The Five Biggest Contradictions in Fitness
Latest Article

The Five Biggest Contradictions in Fitness

Itís no secret that when people contradict themselves, it has the effect of making the flaws in their actions or statements seem glaringly obvious. But what about when WE ourselves get caught contradicting ourselves by someone else?

By: Nick Tumminello Added: January 6th, 2014
More Recent Articles
Contrast Training for Size
By: Lee Boyce
An Interview with Marianne Kane of Girls Gone Strong
By: Jordan Syatt
What Supplements Should I be Taking? By: Jay Wainwright
Bench Like a Girl By: Julia Ladewski
Some Thoughts on Building a Big Pull By: Christopher Mason

Facebook Join Facebook Group       Twitter Follow on Twitter       rss Subscribe via RSS
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 76
  1. #26
    Senior Member bill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    va
    Posts
    207
    Jimmy do you have any examples of people that have used this or the types of results you hope for over a 3 wk block?
    I have used slow negatives before and found it boring and tedious. Any suggestions? I have reread the article.
    Do you consider this similar to Dante's DC training?
    Remember, to get big, you have to get strong. The two are interconnected. Lift heavy, work hard, and size will come. Like night follows day. It works. Arnold
    Do work son. Big Black (Rob and Big)

  2. #27
    Wannabebig Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by bill View Post
    Jimmy do you have any examples of people that have used this or the types of results you hope for over a 3 wk block?
    I have used slow negatives before and found it boring and tedious. Any suggestions? I have reread the article.
    Do you consider this similar to Dante's DC training?

    Bill,
    I'm not 100% sure what "type" you are referring to? Are you referring to the program in the article or TUT? It all depends how you used negatives before? Most people will make a point to add a negatives into their training session. Basically they'll add it in as a new exercise or extra sets. A program might look like this:
    Flat Chest Press 3 x10
    Incline Press 3x10
    Incline Fly 3x10
    Decline Press 3x10
    Falt Chest Press negatives 3 sets x 6 reps

    In this case, i would not advocate it at all. There is a difference between negatives and eccentric loading. Utlizing TUT allows us to to eccentricly load a muscle. Negatives are basically where you have a partner raise the load while you lower a greater than 1RM load by yourself. I've seen some good gainss in a 3 week cycle once TUT has been used. As for Dante's training, he utilizes rest-pause, so it is completely different.

  3. #28
    Tearing **** Up FortifiedIron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    715
    Jimmy,

    I have some simple question for you.

    1. You seem to mention the biggest and most important aspect of training programming, especialy for beginners, and that is progression. Would you care to elaborate a little on this topic here?

    2. You seem to discuss TUT alot, are you suggesting that the time in which the muscle is under tension is one of the most important aspects of training? I do agree that tension is the most important, however how can one justify that during the movement all the tension is equally placed on the whole muscle? Based on all research I've read tension is missplaced due to joint angle. You'll find this discussed in great detail by Mel Siff (see archives Supertraining Discussion and book). I've seen some even about this by Enoka. (Neuromechanics of Human Movement) I think load being used is more important to discuss than tempo, load is the mechanical factor determing the amount of tension, not time.

    Kc

  4. #29
    Just watch me ... Built's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    9,912
    Quote Originally Posted by Built View Post
    Hey, no worries. I wasn't suggesting training to induce DOMS lol - I'm a pussy and hate pain. You brought up DOMS so I felt I should address it.

    Now, I'm not at all clear on how these chemicals or their associated enzymes serve to create an anabolic environment (although I'm well-aware of the "christmas cookie effect" lol!), but what I'm trying to get a handle on is this:

    Under what circumstances would slower concentrics be beneficial to hypertophy?

    PS great thread! I'm really enjoying this discussion.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith View Post
    Look at anyone on a low carb diet or someone that is "cutting" their muscle glycogen is low. Muscle glycogen is the primry fuel source for our body. Low glycogen is going to effect our training intensity. ATP and CP, our high intensity energy system. The longer we can sustain that energy system ( we won't sustain it more than 10 second), the heavier load we can use.
    Not quite. I use low carb/cyclinc carb dieting a great deal, and I often make strength GAINS during my cuts. The trick is to use lower rep ranges that aren't so glycogen dependent. That way, a heavier load can be moved without the associated glycogen demands.

    I use higher rep ranges when I bulk - with the extra food/carbs available, glycogen isn't so precious.

    I was surprised to see you reference higher rep ranges for fat loss at the top of your pyramid in your article. Is this how you cut down your clients?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith View Post

    Slow concetrics like everything else have a place and a time. While they may lead to more fatigue substrate build up they also can serve as a great way to induce hypertrophy.
    Interesting.

    How?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith View Post
    When working with physique clients I may use it for 3 weeks out of a 12 week block ( keep in mind I periodize my training in 3 week block). It simply allows for different adaptation.
    What adaptation is this? And why three-week mesocycles?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith View Post

    Athletes should always use a fast concentric. The general publich and physique competitors should always use a fast cocentric.
    Why?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith View Post

    That is not to say that a slow concentrics does not have its merits. Would I use both a slow concentric and a super slow eccentric? No. We know that concentric and eccentric contractions cause different metabolic rises in the body. I have the study somewhere, I will try to dig it up.
    Please do. I'm VERY interested to read more on this topic.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith View Post

    It's a good discussion, feel free to keep it going.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith View Post
    The main table is from Poliquin/King. We know that the amount of tension that we can create on a muscle through either load or time is going to affect its growth status. When you reach a higher level of strength development, you must seek ways to increase the levels of intramuscular tension. A great example is the use of bands or chains.
    This is interesting.

    With bands, you set them up so that the force either increases or decreases non-linearly with ROM, at least I think this is how the forces work.

    For example, self-assisted chins - load increases at the top of the concentric, decreases at the bottom.

    Or bench press: load increases at the top of the press, decreases at the bottom.

    With chains, you're linearly increasing the load on the concentric, and linearly decreasing it on the eccentric.

    I would like to hear more on how to incorporate these into a mesocycle. Would this work well for two consecutive lifts, or should one method be applied for say three weeks, then the other for the next? And what physique benefits are entailed with either?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith View Post
    We also know that the potential for strength gains is greater at slow speeds than high speeds ie a back squat vs a snatch (Moffroid and Whipple 1970, Berger 1982)
    Okay, now, Moffroid and Whipple argued that speed training only increases power output of fast movements, while slower reps increase power output at all speeds of movement, correct? I'm not sure what the Berger article was - I imagine it supported the earlier research.

    What I'm not at all clear on is how this affects hypertrophy.

    Oh, and while I'm asking, you mentioned in your article the importance of timing rest between sets. I'd like to hear more on this.

  5. #30
    Tearing **** Up FortifiedIron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by Built View Post
    Okay, now, Moffroid and Whipple argued that speed training only increases power output of fast movements, while slower reps increase power output at all speeds of movement, correct? I'm not sure what the Berger article was - I imagine it supported the earlier research.

    What I'm not at all clear on is how this affects hypertrophy.
    Have not looked at the studies mention above.. but what type of strength are we discussing here?

    Kc

  6. #31
    Wannabebig Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by FortifiedIron View Post
    Jimmy,

    I have some simple question for you.

    1. You seem to mention the biggest and most important aspect of training programming, especialy for beginners, and that is progression. Would you care to elaborate a little on this topic here?

    2. You seem to discuss TUT alot, are you suggesting that the time in which the muscle is under tension is one of the most important aspects of training? I do agree that tension is the most important, however how can one justify that during the movement all the tension is equally placed on the whole muscle? Based on all research I've read tension is missplaced due to joint angle. You'll find this discussed in great detail by Mel Siff (see archives Supertraining Discussion and book). I've seen some even about this by Enoka. (Neuromechanics of Human Movement) I think load being used is more important to discuss than tempo, load is the mechanical factor determing the amount of tension, not time.

    Kc
    Kyle,
    Nice to see you here. I've read much of your material.

    1. I really think that progression is essential for just about anyone. Our body will do anything it can to maintain homeostasis. We must periodically further stress and destress our body or we won't grow. The majority of people are walking around in a state of adernal fatigue becausse they keep stressing stressing and stressing with no de-stress. Now we shouldn't just think of progression as more reps or a heavier load. We must address sets and rest as well.

    2. We know that tension changes as we move further away from the axis of rotation and is all affected by the strength curve of the exercise. Tension does fluctuate from low to high throughout the movement.I'm more concerned with Time under Load then Time Under Tension. Torque is extremely important during any weight lifting exercise. Adding more elbow flexion each rep of a side lateral raise can change the entire exercise. I'm also a fan of partial rep range work. I tend to use Time Under Load and Time Under Tension interchangable when dicussing muscle tension. Do I think load is important? 100%. You're correct, load is typically thought of as a neural thing( the whole powerlifters use heavy weight), it certainly is mechanical. The whole TUT 20-40 seconds theory does have holes, as we have addressed. I think however for beginners and even advanced trainers, we can not completely ignore it. I tend to be in the middle of the load-tension argument, especially when talking hypertrophy. I attempt to address both factors.We'll see the tempo recommendation during more high rep work in an attempt to cause more strain.

    I'll take workload over TUT anyday but I'm not going to completely ignore TUT either.
    Jimmy

  7. #32
    Wannabebig Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Built View Post
    Not quite. I use low carb/cyclinc carb dieting a great deal, and I often make strength GAINS during my cuts. The trick is to use lower rep ranges that aren't so glycogen dependent. That way, a heavier load can be moved without the associated glycogen demands.

    Keep in mind I was taking a typical, usual stance when mentioning glycogen levels during fat loss peeriods. Notice the " " around cutting. Strength is neural and is entirely possible to gain during fat loss periods. We have an optimal intensity thershold that must be met. People typically don't meet this during their fat loss attempts.

    I use higher rep ranges when I bulk - with the extra food/carbs available, glycogen isn't so precious.

    I use both lower and higher rep ranges. The key is too cycle from both a motor unit and a hormonal perspective.

    I was surprised to see you reference higher rep ranges for fat loss at the top of your pyramid in your article. Is this how you cut down your clients?

    I referenced higher reps, not because I feel they are the most important, but to simple show a descending pyramid.

    Interesting.
    How can slow concentric lead to more size gains? Pure adaptation. We must strain ( not damage) the body to grow. If we've been training with explosive concentrics for a long period of time, slow concentrics are going to have a place. I've even used controlled eccentrics with a slow concentric to induce size.




    What adaptation is this? And why three-week mesocycles?
    It's just different, we know that muscle fibers are recruited differently peer each contraction, so we should focus on hitting these muscle fibers in different ways. Why three weeks? I've found it works well plus it keeps the clients fresh. Not everyone is going to be a gung-hoe fitness competitor.Hell even some top athleetes I work with are bored after two weeks.


    Why?
    We need to hit our higher thershold motor units

    Please do. I'm VERY interested to read more on this topic.




    This is interesting.

    With bands, you set them up so that the force either increases or decreases non-linearly with ROM, at least I think this is how the forces work.

    For example, self-assisted chins - load increases at the top of the concentric, decreases at the bottom.

    Or bench press: load increases at the top of the press, decreases at the bottom.

    With chains, you're linearly increasing the load on the concentric, and linearly decreasing it on the eccentric.

    I would like to hear more on how to incorporate these into a mesocycle. Would this work well for two consecutive lifts, or should one method be applied for say three weeks, then the other for the next? And what physique benefits are entailed with either?



    Okay, now, Moffroid and Whipple argued that speed training only increases power output of fast movements, while slower reps increase power output at all speeds of movement, correct? I'm not sure what the Berger article was - I imagine it supported the earlier research.

    What I'm not at all clear on is how this affects hypertrophy.

    Oh, and while I'm asking, you mentioned in your article the importance of timing rest between sets. I'd like to hear more on this.

    My response are in there. I'll get to the ones I haven't gotten to yet tomorrow.

  8. #33
    Just watch me ... Built's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    9,912
    Quote Originally Posted by Built

    Not quite. I use low carb/cyclinc carb dieting a great deal, and I often make strength GAINS during my cuts. The trick is to use lower rep ranges that aren't so glycogen dependent. That way, a heavier load can be moved without the associated glycogen demands.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy

    Keep in mind I was taking a typical, usual stance when mentioning glycogen levels during fat loss peeriods. Notice the " " around cutting. Strength is neural and is entirely possible to gain during fat loss periods. We have an optimal intensity thershold that must be met. People typically don't meet this during their fat loss attempts.
    Maybe not normal people. But we're not normal people here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Built

    I use higher rep ranges when I bulk - with the extra food/carbs available, glycogen isn't so precious.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    I use both lower and higher rep ranges. The key is too cycle from both a motor unit and a hormonal perspective.
    This is interesting - how much of each, and what do you mean by "motor unit" and "hormonal" perspectives?

    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    I was surprised to see you reference higher rep ranges for fat loss at the top of your pyramid in your article. Is this how you cut down your clients?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    I referenced higher reps, not because I feel they are the most important, but to simple show a descending pyramid.
    Not quite what I was getting at. I didn't think they were prioritized because they were at the top. I was just puzzled to see higher rep ranges associated with fat loss. Most of us here cut on low reps.

    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    Interesting.
    How can slow concentric lead to more size gains?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    Pure adaptation. We must strain ( not damage) the body to grow. If we've been training with explosive concentrics for a long period of time, slow concentrics are going to have a place. I've even used controlled eccentrics with a slow concentric to induce size.
    See, this is the part I'm interested in. How does this induce size? And can you give me an example of how you've done this? In particular, I'm interested in bringing up my quads. I've fiddled with a variety of rep ranges and tempos - my quads always lag behind my hams. How would you suggest I incorporate controlled eccentrics with slow concentrics in my struggle to coax size out of my quads?

    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    What adaptation is this? And why three-week mesocycles?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    It's just different, we know that muscle fibers are recruited differently peer each contraction, so we should focus on hitting these muscle fibers in different ways. Why three weeks? I've found it works well plus it keeps the clients fresh. Not everyone is going to be a gung-hoe fitness competitor.Hell even some top athleetes I work with are bored after two weeks.
    No worries - I fully appreciate the need for a periodized approach. I'm just curious about the "three week" notion, although it may very well be a practical compromise between stimulus, adaptation, and boredom.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    Athletes should always use a fast concentric. The general publich and physique competitors should always use a fast cocentric.
    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    Why?
    We need to hit our higher thershold motor units
    I understand that fast twitch motor units are the higher threshold ones, and that they are preferentially stimulated with explosive concentrics and slow eccentrics. What I don't understand is why the general public and physique competitors should always use these. Also, didn't you just mention you have managed to stimulate hypertrophy with slow concentrics?

    So much discussion here - what a great thread!

  9. #34
    Tearing **** Up FortifiedIron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith View Post
    Kyle,
    Nice to see you here. I've read much of your material.
    Been a lurker on here for along time.. real long time lol

    1. I really think that progression is essential for just about anyone. Our body will do anything it can to maintain homeostasis. We must periodically further stress and destress our body or we won't grow. The majority of people are walking around in a state of adernal fatigue becausse they keep stressing stressing and stressing with no de-stress. Now we shouldn't just think of progression as more reps or a heavier load. We must address sets and rest as well.
    Progressive overload is the biggest key there is, however the most miss-used method in weight training. People think that progressive overload is simply adding 5lbs a wk till progress stops. This is very uneffective becasue of stagnation. However if you break it done based on total work you get a much different equation.

    2. We know that tension changes as we move further away from the axis of rotation and is all affected by the strength curve of the exercise. Tension does fluctuate from low to high throughout the movement.I'm more concerned with Time under Load then Time Under Tension. Torque is extremely important during any weight lifting exercise. Adding more elbow flexion each rep of a side lateral raise can change the entire exercise. I'm also a fan of partial rep range work. I tend to use Time Under Load and Time Under Tension interchangable when dicussing muscle tension. Do I think load is important? 100%. You're correct, load is typically thought of as a neural thing( the whole powerlifters use heavy weight), it certainly is mechanical. The whole TUT 20-40 seconds theory does have holes, as we have addressed. I think however for beginners and even advanced trainers, we can not completely ignore it. I tend to be in the middle of the load-tension argument, especially when talking hypertrophy. I attempt to address both factors.We'll see the tempo recommendation during more high rep work in an attempt to cause more strain.

    I'll take workload over TUT anyday but I'm not going to completely ignore TUT either.
    Jimmy
    To hit the nail on the head about the load and neual issuse it is all about total work load. I'm going to copy and paste a quote from Zatisorsky.

    Here's something I posted a while back with a quote from Zatsiorsky's book about the "energetic theory" of hypertrophy:

    "According to the energetic hypothesis of muscle cell hypertrophy, the crucial factor determining the balance between protein catabolism and anabolism is the amount of energy available for protein synthesis during exercise. [...] The rate of protein degradation is a function of the weight lifted: The heavier the weight, the higher the rate of protein degradation. [...] The total amount of degraded protein, however, is a function of both the rate of protein catabolism and the mechanical work performed (or the total weight lifted). [...] The mass of proteins catabolized during heavy resistive exercise can be presented as the product of protein breakdown and the number of lifts."

    In other words, lifting maximal loads (i.e. 1-2RM) results in a rapid rate of protein degradation but the amount of mechanical work required to amass a high total amount of degraded protein is much higher than it will provide in a typical training session (in other words the volume is too low). It's also worth repeating the fact that this type of training cannot be done for long periods of time with the same exercises due to the greater levels of NEURAL FATIGUE it induces. At the other end of the spectrum is endurance training (typically 20+ reps) which involves a high amount of mechanical work (repetitions) but the rate of protein degradation is very slow, so the total is low. Therefore, it makes sense that somewhere between the two extremes, a moderate rate of protein degradation + a moderate amount of mechanical work (around 5-10RM) will result in the highest TOTAL amount of degraded protein. Translation: training in a range of around 5-12 reps is generally considered the most effective range for hypertrophy.
    -Friend of mine Dominik wrote that out on another forum.

    The other big thing I harp on about this is how important metabolic stress is within the cell. I'm a big fan of monitoring time between sets. So if you set something up like this:

    5x3 and 3x5 being the same with 15 total reps.

    However the volume is relativly low in this regards and the heavier weight isnt going to do much in terms of helping with hypertrophy as discussed above. Now the way around this is doing this:

    5x3 w/ 80% 30-40 seconds rest between sets.

    Now you get the heavy weight for the tension, and you apply the short rest periods keeping the bout going. Now you have a lifter in a fatigued state lifting a moderatly heavy load for 15 reps. There is going to be some deplation of the ATP system so something like this isnt suppose to be done on every exercise.
    back on the load issue and programming here is a structure. Its based on set/reps being stable from and total number of sets being equal or close to equal. The trick is you stress time between sets, add weight to the bar every week (regardless), and you can still put forth that workload in the lower rep ranges to accumlate an effect for hypertrophy gains.

    Monday:
    - Barbell Bench Press
    : Warm up 2 sets of 10
    : (1wk) 3x8 (2wk) 3x8 (3wk) 4x6 (4wk) 4x6 (5wk) 5x5 (6wk) 5x5 (7wk)
    : Rest time approx 2-3 minutes between sets.

    - Bent Over Rows
    : Warm up 2 sets of 10
    : (1wk) 3x8 (2wk) 3x8 (3wk) 4x6 (4wk) 4x6 (5wk) 5x5 (6wk) 5x5 (7wk)
    : Rest time approx 2-3 minutes between sets.

    - Should Press w/ DBs
    : Warm up 2 sets of 10
    : (1wk) 3x8 (2wk) 3x8 (3wk) 4x6 (4wk) 4x6 (5wk) 5x3 (6wk) 5x3 (7wk)
    : Rest Time around 1-2 minutes between sets.

    - Side Laterals
    : Warm up 2 sts of 10
    : (1wk) 3x8 (2wk) 3x8 (3wk) 4x6 (4wk) 4x6 (5wk) 5x5 (6wk) 5x5 (7wk)
    : Rest time approx 30-60 seconds between sets.


    Tuesday:
    - Squat
    : Warm up 2 sets of 10
    : (1wk) 3x8 (2wk) 3x8 (3wk) 4x6 (4wk) 4x6 (5wk) 5x3 (6wk) 5x3 (7wk)
    : Rest Time around 2-5 minutes between sets

    - Stiff Leg Deadlifts
    : Warm Up 2 sets of 10
    : (1wk) 3x8 (2wk) 3x8 (3wk) 4x6 (4wk) 4x6 (5wk) 5x5 (6wk) 5x5 (7wk)
    : Rest Time around 2-3 minutes between sets.

    - Bench Step Ups with Dumbell (each hand)
    : Warm up 2 sets of 10 w/ no weight
    : (1wk) 3x8 (2wk) 3x8 (3wk) 4x6 (4wk) 4x6 (5wk) 5x5 (6wk) 5x5 (7wk)
    : Rest Time around 1-2 minutes between sets.

    - Calf Raises
    : Warm Up 2 sets of 10
    : (1wk) 3x12 (2wk) 3x12 (3wk) 3x10 (4wk) 3x10 (5wk) 4x10 (6wk) 4x10 (7wk)
    : Rest Time around 1-2 minutes between sets.

    Wed: Off

    Thursday:
    - Dumbell Bench Press
    : Warm Up 2 sets of 10
    : (1wk) 3x8 (2wk) 3x8 (3wk) 4x6 (4wk) 4x6 (5wk) 5x5 (6wk) 5x5 (7wk)
    : Rest Time around 1-2 minutes between sets.

    - Lat Pull Down
    : warm up 2 sets of 10
    : (1wk) 3x8 (2wk) 3x8 (3wk) 4x6 (4wk) 4x6 (5wk) 5x5 (6wk) 5x5 (7wk)
    : Rest Time around 1-2 minutes between sets.

    - Incline Bench Press with Dumbells
    : Warm up 2 sets of 10
    : (1wk) 3x8 (2wk) 3x8 (3wk) 4x6 (4wk) 4x6 (5wk) 5x5 (6wk) 5x5 (7wk)
    : Rest Time around 1-2 minutes between sets.

    - Plate Raises
    : Warm up 2 sets of 10
    : (1wk) 3x12 (2wk) 3x12 (3wk) 3x10 (4wk) 3x10 (5wk) 4x10 (6wk) 4x10 (7wk)
    : Rest Time around 30-60 seconds between sets.


    Friday:
    - Deadlift
    : Warm up 2 sets of 10
    : (1wk) 3x8 (2wk) 3x8 (3wk) 4x6 (4wk) 4x6 (5wk) 5x5 (6wk) 5x5 (7wk)
    : Rest Time around 2-5 minutes between sets.

    - Leg Press
    : Warm up 2 sets of 10
    : (1wk) 3x8 (2wk) 3x8 (3wk) 4x6 (4wk) 4x6 (5wk) 5x5 (6wk) 5x5 (7wk)
    : Rest Time around 2 minutes between sets.

    - Lunges with Dumbells (each hand)
    : Warm up 2 sets of 10 w/ no weight
    : (1wk) 3x8 (2wk) 3x8 (3wk) 4x6 (4wk) 4x6 (5wk) 5x5 (6wk) 5x5 (7wk)
    : Rest Time around 30-60 seconds between sets.

    - Decline Sit-ups
    : Warm up 1 set of 10 w/ no weight
    : (1wk) 3x12 (2wk) 3x12 (3wk) 3x8 (4wk) 3x8 (5wk) 5x5 (6wk) 5x5 (7wk)
    : Rest Time around 30-60 seconds between sets.

    Not trying to hijack your thread.. kinda got off on a tangent.

    Kc

  10. #35
    Wannabebig Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Built View Post




    This is interesting - how much of each, and what do you mean by "motor unit" and "hormonal" perspectives?When looking at a 12-week training block utilizing undulating periodization, it will a 50/50 split. That is not to say that I have two low rep days and two high days per week.I've found good results using a linear-undulating approach.In a three week block, the client may need more glycogen depeletion so the workouts will be higher rep. When you look at motor unit recruitment, we know that hitting our type IIb's are going to give us the most potential to grow. We can not ignore the Type I's though as well. Hormonally, we know that both high reps with short rest intervals will lead to high GH output and lower reps will also favorably alter the test-cortisol ratio.





    Not quite what I was getting at. I didn't think they were prioritized because they were at the top. I was just puzzled to see higher rep ranges associated with fat loss. Most of us here cut on low reps. It certainly has become the popular thing. I lthink both high and low rep training can be helpful. The problem with strictly just going high rep is that we do not need give our body any excuse to hold onto the muscle we have. We also know that higher load training can put us into a favorable hormonal environment.The pyramid also was to show rep ranges, not just fat loss.





    See, this is the part I'm interested in. How does this induce size? And can you give me an example of how you've done this? In particular, I'm interested in bringing up my quads. I've fiddled with a variety of rep ranges and tempos - my quads always lag behind my hams. How would you suggest I incorporate controlled eccentrics with slow concentrics in my struggle to coax size out of my quads?If you are going to include both slow concentrics and eccentrics, you must be careful to not overdo it. I'd suggest only using it on your first movement. Let's say it's a front squat, go with it here then resume your normal training. After you've assesssed your tolerance, begin to add slow concentrics with a controlled eccentric to another exercise





    No worries - I fully appreciate the need for a periodized approach. I'm just curious about the "three week" notion, although it may very well be a practical compromise between stimulus, adaptation, and boredom.
    It really is, instead of including a deload week. I will just switch emphasis. I've found this to be very effective. I've even monitored hormonal levels through testing and found that the enviroment is still anabolic


    I understand that fast twitch motor units are the higher threshold ones, and that they are preferentially stimulated with explosive concentrics and slow eccentrics. What I don't understand is why the general public and physique competitors should always use these. Also, didn't you just mention you have managed to stimulate hypertrophy with slow concentrics? The general public just doesn't need to be overly concerned with slow concentric or bodypart training. For your more dedicated people and physique competitors, they should generally stay with a explosive concentric but may be well switching there emphasis to a slow concentric for 3-4 weeks.

    So much discussion here - what a great thread!
    Yes it is a great thread.

  11. #36
    Just watch me ... Built's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    9,912
    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    This is interesting - how much of each, and what do you mean by "motor unit" and "hormonal" perspectives?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    [B]When looking at a 12-week training block utilizing undulating periodization, it will a 50/50 split. That is not to say that I have two low rep days and two high days per week.I've found good results using a linear-undulating approach.In a three week block, the client may need more glycogen depeletion so the workouts will be higher rep.
    Okay, so how do you break this up? I'm familiar with daily undulating periodization and the research behind it. Are you doing the periods as 3-week mesocycles instead of daily microcycles? Like, three weeks higher rep, 3 weeks lower rep? Or do you alternate bodyparts and do the waves that way?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    When you look at motor unit recruitment, we know that hitting our type IIb's are going to give us the most potential to grow. We can not ignore the Type I's though as well. Hormonally, we know that both high reps with short rest intervals will lead to high GH output and lower reps will also favorably alter the test-cortisol ratio.
    Sure, and of course you don't want to ignore ANY part of muscle growth. But my understanding was the best thing that comes from higher rep work is sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, no? And maybe joint conditioning, capillary density - all things that support further growth in the sarcomere.

    Although higher rep work induces a transient increase in GH, my limited understanding of these things is that unless GH increases by supraphysiological (read: injected) amounts, the endogenous increase doesn't translate to measurable growth. Or do you have access to information I've missed? (I try to read more on the internet, REALLY I do. But sleep and my job keep getting in the way... )

    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    Not quite what I was getting at. I didn't think they were prioritized because they were at the top. I was just puzzled to see higher rep ranges associated with fat loss. Most of us here cut on low reps.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    It certainly has become the popular thing.
    If by "popular" you mean "most people don't do it this way, but it works better than the high-reps", then yes, I suppose "popular" is the right word.



    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy

    I lthink both high and low rep training can be helpful.
    Sure. For hypertrophy, certainly. How are they both helpful for a cut?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy

    The problem with strictly just going high rep is that we do not need give our body any excuse to hold onto the muscle we have. We also know that higher load training can put us into a favorable hormonal environment.The pyramid also was to show rep ranges, not just fat loss.
    No, I understand that. But you put "fat loss" with the higher rep range work, not the lower rep range work.

    Why?


    Quote Originally Posted by Built

    See, this is the part I'm interested in. How does this induce size? And can you give me an example of how you've done this? In particular, I'm interested in bringing up my quads. I've fiddled with a variety of rep ranges and tempos - my quads always lag behind my hams. How would you suggest I incorporate controlled eccentrics with slow concentrics in my struggle to coax size out of my quads?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    If you are going to include both slow concentrics and eccentrics, you must be careful to not overdo it. I'd suggest only using it on your first movement. Let's say it's a front squat, go with it here then resume your normal training. After you've assesssed your tolerance, begin to add slow concentrics with a controlled eccentric to another exercise
    I guess I'm having trouble explaining myself.

    How do the slow concentrics add benefit? I'm aware that explosive concentrics recruit more fast twitch fibres, and since they're the ones we want to induce hyptrophy in ... ?

    What part am I missing here?

    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    No worries - I fully appreciate the need for a periodized approach. I'm just curious about the "three week" notion, although it may very well be a practical compromise between stimulus, adaptation, and boredom.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    It really is, instead of including a deload week. I will just switch emphasis. I've found this to be very effective. I've even monitored hormonal levels through testing and found that the enviroment is still anabolic
    Cool. Gonna publish up these results? It would make a killer paper!

    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    I understand that fast twitch motor units are the higher threshold ones, and that they are preferentially stimulated with explosive concentrics and slow eccentrics. What I don't understand is why the general public and physique competitors should always use these. Also, didn't you just mention you have managed to stimulate hypertrophy with slow concentrics?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    The general public just doesn't need to be overly concerned with slow concentric or bodypart training.
    I don't know how many BB really need to be concerned with bodypart training, to be frank. But you earlier argued that the gen pop needn't be concerned with explosive concentrics. Now you're arguing they needn't be concerned with slow concentrics either?

    Meh - we're not the general public here anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy

    For your more dedicated people and physique competitors, they should generally stay with a explosive concentric but may be well switching there emphasis to a slow concentric for 3-4 weeks.
    Okay - cool. This is the part that I'm interested in.

    Why?

    And for a cut, or for a bulk?

    Revisiting an earlier comment, you mentioned that you use both high and low reps for cutting. You seem to be of a mind that low reps for cutting are a bit of a fad. Should I take it you're not a fan? How do YOU cut up your physique clients?

  12. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    12,251
    i dont want to get involved in the science aspect of all this, because i havent studied it yet, but are we not missing out a very important rule here?

    not everyone is the same, and not one thing is the best

    one person can grow as much as another person doing 1-5 reps as the other does 8-12
    2000 or bust

  13. #38
    Proud Father Maki Riddington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Vancouver, B.C.
    Posts
    5,323
    No, I understand that. But you put "fat loss" with the higher rep range work, not the lower rep range work.
    Some coaches suggest the use of "higher" reps for fat loss because of the GH release which is linked to fat loss. On the other hand some advocate sticking to low reps because they feel protein synthesis is compromised with lowered calories and you need adequate amounts of tension placed on the body to keep it from losing muscle tissue.

    Both ways work.
    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

  14. #39
    Wannabebig Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Built View Post
    Okay, so how do you break this up? I'm familiar with daily undulating periodization and the research behind it. Are you doing the periods as 3-week mesocycles instead of daily microcycles? Like, three weeks higher rep, 3 weeks lower rep? Or do you alternate bodyparts and do the waves that way?
    Ok we're going to assume that my client is in a full body mode. They train 4 times a week and are only concerned with looking good naked. They've recently been focusing on increaseing size and now want to follow a "U" diet, where they are low carb 70 % of the time for 9 weeks and moderate carb 30% of the time for those same weeks. they've been doing body part splits for the past 8 weeks and following a high carb diet. While they need the adaptation that lower reps and heavier load would give them, I first want to go with a glycogen lowering linear fashion for 1 week of full body session. The 2nd and 3rd week, we are going to go into a undulating fashion of 2 heavy load, 2 light load days. For the next 3 weeks, they are going to go pure undulating, 2 heavy/2 light days. The next 3 week cycle is going to be during a very low carb cycling phase, so to get the most out of their workouts and keep the muscle, while beginning to add aerobic work in, we are going to go linear with higher loads for 3 weeks.

    When doing pure bodypart splits, I almost always go with one heavy day and one light day per bodypart unless the client is severly bodypartted out. In this case, I may go linear and just up the sets.



    Sure, and of course you don't want to ignore ANY part of muscle growth. But my understanding was the best thing that comes from higher rep work is sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, no? And maybe joint conditioning, capillary density - all things that support further growth in the sarcomere.
    Hitting a muscle fiber from both ends of the spectrum is going to cause different recruitment. Throw in that some muscles respond bette rto higher reps and other to lower and we see that we need both aspects hit.Higher rep workouts will also play into recovery.Especially when dieting, you are going to be limited in your capacity to recover from all of these low rep sessions.Plus for fat loss, we need to raise the intensity in our sessions as often as possible. The first way I am going to do that is undulate my rep ranges. Going with more sets, more reps, more exercises etc etc just equals more. It is not necessarily better. We are doing ourself a dissservice by training one way for too long.

    Although higher rep work induces a transient increase in GH, my limited understanding of these things is that unless GH increases by supraphysiological (read: injected) amounts, the endogenous increase doesn't translate to measurable growth. Or do you have access to information I've missed? (I try to read more on the internet, REALLY I do. But sleep and my job keep getting in the way... )
    I meant to say "higher" not high. While it may be nothing compared to injecting GH, we can raise it. Should we ignore that raise since it is not huge? I don't think so. The degree of intensity if the key deciding factor for inducing exercise related GH release. That goes back to my point to hitting different muscle fibers . While I won't claim to access to mystery studies, I am a endocrine nerd and plan on talking alot about the topic very soon!




    If by "popular" you mean "most people don't do it this way, but it works better than the high-reps", then yes, I suppose "popular" is the right word.
    As a whole the fitness industry jumps into things way too easily. We need lower reps when we cut but it is not the be all end all of dieting. Again it goes back to both the motor unit and hormonal factors of resistance training, both can be used to diet, IF they are used right.




    Sure. For hypertrophy, certainly. How are they both helpful for a cut?
    For the same reason they stimulate hypertrophy. We need to stimulate both the CNS with the workload and muscular breakdown with higher rep training. I used to be a higher rep hater but when used right ( read not exclusivly) they can be great. Remember, muscle fibers are either powered by glycogen or the oxidative system, so again we need to tax both system.



    No, I understand that. But you put "fat loss" with the higher rep range work, not the lower rep range work.
    I think for beginners, utilizing low rest periods and higher reps, they will see some very nice fat loss.

    Why?






    I guess I'm having trouble explaining myself.

    How do the slow concentrics add benefit? I'm aware that explosive concentrics recruit more fast twitch fibres, and since they're the ones we want to induce hyptrophy in ... ?

    What part am I missing here?
    I think you are over thinking it. It's adaptation, yes we want to induce growth in the fast twitch fibers. Slow concentric training will result in more lactic acid production then fast concentrics, lactic acid is linked to higher GH .It purely is another way to train.I doubt you'll find studies on slow concentrics but it works, use it for 3-4 weeks and let me know




    Cool. Gonna publish up these results? It would make a killer paper!
    I can't, the clients all have to sign before they get their hormonal profiles done. I can talk about the results but I can't release it as research.





    I don't know how many BB really need to be concerned with bodypart training, to be frank. But you earlier argued that the gen pop needn't be concerned with explosive concentrics. Now you're arguing they needn't be concerned with slow concentrics either?
    I think things are getting twisted. I stated earlier that the gen pop should use explosive concentrics. A guy who has a family, a 9-5 who just wants to add some muscle and loss some weight doesn't need slow concentrics. BBers not doing bodypart splits? Are you feeling ok? lol

    Meh - we're not the general public here anyway.



    Okay - cool. This is the part that I'm interested in.

    Why?

    And for a cut, or for a bulk?
    It is going to change their training intensity. Our body is going to respond differently. I'd used it more on a bulk than a cut. During a cut we don't want a slow training time for the majority of the training.

    Revisiting an earlier comment, you mentioned that you use both high and low reps for cutting. You seem to be of a mind that low reps for cutting are a bit of a fad. Should I take it you're not a fan? How do YOU cut up your physique clients?I love low reps for cutting, but the fitness industry over responds. How do I cut up a physique client? That's a whole article that I would love to write.
    Hopefully I read everything you wrote as intended

  15. #40
    Wannabebig Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Stumprrp View Post
    i dont want to get involved in the science aspect of all this, because i havent studied it yet, but are we not missing out a very important rule here?

    not everyone is the same, and not one thing is the best

    one person can grow as much as another person doing 1-5 reps as the other does 8-12
    Your 100% right. Everyone needs to avoid adaptation, so if your goal is purely looks, we need to utlize both rep ranges. They are just tools.

  16. #41
    Wannabebig Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Maki Riddington View Post
    Some coaches suggest the use of "higher" reps for fat loss because of the GH release which is linked to fat loss. On the other hand some advocate sticking to low reps because they feel protein synthesis is compromised with lowered calories and you need adequate amounts of tension placed on the body to keep it from losing muscle tissue.

    Both ways work.
    Maki,
    What I think it comes down to is training intensity. Traineers will have there "system" and claim it is the only way. That is freakin horrible for them to say. Everything is a tool. The best fat loss I have ever gotten has been from a program with both high and low reps during the same cycle, sometimes the same session.

  17. #42
    Just watch me ... Built's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    9,912
    Quote Originally Posted by Maki Riddington View Post
    Some coaches suggest the use of "higher" reps for fat loss because of the GH release which is linked to fat loss. On the other hand some advocate sticking to low reps because they feel protein synthesis is compromised with lowered calories and you need adequate amounts of tension placed on the body to keep it from losing muscle tissue.

    Both ways work.
    Well, maybe if you're male and/or assisted.

    Personally, I haven't had any success cutting with high reps.

    Worked like a hot damn with low though. Once I realized what was going on, I started to think a bit more on it, and, well, I've yet to see a ripped mom getting out of toning class at the community centre.

    How do you do it with your clients, Maki? What kind of protocol do you have them do?

  18. #43
    Proud Father Maki Riddington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Vancouver, B.C.
    Posts
    5,323
    Quote Originally Posted by Built View Post
    Well, maybe if you're male and/or assisted.

    Personally, I haven't had any success cutting with high reps.

    Worked like a hot damn with low though. Once I realized what was going on, I started to think a bit more on it, and, well, I've yet to see a ripped mom getting out of toning class at the community centre.

    How do you do it with your clients, Maki? What kind of protocol do you have them do?
    It depends on a lot of things. Some things to factor in are how much they move a day or week, if they are willing to follow a nutritional plan, what work/family stress is like, their current conditioning levels, body fat % etc. I have to also factor in if they have any postural issues and/or muscle imbalances as well. The list can be fairly extensive based on what I learn from the initial consult and what I see during the assesment.

    So, I don't have one protocol I use exclusively.

    Also, I am mainly a strength/conditioning guy. I make that quite clear up front. I don't do the "weight loss" thing. If I do, I pick my clients carefully.

    If I do train someone for fat loss, I might complexes, a variety of intervals on cardio equipment, circuits, low rep training, long distance running, it really depends like I said.
    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

  19. #44
    Just watch me ... Built's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    9,912
    I guess it's hard when you're training someone for fat loss rather than dieting off the weight. And you can't MAKE them stick to a diet.

    It's no secret that my approach isn't so much to train for fat loss as it is to diet off the weight and risk manage muscle maintenance through short, heavy workouts. That being said, a little strategic cardio can provide a bit of a boost and allow for some much-welcomed dietary freedom, to be sure.

    And I never entirely abandon high-er rep work - my old joints seem to need a little help from this type of training - I just don't rely on it for fat loss (although if I get a little fat burning out of it, TRUST me, it is not unwelcomed!)

    Jimmy, I wasn't suggesting you were comparing the GH increase you'd get from lactic acid type training with the increase from injections - but I've not found much that supports these transient endogenous spikes actually translate to measureable physique gains. Do you have evidence that they do?


    I tried to train for fat loss for years.

    Heh, I jogged my way up to metformin and 40% bodyfat. <shudders at the now distant memory>

  20. #45
    Just watch me ... Built's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    9,912
    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    Okay, so how do you break this up? I'm familiar with daily undulating periodization and the research behind it. Are you doing the periods as 3-week mesocycles instead of daily microcycles? Like, three weeks higher rep, 3 weeks lower rep? Or do you alternate bodyparts and do the waves that way?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    Ok we're going to assume that my client is in a full body mode. They train 4 times a week and are only concerned with looking good naked. They've recently been focusing on increaseing size and now want to follow a "U" diet, where they are low carb 70 % of the time for 9 weeks and moderate carb 30% of the time for those same weeks. they've been doing body part splits for the past 8 weeks and following a high carb diet. While they need the adaptation that lower reps and heavier load would give them, I first want to go with a glycogen lowering linear fashion for 1 week of full body session. The 2nd and 3rd week, we are going to go into a undulating fashion of 2 heavy load, 2 light load days. For the next 3 weeks, they are going to go pure undulating, 2 heavy/2 light days. The next 3 week cycle is going to be during a very low carb cycling phase, so to get the most out of their workouts and keep the muscle, while beginning to add aerobic work in, we are going to go linear with higher loads for 3 weeks.

    When doing pure bodypart splits, I almost always go with one heavy day and one light day per bodypart unless the client is severly bodypartted out. In this case, I may go linear and just up the sets.
    Okay, you lost me. I think I'll wait for the book for this one lol!

    I am, however, charmed by this "U" diet of which you speak. I'm a fan of lower-carb, cyclic approaches to begin with. Where can I read up on this one?

    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    Sure, and of course you don't want to ignore ANY part of muscle growth. But my understanding was the best thing that comes from higher rep work is sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, no? And maybe joint conditioning, capillary density - all things that support further growth in the sarcomere.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    Hitting a muscle fiber from both ends of the spectrum is going to cause different recruitment. Throw in that some muscles respond bette rto higher reps and other to lower and we see that we need both aspects hit.
    Couldn't agree more. This last year for me has been one of discovery - my quads, delts and pecs really need work in the higher end of the hypertrophy range, and with considerably more volume than say my hams, back, and arms.

    I wish I could find a listing of "typical" muscle-fibre-type concentrations.

    I seem to have the idea that hams are predominantly fast twitch, soleus slow, gastrocs fast, delts slow, quads slow, tibialis fast ... I understand that these are gross generalizations and vary from person to person, but still, in the absence of muscle biopsies, generalizations can serve as starting points.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    Higher rep workouts will also play into recovery. Especially when dieting, you are going to be limited in your capacity to recover from all of these low rep sessions.
    Now this is interesting, and I don't understand it. How are you going to be able to stimulate recovery with higher rep work on reduced calories? The whole reason I've trained with lower reps on a cut is because it's less taxing. I just want to stimulate the muscle enough to stick around.

    Jimmy, please let me be clear here - I'm not trying to bust your chops, I swear! - You know more about this stuff than I do and I'm trying to pump you for information. I'm also going into a cut in a week, so this is really timely for me. It's just your approach is so very different from what I've found success with. I'd like to understand what it is that you do.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    Plus for fat loss, we need to raise the intensity in our sessions as often as possible.
    See, this is where I get nervous. The object, of course, on a cut is to only cut fat. Increasing intensity ... hmmm. How do you do this as the cut progresses without compromising LBM?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    The first way I am going to do that is undulate my rep ranges. Going with more sets, more reps, more exercises etc etc just equals more. It is not necessarily better. We are doing ourself a dissservice by training one way for too long.
    Absolutely.
    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    Although higher rep work induces a transient increase in GH, my limited understanding of these things is that unless GH increases by supraphysiological (read: injected) amounts, the endogenous increase doesn't translate to measurable growth. Or do you have access to information I've missed? (I try to read more on the internet, REALLY I do. But sleep and my job keep getting in the way... )
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    I meant to say "higher" not high. While it may be nothing compared to injecting GH, we can raise it. Should we ignore that raise since it is not huge? I don't think so. The degree of intensity if the key deciding factor for inducing exercise related GH release. That goes back to my point to hitting different muscle fibers . While I won't claim to access to mystery studies, I am a endocrine nerd and plan on talking alot about the topic very soon!
    It is SUCH an interesting area to me. I'll look forward to reading more on this as you produce it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    If by "popular" you mean "most people don't do it this way, but it works better than the high-reps", then yes, I suppose "popular" is the right word.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    As a whole the fitness industry jumps into things way too easily.
    I think you may have misread my post. I suggested most people cut on HIGH reps. High reps is the one that is popular.

    When I tell people I cut on LOW reps most people look at me like I've lost my mind.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    We need lower reps when we cut but it is not the be all end all of dieting. Again it goes back to both the motor unit and hormonal factors of resistance training, both can be used to diet, IF they are used right.
    I suppose that's the big trick. I just wish I had more of a handle on it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    Sure. For hypertrophy, certainly. How are they both helpful for a cut?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    For the same reason they stimulate hypertrophy. We need to stimulate both the CNS with the workload and muscular breakdown with higher rep training. I used to be a higher rep hater but when used right ( read not exclusivly) they can be great. Remember, muscle fibers are either powered by glycogen or the oxidative system, so again we need to tax both system.
    Here we go. This is the part I was waiting for.

    <rubs hands together>

    Now, type I are the oxidative, and type II are either fast (glycogen) or slow-ish.

    I have certainly noticed this bulk that my quads woke up with the higher rep work, so I too have learned to respect the value of the 15-rep set of front squats (yes, puking is a value). Is it just that - working through the oxidative slow twitch motor units until the fast twitch ones kick in? Is this what you're getting at here? Or are you looking at this from a hormonal perspective?

    And what, exactly, is the difference to the amount of muscle damage elicited by 40 seconds TUT using slow negs on a 5-rep set, and the damage elicited by 40 seconds TUT performed in a 10-rep set? I'm really trying to wrap my mind around this one.


    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    No, I understand that. But you put "fat loss" with the higher rep range work, not the lower rep range work.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    I think for beginners, utilizing low rest periods and higher reps, they will see some very nice fat loss.
    Absolutely. But to be fair, tell a newbie to replace bread with lettuce and pasta with broccoli and get 'em doing the Susan Powter video workout and they'll see some very nice fat loss.

    I miss newbie gains. <cries>

    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    I guess I'm having trouble explaining myself.

    How do the slow concentrics add benefit? I'm aware that explosive concentrics recruit more fast twitch fibres, and since they're the ones we want to induce hyptrophy in ... ?

    What part am I missing here?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    I think you are over thinking it.
    Okay, if my sig weren't already too big, I'd sig this... Yes, I probably am. I can't help it. I think it's a defect.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    It's adaptation, yes we want to induce growth in the fast twitch fibers.
    We certainly want to induce growth.

    However, on a cut, outside of newbie gains, I really don't see how likely this is. That's my only real concern here. I have DEFINITELY learned to respect what a periodized approach incorporating higher-rep work can do on a bulk.

    It's for cutting that this makes me nervous.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    Slow concentric training will result in more lactic acid production then fast concentrics, lactic acid is linked to higher GH .It purely is another way to train.I doubt you'll find studies on slow concentrics but it works, use it for 3-4 weeks and let me know
    As a matter of fact, I did.

    I used it while product testing for flawlesstraining, and I lost size when I used it during cutting. The product's author suggested this was because my diet was too low in carbs, and because I he didn't feel I am an athlete.

    I did fiddle around with it a little while bulking. Is there a way to use it during a cut without losing size?

    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    Cool. Gonna publish up these results? It would make a killer paper!
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    I can't, the clients all have to sign before they get their hormonal profiles done. I can talk about the results but I can't release it as research.
    Really? Even if they remain anonymous? Seems a tragic loss of data.

    <mutters under her breath - stupid ethical considerations>
    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    I don't know how many BB really need to be concerned with bodypart training, to be frank. But you earlier argued that the gen pop needn't be concerned with explosive concentrics. Now you're arguing they needn't be concerned with slow concentrics either?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    I think things are getting twisted. I stated earlier that the gen pop should use explosive concentrics. A guy who has a family, a 9-5 who just wants to add some muscle and loss some weight doesn't need slow concentrics.
    Why not?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    BBers not doing bodypart splits? Are you feeling ok? lol
    I am, indeed, feeling ok.

    Probably because I DON'T do "leg day", "arm day", or "shoulder day".

    <grins>

    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    Why?

    And for a cut, or for a bulk?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    It is going to change their training intensity. Our body is going to respond differently. I'd used it more on a bulk than a cut. During a cut we don't want a slow training time for the majority of the training.
    Agreed. Uses too much glycogen. Not cool on lower calories.

    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    Revisiting an earlier comment, you mentioned that you use both high and low reps for cutting. You seem to be of a mind that low reps for cutting are a bit of a fad. Should I take it you're not a fan? How do YOU cut up your physique clients?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    I love low reps for cutting, but the fitness industry over responds.
    They do? So far I don't see a whole lot of people cutting on low reps. What problem do you see with the industry getting attached to something so effective?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    How do I cut up a physique client? That's a whole article that I would love to write.
    I'll look forward to it.



    Thanks Jimmy

    MariAnne

  21. #46
    Wannabebig Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Built View Post
    Well, maybe if you're male and/or assisted.

    Personally, I haven't had any success cutting with high reps.

    Worked like a hot damn with low though. Once I realized what was going on, I started to think a bit more on it, and, well, I've yet to see a ripped mom getting out of toning class at the community centre.

    How do you do it with your clients, Maki? What kind of protocol do you have them do?
    You are correct, the majority of people would benefit from cutting with low reps. The ONLY reason I advocate higher reps, AT TIMES, during cutting is for the simple purpose of changing training intensity. Do I think the "high rep for GH" is something great? No, not at all but do I think it's something we should completely throw out the window? No.

    You referenced that you've never seen a ripped mom in a toning class, you are right but it is because they are only doing high reps. I love low rep training but if we stayed with low rep training for too long (the classes) we wouldn't grow that much either.

  22. #47
    Wannabebig Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Built View Post
    I guess it's hard when you're training someone for fat loss rather than dieting off the weight. And you can't MAKE them stick to a diet.

    It's no secret that my approach isn't so much to train for fat loss as it is to diet off the weight and risk manage muscle maintenance through short, heavy workouts. That being said, a little strategic cardio can provide a bit of a boost and allow for some much-welcomed dietary freedom, to be sure.

    And I never entirely abandon high-er rep work - my old joints seem to need a little help from this type of training - I just don't rely on it for fat loss (although if I get a little fat burning out of it, TRUST me, it is not unwelcomed!)

    Jimmy, I wasn't suggesting you were comparing the GH increase you'd get from lactic acid type training with the increase from injections - but I've not found much that supports these transient endogenous spikes actually translate to measureable physique gains. Do you have evidence that they do?


    I tried to train for fat loss for years.

    Heh, I jogged my way up to metformin and 40% bodyfat. <shudders at the now distant memory>

    Ok let me clear something up. I am not a steady state aerobic guy, not at all. Yes you are right, the GH spike isn't going to completely change a physique but we also know that high rep work will activate different muscle fibers. The majority of the people fail with fat loss because they do not train with enough intensity.Well what if I gave them high rep complexes or tri-sets with high reps? Do you see what I'm getting at, high rep can be high intensity. The typical superset doesn't have to be the be all end all.

  23. #48
    Wannabebig Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Built View Post
    Okay, you lost me. I think I'll wait for the book for this one lol!
    Sorry about that
    I am, however, charmed by this "U" diet of which you speak. I'm a fan of lower-carb, cyclic approaches to begin with. Where can I read up on this one?
    Sorry, I haven't written an article on it yet.




    Couldn't agree more. This last year for me has been one of discovery - my quads, delts and pecs really need work in the higher end of the hypertrophy range, and with considerably more volume than say my hams, back, and arms.

    I wish I could find a listing of "typical" muscle-fibre-type concentrations.

    I seem to have the idea that hams are predominantly fast twitch, soleus slow, gastrocs fast, delts slow, quads slow, tibialis fast ... I understand that these are gross generalizations and vary from person to person, but still, in the absence of muscle biopsies, generalizations can serve as starting points.
    Any place that tells you a ratio of FT/ST without biopsies is lying to you.You've got to remember that you need to consisently fight adaptation.Slow concentrics are just another method to use. In terms of muscle fiber type, I think it has some benefit but remember it is just another way to target the muscle.



    Now this is interesting, and I don't understand it. How are you going to be able to stimulate recovery with higher rep work on reduced calories? The whole reason I've trained with lower reps on a cut is because it's less taxing. I just want to stimulate the muscle enough to stick around. Simply through increased blood flow and less taxing sessions. There is a difference between high rep training for fat loss and high rep training for recovery. For fat loss I might perform two quad sets of 3 sets of 15-10 reps. For recovery I may go with 2 sets of 20 reps with a full body session.

    Jimmy, please let me be clear here - I'm not trying to bust your chops, I swear! - You know more about this stuff than I do and I'm trying to pump you for information. I'm also going into a cut in a week, so this is really timely for me. It's just your approach is so very different from what I've found success with. I'd like to understand what it is that you do.
    Hey no problem, I love talking shop and love helping people. Any help I can be, I'd love to be.


    See, this is where I get nervous. The object, of course, on a cut is to only cut fat. Increasing intensity ... hmmm. How do you do this as the cut progresses without compromising LBM?The first way that people increase intensity on a cut is to add more total work. So intensity techniqes like drop-sets or increasing aerobic work or increasing training sessions. I'm on the bottom part of the "U" (the low carb part) right now and I am still training the same amount. On a cut you must remember that you have to reach an intensity thershold. The best piece of take home advice I can give you is do something you've never done.Aim to progress every session without going on the deep end. If your first exercise is a deadlift, on the 2nd week add another set without adding extra sets on the rest of your workout. On the 3rd session, drop that set and increase the rep by one or two.



    Absolutely.




    It is SUCH an interesting area to me. I'll look forward to reading more on this as you produce it.
    Yes it really is interesting


    I think you may have misread my post. I suggested most people cut on HIGH reps. High reps is the one that is popular.
    For the majority of people yes. For those on the message boards however,they do tend to over react

    When I tell people I cut on LOW reps most people look at me like I've lost my mind.
    You should see the looks I get in the gym lol


    I suppose that's the big trick. I just wish I had more of a handle on it.





    Here we go. This is the part I was waiting for.

    <rubs hands together>

    Now, type I are the oxidative, and type II are either fast (glycogen) or slow-ish.

    I have certainly noticed this bulk that my quads woke up with the higher rep work, so I too have learned to respect the value of the 15-rep set of front squats (yes, puking is a value). Is it just that - working through the oxidative slow twitch motor units until the fast twitch ones kick in? Is this what you're getting at here? Or are you looking at this from a hormonal perspective?
    I'm looking at this through the amount of muscle damage that is goingto occur. We know that lower reps and higher reps both function differently in terms of both hormonal, motor unit and muscle breakdown

    And what, exactly, is the difference to the amount of muscle damage elicited by 40 seconds TUT using slow negs on a 5-rep set, and the damage elicited by 40 seconds TUT performed in a 10-rep set? I'm really trying to wrap my mind around this one.
    In the first option your going to be primarily fast twicth dominat with less muscle breakdown. In the second your going to have more mechanical damamge. keep in mind I'm just looking at the reps here. In terms of the eccentric, you'll eccentric load the muscle more with the first option but you'll load it longer with the second.





    Absolutely. But to be fair, tell a newbie to replace bread with lettuce and pasta with broccoli and get 'em doing the Susan Powter video workout and they'll see some very nice fat loss.

    I miss newbie gains. <cries>




    Okay, if my sig weren't already too big, I'd sig this... Yes, I probably am. I can't help it. I think it's a defect.


    We certainly want to induce growth.

    However, on a cut, outside of newbie gains, I really don't see how likely this is. That's my only real concern here. I have DEFINITELY learned to respect what a periodized approach incorporating higher-rep work can do on a bulk.

    It's for cutting that this makes me nervous.


    As a matter of fact, I did.

    I used it while product testing for flawlesstraining, and I lost size when I used it during cutting. The product's author suggested this was because my diet was too low in carbs, and because I he didn't feel I am an athlete.
    I'm just not going to comment here

    I did fiddle around with it a little while bulking. Is there a way to use it during a cut without losing size?
    I've never suggested using a slow concentric only approach. I've suggested one exercise and maybe two. The bulk of your workload should be things that induce a higher metabolic rate.



    Really? Even if they remain anonymous? Seems a tragic loss of data.
    Sorry but I can talk about it

    <mutters under her breath - stupid ethical considerations>


    Why not?
    This training time is limited, he needw to get in and get out

    I am, indeed, feeling ok.

    Probably because I DON'T do "leg day", "arm day", or "shoulder day".
    Nice
    <grins>




    Agreed. Uses too much glycogen. Not cool on lower calories.




    They do? So far I don't see a whole lot of people cutting on low reps. What problem do you see with the industry getting attached to something so effective?
    Need to remind you of swiss balls. I think low rep cutting is great but not the be all end all



    I'll look forward to it.



    Thanks Jimmy

    MariAnne

    Hope that clears it up

  24. #49
    Just watch me ... Built's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    9,912
    Awesome.

    So, this metabolic work you have your clients do on cuts - what does it accomplish - does it simply burn off more calories, or is it somehow protective of BMR and LBM?

  25. #50
    Just watch me ... Built's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    9,912
    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    And what, exactly, is the difference to the amount of muscle damage elicited by 40 seconds TUT using slow negs on a 5-rep set, and the damage elicited by 40 seconds TUT performed in a 10-rep set? I'm really trying to wrap my mind around this one.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    In the first option your going to be primarily fast twicth dominat with less muscle breakdown. In the second your going to have more mechanical damamge. keep in mind I'm just looking at the reps here. In terms of the eccentric, you'll eccentric load the muscle more with the first option but you'll load it longer with the second.
    Okay, so on a cut, where the focus switches from hypertrophy to prevention of muscle loss, it strikes me that the first option would be preferable, right? For the most part, there's just not enough food going in to maintain anabolism to counter a lot of mechanical damage - am I reading this right? It at least seems to make sense in my little brain.

    And I imagine you adjust your approach as a cut progresses, right? At uber-lean levels of bodyfat, muscle loss becomes more and more of a concern. Is your approach to kick-start the cut with more metabolic work, then move toward more of a "muscle-protection" strategy as the cut progresses - cutting down on mechanical damage, volume, and metabolic work and focussing instead on keeping precious LBM as the last bits of fluff are gradually coaxed off?

    Quote Originally Posted by Built
    I used it while product testing for flawlesstraining, and I lost size when I used it during cutting. The product's author suggested this was because my diet was too low in carbs, and because I he didn't feel I am an athlete.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy
    I'm just not going to comment here
    ROFLMFAO!


Similar Threads

  1. Spying On Americans, Part 2
    By Focused70 in forum General Chat
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 01-27-2007, 09:09 AM
  2. One on One with Jimmy Smith by Maki Riddington - Dec 26th Dec 2006
    By Joe Black in forum Bodybuilding & Weight Training
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 01-21-2007, 07:56 PM
  3. Whoah...almost died today...(a squat query)
    By puny_ectomorph in forum Bodybuilding & Weight Training
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 08-26-2002, 03:17 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
  •