Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 45

Thread: Negative or positive ?

  1. #1
    Soon to be lean... Joe Black's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Cambridge, England
    Posts
    10,936
    From Chris Mason's article it got me thinking about the negative part of a exercise motion.....

    What part stimulates the most muscle fibres...

    The negative or the positive part of the movement..

    I remember when I used to buy musclemag I am sure I read that the negative stimulated much more but then again it was musclemag...

  2. #2
    Senior Member Cackerot69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Moisturizing kimpy's face.
    Posts
    2,744
    "To examine the effect of specific concentric and eccentric training on muscular strength following an initial standardized period of excessive training, shoulder extensors and flexors were tested. The shoulder is a joint particularly susceptible to injury and requires a specific strength training program. For a period of 12 weeks, subjects performed training, including concentric and eccentric actions. Thereafter, they were divided into three groups that performed specific 12-week programs, including either concentric (C-E/C), eccentric (C-E/E), or a combination of both concentric and eccentric exercises (C-E/C-E). Following the initial period of training, significant increases (p < 0.05) in performance were observed for all experimental groups. The C- E/C group showed significant increases (p < 0.05) in performance after 24 weeks of training, especially at high concentric angular velocities. However, the C-E/E group showed significant increases (p < 0.05) only in their eccentric moments. No significant differences were noted for the C-E/C-E group. These findings seem to partly confirm the mode- specificity principle, as only the concentric-specific training program improved concentric and eccentric strength. Moreover, the velocity- specificity principle was strongly supported."

    so, basically, eccentric training will increase your strength in the eccentric portion of the lift, but not so much on the concentric. but, concentric training will increase both.

  3. #3
    Moderator Adam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    5,720
    Heres a seminar by Arthur Jones which explains alot about negatives. If you dont want to listen to the whole thing watch the little video. I found the seminar very informative http://www.cyberpump.com/arthur/arthur3.html
    Best Meet @ Lifts@181:...............Best gym lifts
    Squat...- 403..........................Squat....- 395 w/belt
    Bench...- 303..........................Bench....- 300....Paused in meet - 281
    Deadlift.- 503.....Unofficial 513...Deadlift..- 490
    Total....- 1,203...IPF Class II......All done raw, Touch'n go bench

    "Only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly" Robert F. Kennedy

    "A man can fail many times, but he isn't a failure until he gives up"

    "However beautiful the strategy you should occasionally look at the results" John Berardi

    Powerlifting Westside Style

  4. #4
    Player Hater PowerManDL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    Posts
    7,850
    Originally posted by Cackerot69
    "To examine the effect of specific concentric and eccentric training on muscular strength following an initial standardized period of excessive training, shoulder extensors and flexors were tested. The shoulder is a joint particularly susceptible to injury and requires a specific strength training program. For a period of 12 weeks, subjects performed training, including concentric and eccentric actions. Thereafter, they were divided into three groups that performed specific 12-week programs, including either concentric (C-E/C), eccentric (C-E/E), or a combination of both concentric and eccentric exercises (C-E/C-E). Following the initial period of training, significant increases (p < 0.05) in performance were observed for all experimental groups. The C- E/C group showed significant increases (p < 0.05) in performance after 24 weeks of training, especially at high concentric angular velocities. However, the C-E/E group showed significant increases (p < 0.05) only in their eccentric moments. No significant differences were noted for the C-E/C-E group. These findings seem to partly confirm the mode- specificity principle, as only the concentric-specific training program improved concentric and eccentric strength. Moreover, the velocity- specificity principle was strongly supported."

    so, basically, eccentric training will increase your strength in the eccentric portion of the lift, but not so much on the concentric. but, concentric training will increase both.
    That study deals with performance, i.e., strength gains. For those concerned with hypertrophy, negative exercise is almost assuredly the better protocol, when used properly.

    Since training for strength/performance is a whole different ballgame than training for hypertrophy, this study isn't necessarily relevant.

    All the best,

    PowerMan DL

  5. #5
    Moderator Adam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    5,720

    Question?

    Even if your concentric strenght did not increase while doing negatives you would still get hypertrophy and then you could adapt your CNS to get strong really quickly on the concentric, Is this right?
    Best Meet @ Lifts@181:...............Best gym lifts
    Squat...- 403..........................Squat....- 395 w/belt
    Bench...- 303..........................Bench....- 300....Paused in meet - 281
    Deadlift.- 503.....Unofficial 513...Deadlift..- 490
    Total....- 1,203...IPF Class II......All done raw, Touch'n go bench

    "Only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly" Robert F. Kennedy

    "A man can fail many times, but he isn't a failure until he gives up"

    "However beautiful the strategy you should occasionally look at the results" John Berardi

    Powerlifting Westside Style

  6. #6
    Proud Father Maki Riddington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Vancouver, B.C.
    Posts
    5,323
    Here is a study that states otherwise.
    On concentric vs eccentric strenght and the carryover.

    This study examined the role of high forces versus metabolic cost in the adaptations following strength training. Ten young, healthy male and female subjects trained one leg using concentric (CL) and the other using eccentric (EL) contractions of the quadriceps muscle for 20 weeks. EL used weights which were 35% higher than those used for CL. Isometric strength, and the length:tension and force:velocity relationship of the muscle were measured before and after training. Muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) was measured near the knee and hip using computed tomography. Increases in isometric strength were greater for CL compared to EL, the difference being significant with the knee at 1.57 rad (90 degrees) [mean (SD), 43.7 (19.6)% vs 22.9 (9.8)%, respectively; P = 0.01]. Increases in isokinetic strength tended to be larger for EL, although the differences were not significant. Significant increases in CSA occurred near the hip for both EL and CL.
    Maki Fit Blog

    At Large: Optimize Your Body | Dynamic Conditioning |
    My articles on Wannabebig

    "Soli Deo Gloria"
    "Test all things; hold fast what is good.": 1 Thessalonians 5:21

    "I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do--this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.
    So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God's law; but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? Thanks be to God--through Jesus Christ our Lord!"
    Romans 7:14-25

    "Judo is not about strength. Yet in the learning curve, all Judokas get strong. Only with time do you learn where to apply that strength."
    The Art of Judo

  7. #7
    Administrator chris mason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Posts
    12,732
    Negative only training will induce a directly proportional gain in the positive phase of the lift contrary to what Cack's article says. The article is flat wrong. If you do not believe that, you are entitled to your opinion. However, as usual, I recommend that you give it a try and see for yourself. Just make sure you give it a fair try by adhering to the suggestions in the article with regards to frequency and sets. Negative only training will also induce both gains in strength and size. If you induce size in the fashion of stimulating your myofibrils to increase in size, you will also induce greater strength. If anyone says any differently, they either do not understand the previous statement, or they are wrong.

  8. #8
    Wannabebig Moron The Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    226
    Originally posted by chris mason
    If anyone says any differently, they either do not understand the previous statement, or they are wrong.
    I agree with what you're saying, to an extent, Chris. But can't we please leave statements like that out of posts? That's the kind of statement that will make people attack you. The longer I've been in the iron game, the more I've come to understand that a closed-minded statement, no matter how correct or incorrect, will only ilicit negative responses from readers.

  9. #9
    Proud Father Maki Riddington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Vancouver, B.C.
    Posts
    5,323
    Hi Chris,I bet you just couldn't hold back any longer
    Anyways here is a study advocating what Cack was quoting in the above.

    I beleive what Chris says but I'm posting this so you can see they're both sides to the argument.


    Med Sci Sports Exerc 1995 Jun;27(6):868-73

    Muscular adaptation to concentric and eccentric exercise at equal
    power levels.

    Mayhew TP, Rothstein JM, Finucane SD, Lamb RL

    The effect of training with concentric and eccentric contractions on
    fiber hypertrophy and isometric torque production was investigated in
    20 healthy subjects. One group (eight female and two male subjects)
    performed concentric contractions of their quadriceps femoris muscles
    at an intensity of 90% of their maximal concentric power. The other
    group (six female and four male subjects) performed eccentric
    contractions at the same relative power level. Both groups exercised
    three times per week for 4 wk at a constant speed of 60 degrees.s-1
    on a Kin-Com dynamometer. Needle biopsies were obtained from the
    vastus lateralis before and after the exercise program. Fiber-type
    differentiation was performed using a myosin ATPase stain at a
    preincubation of 10.5. Maximal isometric knee extension torque was
    also measured before and after the exercise program. An analysis of
    covariance was used to determine whether there were significant
    differences between the exercise groups in: 1) the post-exercise
    fiber areas and 2) maximal isometric torque (MIso), while controlling
    for initial differences.

    Results showed a significant difference
    between the Type II fiber areas (P < 0.01) and the MIso (P = 0.01).
    These data indicate that, when exercising at the same relative power
    level, a subject performing concentric contractions will show greater
    muscle hypertrophy and improve in MIso production more than a subject
    training with eccentric contractions.
    Maki Fit Blog

    At Large: Optimize Your Body | Dynamic Conditioning |
    My articles on Wannabebig

    "Soli Deo Gloria"
    "Test all things; hold fast what is good.": 1 Thessalonians 5:21

    "I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do--this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.
    So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God's law; but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? Thanks be to God--through Jesus Christ our Lord!"
    Romans 7:14-25

    "Judo is not about strength. Yet in the learning curve, all Judokas get strong. Only with time do you learn where to apply that strength."
    The Art of Judo

  10. #10
    Player Hater PowerManDL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    Posts
    7,850
    Originally posted by mac sloan
    Here is a study that states otherwise.
    On concentric vs eccentric strenght and the carryover.

    This study examined the role of high forces versus metabolic cost in the adaptations following strength training. Ten young, healthy male and female subjects trained one leg using concentric (CL) and the other using eccentric (EL) contractions of the quadriceps muscle for 20 weeks. EL used weights which were 35% higher than those used for CL. Isometric strength, and the length:tension and force:velocity relationship of the muscle were measured before and after training. Muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) was measured near the knee and hip using computed tomography. Increases in isometric strength were greater for CL compared to EL, the difference being significant with the knee at 1.57 rad (90 degrees) [mean (SD), 43.7 (19.6)% vs 22.9 (9.8)%, respectively; P = 0.01]. Increases in isokinetic strength tended to be larger for EL, although the differences were not significant. Significant increases in CSA occurred near the hip for both EL and CL.
    Ok well, with a SD of nearly 20% on the CL group, I can't say I'd place too much faith in that particular measurement......

    However, without knowing the set volume and overall loading patterns of this study, I'd hesitate to give any judgment regarding the results.

    Basically, all it says is that isometric strength appears to be greater with the CL group, isokinetic strength was roughly the same, and hypertrophy was the same-- in other words, the concentric loads produced greater ability to hold a weight-- which makes sense if you think about it. Isokinetic strength is essentially "non-functional" in terms of everyday usage; you can't do a deadlift or a bench press isokinetically.

    Again, it boils down to the fact that there is NO one superior means of training-- all ways of training that aren't just stupid can have a place in an athlete's training regimen, provided that means of training is used to optimize the goal at hand.

    All the best,

    PowerMan DL

  11. #11
    Player Hater PowerManDL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    Posts
    7,850
    Originally posted by mac sloan


    Med Sci Sports Exerc 1995 Jun;27(6):868-73

    Muscular adaptation to concentric and eccentric exercise at equal
    power levels.

    Mayhew TP, Rothstein JM, Finucane SD, Lamb RL

    The effect of training with concentric and eccentric contractions on
    fiber hypertrophy and isometric torque production was investigated in
    20 healthy subjects. One group (eight female and two male subjects)
    performed concentric contractions of their quadriceps femoris muscles
    at an intensity of 90% of their maximal concentric power. The other
    group (six female and four male subjects) performed eccentric
    contractions at the same relative power level. Both groups exercised
    three times per week for 4 wk at a constant speed of 60 degrees.s-1
    on a Kin-Com dynamometer. Needle biopsies were obtained from the
    vastus lateralis before and after the exercise program. Fiber-type
    differentiation was performed using a myosin ATPase stain at a
    preincubation of 10.5. Maximal isometric knee extension torque was
    also measured before and after the exercise program. An analysis of
    covariance was used to determine whether there were significant
    differences between the exercise groups in: 1) the post-exercise
    fiber areas and 2) maximal isometric torque (MIso), while controlling
    for initial differences.

    Results showed a significant difference
    between the Type II fiber areas (P < 0.01) and the MIso (P = 0.01).
    These data indicate that, when exercising at the same relative power
    level, a subject performing concentric contractions will show greater
    muscle hypertrophy and improve in MIso production more than a subject
    training with eccentric contractions.
    Ok, this is a slightly different proposal--

    They are referring to *power* output, not work or force. Power output is force times velocity, or work with respect to time; in other words, speed is a key component. As a rough example, a power clean with 225 lbs can be completed in .5 seconds, whereas a deadlift with the same weight may take 1 or 2 seconds to complete-- the power clean has a higher power output even though the same weight was moved.

    It has been shown that high power outputs have the ability to stimulate hypertrophy as well, not to mention the obvious gains in strength. This explains the muscle hypertrophy in Olympic weightlifters that rarely if ever train with reps outside the 1-3 range.

    In this study, for example, it is hard to use movements with high power across the negative phase of any lift; and with explosive movements used, I'd find it very believable that FT hypertrophy and strength was improved by the concentric lifters.

    All the best,

    PowerMan DL

  12. #12
    Player Hater PowerManDL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    Posts
    7,850
    Originally posted by chris mason
    Negative only training will induce a directly proportional gain in the positive phase of the lift contrary to what Cack's article says. The article is flat wrong........
    If you induce size in the fashion of stimulating your myofibrils to increase in size, you will also induce greater strength. If anyone says any differently, they either do not understand the previous statement, or they are wrong.
    Ok, negative-only training does stimulate greater protein breakdown, and thereby hypertrophy, but it doesn't necessarily improve strength. The article, in fact, was not an article, but a peer-reviewed experiment-- what's given is actual observed and reproducable fact.

    You are correct in noting that increasing the number of myofibrils via hypertrophy will increase strength-- but here's the issuse: negative-only training causes little increase in *myofibrillar* hypertrophy. Negatives stimulate a whole mess of biochemical activity that results in *sarcoplasmic* (or non-contractile) hypertrophy. It's all about specificity. You're not exactly wrong, per se, just "out of context."

    The fact is that hypertrophy stimulated by concentric-type strength-oriented movements will stimulate functional, contractile (myofibrillar) hypertrophy, whereas slower movements emphasizing negative-type contractions tend to stimulate non-functional sarcoplasmic hypertrophy. And think about it: bodybuilders are huge, muscular beasts, but can't nearly lift the weights that an Olympic lifter can. Then again, an Olympic lifter can move tremendous weights, but have little in the way of hypertrophy.

    And again, this isn't to say that there isn't *some* carryover between the two-- eccentrics build some strength, and concentrics can build some size. Its just that the correlation isn't 1:1 by any means.

    All the best,

    PowerMan DL
    Last edited by PowerManDL; 03-12-2001 at 02:13 PM.

  13. #13
    Soon to be lean... Joe Black's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Cambridge, England
    Posts
    10,936
    Thanks to everyone for replying !

    Gettin Bigger : Thanks for the cyber pump link... I wacthed the movie clip on negatives for the football played who could not chin, and mangaed to in a small amount of time by training in a negative fashion..

    I am really getting into Arthur Jone's stuff now and am gonna be trying to read of much of it as I can..

  14. #14
    Administrator chris mason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Posts
    12,732
    ROLE OF MUSCLE FIBER DAMAGE

    There is now convincing evidence which has shown the importance of eccentric contractions in producing muscle hypertrophy (15,24,45,46). It is known that eccentric contractions produces greater injury than concentric or isometric contractions. We also know that if you can induce muscle fiber injury, satellite cells are activated. Both animal and human studies point to the superiority of eccentric contractions in increasing muscle mass (24,45,46). However, in the real world, we don't do pure eccentric, concentric, or isometric contractions. We do a combination of all three. So the main thing to keep in mind when performing an exercise is to allow a controlled descent of the weight being lifted. And on occasion, one could have his/her training partner load more weight than can be lifted concentrically and spot him/her while he/she performs a pure eccentric contraction. This will really put your muscle fibers under a great deal of tension causing microtears and severe delayed-onset muscle soreness. But you need that damage to induce growth. Thus, the repeated process of injuring your fibers (via weight training) followed by a recuperation or regeneration may result in an overcompensation of protein synthesis resulting in a net anabolic effect (12,31).
    -----------------------------------------------------

    The above is an exerpt from: http://home.hia.no/~stephens/hypplas.htm

    Please check out the rest of the article. This means you, Powermandl. What makes you think that negative training will cause growth other than that of the myofibrils? What exactly would it stimulate? Would it stimulate mitochondria? No, (not to any greater degree than any standard anaerobic exercise) because it is not aerobic in effect. How about capillarization? Not any more than standard weight training. Sarcoplasm you say. Why? Why would celluar fluid be stimulated to a greater degree with negative training? Short term, maybe, due to the greater damage incurred, you may get some edema, but not long term to any special degree. How about glycogen? Well, to the degree that you incresed your myofibrils and increased the need for ATP I suppose so. But again, not to any special degree. How about fat deposits? Well, not unless you are eating too much. So, in conclusion, I must say that your opinion here is unfounded and illogical.

    A bodybuilder cannot lift the poundages that an Olympic lifter can in their respective sport because they do not train with those specific lifts and therefore never develope the necessary skill to perform them at a high level. A 250 lb bodybuilder, if he trains heavy, can very likely squat and or bench press a weight that is quite comparable, if not greater than the similar bodyweight Olympic lifter. That is because he practices those lifts. The difference in the Olympic lifter is due to skill (read nervous system adaptation), genetics (higher percentage of fast twitch fibers, and the ability to stimulate greater numbers of those fibers at a given time), and the explosive nature of the lifts they perform. Most bodybuilders don't use their lower body to help thrust up an overhead press and then drop beneath the weight to help complete the lift. Bodybuilders also train in such a fashion that they stimulate more of the "non-contractile" elements of their muscles. This leads to larger, but not necessarily stronger muscles. THE FACT REMAINS, THAT IF A MUSCLE GROWS DUE TO AN INCREASE IN THE SIZE OF THE MYOFIBRILS, AS OCCURS DURING SHORT DURATION, HIGH INTENSITY EXERCISE, IT HAS ALSO GOTTEN STRONGER. PERIOD. END OF DISCUSSION. HIGH VOLUME TRAINING WILL STIMULATE EXCESSIVE CAPILLARIZATION AND MITOCHONDRIA WHICH WILL RESULT IN GROWTH, BUT NOT AS GREAT OF AN INCREASE IN STRENGTH. HIGH VOLUME TRAINING CAN ALSO STIMULATE THE MYOFIBRILS, BUT AT THE RISK OF THE INABILITY TO RECOVER FROM SAID TRAINING. I AM 100% CORRECT, AND YOU ARE NOT.

  15. #15
    Senior Member Cackerot69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Moisturizing kimpy's face.
    Posts
    2,744
    your article must be defective in some way.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    27
    Chris Mason yelled, "HIGH VOLUME TRAINING CAN ALSO STIMULATE THE MYOFIBRILS, BUT AT THE RISK OF THE INABILITY TO RECOVER FROM SAID TRAINING. I AM 100% CORRECT, AND YOU ARE NOT".

    So if I am correct you are saying that high volume training runs the risk of delaying recovery.

    Higher volume can promote recovery.

    References to be added..........

  17. #17
    Wannabebig Moron The Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    226
    Chris, you're wrong about bodybuilders being able to do the same as olympic lifters on exercises that the bodybuilder is proficient in. Olympic lifters are, in my opinion, the most amazing strength athletes on earth. These guys do full depth squats that most bodybuilders can't quarter squat. They military press weights that bodybuilders can't even comprehend. Bodybuilders, as a whole, have very weak lifts compared to olympic lifters. Look at the records held by olympic lifters. It's absolutely incredible. There aren't any bodybuilders that are hauling the same stuff. Hell, Ben Johnson (who is a sprinter, not an OL) used to move around squatting weight at a full depth that most bodybuilders can't handle with a full ROM on an angled leg press!

  18. #18
    Porn Star YatesNightBlade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Northern England
    Posts
    2,028
    I agreed with you Cobra ..... except for the ROM bit. I know lots of bodybuilder that couldn't possible go any deeper when they squat ... me included, but Olympic lifters are in a league of their own when it comes to power. Some of them guys are like 11 stone.
    Last edited by YatesNightBlade; 03-13-2001 at 02:00 AM.
    * * * * * * * * *
    Yates

    hard core n. 1 irreducible nucleus. 2 colloq. a the most committed members of a society


    'Over thinking, over analyzing separates the body from the mind'

  19. #19
    Player Hater PowerManDL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    Posts
    7,850
    Originally posted by chris mason


    <snipped>

    Please check out the rest of the article. This means you, Powermandl. What makes you think that negative training will cause growth other than that of the myofibrils? What exactly would it stimulate? Would it stimulate mitochondria? No, (not to any greater degree than any standard anaerobic exercise) because it is not aerobic in effect. How about capillarization? Not any more than standard weight training. Sarcoplasm you say. Why? Why would celluar fluid be stimulated to a greater degree with negative training? Short term, maybe, due to the greater damage incurred, you may get some edema, but not long term to any special degree. How about glycogen? Well, to the degree that you incresed your myofibrils and increased the need for ATP I suppose so. But again, not to any special degree. How about fat deposits? Well, not unless you are eating too much. So, in conclusion, I must say that your opinion here is unfounded and illogical.


    ****The fact remains that the sarcoplasm (the semifluid interfibrillar substance) and non-contractile proteins that don't contribute to muscular force, can contribute *greatly* to hypertrophy-- this is what I referred to as "sarcoplasmic hypertrophy." Its non-functional, and it is largely what is stimulated by negative-type training. The article you posted, and the link in fact, contained nothing to contradict that fact.

    A bodybuilder cannot lift the poundages that an Olympic lifter can in their respective sport because they do not train with those specific lifts and therefore never develope the necessary skill to perform them at a high level. A 250 lb bodybuilder, if he trains heavy, can very likely squat and or bench press a weight that is quite comparable, if not greater than the similar bodyweight Olympic lifter.

    *****If you think that's true, you're fooling yourself.

    Bodybuilders also train in such a fashion that they stimulate more of the "non-contractile" elements of their muscles. This leads to larger, but not necessarily stronger muscles.

    ****Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you just tell me I was an idiot for saying this could happen? LMAO-- make up your mind!!!

    THE FACT REMAINS, THAT IF A MUSCLE GROWS DUE TO AN INCREASE IN THE SIZE OF THE MYOFIBRILS, AS OCCURS DURING SHORT DURATION, HIGH INTENSITY EXERCISE, IT HAS ALSO GOTTEN STRONGER. PERIOD. END OF DISCUSSION. HIGH VOLUME TRAINING WILL STIMULATE EXCESSIVE CAPILLARIZATION AND MITOCHONDRIA WHICH WILL RESULT IN GROWTH, BUT NOT AS GREAT OF AN INCREASE IN STRENGTH. HIGH VOLUME TRAINING CAN ALSO STIMULATE THE MYOFIBRILS, BUT AT THE RISK OF THE INABILITY TO RECOVER FROM SAID TRAINING. I AM 100% CORRECT, AND YOU ARE NOT.
    Well, if you're done screaming, I'll try to critique this last rant......

    You're screaming at me to say the exact same thing I already said. I *agreed* with you that myofibrillar hypertrophy does result in a bigger and stronger muscle; all I said was that negative-type training DOES NOT tend to stimulate myofibrillar hypertrophy, but it rather stimuates sarcoplasmic, i.e., non-contractile, hypertrophy. What I don't understand is why you tell me I'm stupid for saying that, then turn around one paragraph later and say that bodybuilders train non-contractile elements of the sarcomere for hypertrophy---- which is it?

    Interestingly enough, the easiest way to stimulate myofibrillar growth is training as a powerlifter or an Olympic weightlifter. The heavy weights target the FT fibers quite thoroughly, and the hypertrophy incurred by such lifters is mostly functional.

    Oh well--- feel free to post more irrelevant screaming.

    All the best,

    PowerMan DL

  20. #20
    Wannabebig Moron The Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    226
    Originally posted by chris mason
    I AM 100% CORRECT, AND YOU ARE NOT.
    In
    Most
    Men's
    Arguments
    They
    Understand
    Ranting
    Erratically

    is just plain.. Well, I can't find the word, but I swear I wrote it up there somewhere...
    Last edited by The Cobra; 03-13-2001 at 03:10 PM.

  21. #21
    Geordie The_Chicken_Daddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Grace
    Posts
    6,187
    Originally posted by The Cobra


    In
    Most
    Men's
    Arguments
    They
    Understand
    Ranting
    Erratically
    Where? i can't see it...
    Last edited by The_Chicken_Daddy; 03-13-2001 at 03:24 PM.
    "Geordie/'d3c:di/n. & adj. Brit colloq. n. 1 a native of Tyneside. 2 the dialect spoken on Tyneside. adj. of or relating to Tyneside, its people, or its dialect. [the name George + -IE]

  22. #22
    Senior Member Brahms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    0
    I read about slow negative training a long time ago and I decided to give it a shot since my workout routines were getting rather stale and I wasn't making the gains I wanted. Overall, I can't believe I bought into the hype. After 3 weeks of seriously altering my regimine, I can honestly say that slow negative training is vastly overrated. Why don't you see Yates or the other big guns doing it? Seems like only the test subjects that have gotten any significant results are the ones in the age group above 40. And usually, those people aren't accustomed to a high amount of weight training to begin with. Who knows? They may be able to scientifically prove that it works, but IMO it doesn't.
    Last edited by Brahms; 03-13-2001 at 07:43 PM.

  23. #23
    Tuna Freak Frankster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Tuna Land
    Posts
    1,482
    Every one is different... experiment.
    Eat Tuna!
    "Ya don't touch my tuna, I don't kill you."- by Tuna Master
    "Part of getting what you want is knowing what you have to give up." - by who knows. ME? Eat Tuna!
    My Journal - My FitDay -

  24. #24
    Administrator chris mason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Posts
    12,732
    Ok, Powermandl, I am going to correct you because you are wrong. I never said you were an idiot for stating that bodybuilding stimulates primarily the "non-contractile" elements of the muscle. I stated that you were wrong in saying that negative only training does so. You seem to not read my posts very carefully, which is quite allright, but if you are going to respond I suggest you know what you are talking about. If you assume that bodybuilders train with slow movements that emphasize the negative, and don't train to increase their strength, then that is your assumption, not mine. I did not contradict myself. Bodybuilders, in general, train for both size and strength. I know a bodybuilder who weighs 235 lbs who can bench press in a standard fashion 550 lbs. I bet that there are not a lot of Olympic lifters who can make the same claim.


    ---------qoutes from Powerman
    . And think about it: bodybuilders are huge, muscular beasts, but can't nearly lift the weights that an Olympic lifter can. Then again, an Olympic lifter can move tremendous weights, but have little in the way of hypertrophy.

    Interestingly enough, the easiest way to stimulate myofibrillar growth is training as a powerlifter or an Olympic weightlifter. The heavy weights target the FT fibers quite thoroughly, and the hypertrophy incurred by such lifters is mostly functional.
    ------------ end

    So Powerman, which is it? Does powerlifting/Olympic lifting stimulate muscular growth or does it not? Seems like you made two contradictory statements.
    Last edited by chris mason; 03-13-2001 at 07:43 PM.

  25. #25
    Wannabebig Moron The Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    226
    The hypertrophy that OL do have is functional. They can be skinny, lightweight folks... But they usually have a HUGE ASS and BIG ASS THIGHS and good shoulders. Why would they need a huge chest? Or massive lats? They don't. But what they have that is hypertrophied is REALLY hypertrophied. Look at the chicks. HUGE butts!

Similar Threads

  1. The importance of a positive mindset
    By Mikael in forum Bodybuilding & Weight Training
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 10-21-2004, 08:20 PM
  2. what is it with message boards and negative people?
    By Relentless in forum General Chat
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 09-13-2004, 03:27 PM
  3. Negative???
    By Stephen Riddington in forum Bodybuilding & Weight Training
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-13-2003, 05:24 AM
  4. My training plan, need some positive or negative feedback
    By Skinny in forum Bodybuilding & Weight Training
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-24-2003, 02:42 PM
  5. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-19-2002, 09:04 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •