, I never do negatives. The way the program is set up, it’s plenty brutal as it is. I do however accentuate the negative as much as possible.
Q: Proof for this assertion or claim? Just so I understand correctly, you are telling us that a 150 training partner can provide all the resistance on his own that somebody who can bench 400 lbs (with corresponding squat and deadlift weights) can handle?
A: Yes I am, but this is explained more thoroughly in another chapter that I will post soon that explains how a “loop” is form that creates an environment most conducive to the negative only aspect of the new system outline.
Thanks for the great questions!!
I'm a bobybuilder not a journalist
Goes to prove that i don't have ghost writer
Originally Posted by sigl
I'm a bodybuilder not a journalist
Goes to prove that i don't have ghost writer
Originally Posted by sigl
Answers to your questions
“While some authorities were able to recognize its value, no one really succeeded in harnessing its proper applications.”
--Who were/are these authorities and what are their applicable credentials?
A: Arthur Jones and Mike Mentzer for two.
“Negative only resistance uniquely contributes significantly to the enhancement of the intensity of exercise by imposing a workload on the muscles that is not possible to achieve with any other method of training.”
n Just because the weight of the load is increased in comparison does not necessarily apply to the amount of force is needed if the movement of the resistance is altered.
A: Exactly! And this is the crux of the new system in that a negative feedback “loop” is created whereby the resistance load for the negative resistance exercise become much lighter than would otherwise be necessary with conventional negative resistance protocol, while yielding the maximum benefits possible from negative resistance training. I detail this in one of the chapters.
“Because negative only resistance enables a muscle to utilize more weight than it would be capable of otherwise, it’s dynamic forces it to work harder thus recruiting a greater number of available muscle fibers. This negatively enhanced overload causes the muscle to adapt with increases in strength and size.”
n Such a statement needs statistical, clinical or physiological results to be accredited.
A: Statistical? Clinical? Hey I’m a Chiropractor not a scientist, sorry to disappoint; but consider this, after having completed a series of exercise after which a trainee would typically cease to continuing to do more exercise, wouldn’t it make sense that intensity would be enhanced, and that an additional number of muscle fibers be recruited, by the additional workload imposed by the inclusion of a negative only resistance set at the end of a giant set? It worked for me; my previously “spindly” looking arms became bulbous, and very quickly, drug free.
“This last point serving to reflect a running theme of this journal in that a single set of any exercise cannot sufficiently engage enough muscle fibers to adequately stimulate muscle growth, negative only or otherwise; multiple sets being a requirement for growth.”
n This goes against many of the hypertrophy proven theories of modern training. You either need to reconsider this statement, define what you consider a ‘single set’ or research the ‘twenty rep squat’ method.
A: I talk a lot more about this in another chapter. What I am saying here is that after having completed only one set, or even one series of exercise, the target muscle will not yet have reached what I call “threshold”. In other words, it is not until subsequent “rounds” of exercise that a muscle becomes “primed” enough, to build up to a complete crescendo of muscle stimulation capability. This is not to mention the needed connective tissue preparation for the workload used building up to the performance of the final sets. One single set is self-limiting, and stops way short of achieving this no matter how intense it is.
“Fourth, there is a lack of variable resistance as to adjust to the fluctuation of momentary strength levels (more on this later).”
--Did you ever consider that the force applied by the muscular system is not consistent throughout the entire flexion/extension of a compound movement?
A: Ahh! But with partner applied resistance adjusting to the natural strength curves it is!
“Giant sets provide the perfect “bridge” connecting positive and negative only exercise; their combined applications reciprocally enhancing the muscles responsiveness to both.”
--Are you making up terms? Could you define/restate this?
A: A “bridge” meant to describe the integration of conventional and negative only resistance exercise and the magnified value of their combined power.
“With the new system, by the time you are ready to perform the set of negative only exercise, the target area will have been already fully prepared to take on the rigors of high intensity negative only training and able to derive the maximum benefits from it.”
--What are you considering the maximum benefits? Doesn’t that depend on one’s goals for the training? No goals or ANY background information has been discussed on who this training is directed to/for!
A: For those who are open minded and just want to get huge as safely, quickly, and as “economically” as possible.
“As we engaged into each gut busting rep, the bar would more often than not come crashing down uncontrollably. This method was already lacking two of the necessary major requirements for muscle growth. Not only did we not experience a pump of any kind with this method, but also there was no muscular soreness present afterward either.”
--Pump and soreness are in no way EVER considered “two of the necessary major requirements for muscle growth.”
A: Of course they are. Muscular soreness, although it occurs more in some areas than others is certainly an “indicator” of growth, but like a “pump” certainly doesn’t cause it.
At this point I am going to stop posting questions and comments except two last questions…
1.) Can you please post your own credentials and a reference system for the information this is “based” on?
A: I covered that a little. Other chapters reveal more as to the whys and wherefores.
2.) Are you available to further discuss (not defend) this article online?
A: Of course I am.
Thank you very much for your intelligent questions, your time and your consideration.