MB Madaera
Lost 31.7 lbs fat
Built 11.7 lbs muscle


Chris Madaera
Built 9 lbs muscle


Keelan Parham
Lost 30 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle


Bob Marchesello
Lost 23.55 lbs fat
Built 8.55 lbs muscle


Jeff Turner
Lost 25.5 lbs fat


Jeanenne Darden
Lost 26 lbs fat
Built 3 lbs muscle


Ted Tucker
Lost 41 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle

 
 

Determine the Length of Your Workouts

Evaluate Your Progress

Keep Warm-Up in Perspective


ARCHIVES >>

"Doing more exercise with less intensity,"
Arthur Jones believes, "has all but
destroyed the actual great value
of weight training. Something
must be done . . . and quickly."
The New Bodybuilding for
Old-School Results supplies
MUCH of that "something."

 

This is one of 93 photos of Andy McCutcheon that are used in The New High-Intensity Training to illustrate the recommended exercises.

To find out more about McCutcheon and his training, click here.

 

Mission Statement

H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy

Privacy Policy

Credits

LOG IN FORUM MAIN REGISTER SEARCH
NEW! Negative-Accentuated Machines
First | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

southbeach

Acerimmer1 wrote:
BIO-FORCE wrote:
Acerimmer1 wrote:
BIO-FORCE wrote:

Being able to train effectively with an adequately loaded eccentric is hardly "cracking a walnut".



Nobody is saying that it isn't important to crack walnuts. The saying is intended to illustrate that you do not need a sledge hammer to do so.

Understood, and there are no "simple" or easy ways to change the load to the eccentric action that will cause the benefit.

What benefit?

In essense without a partner or device of this type you are simply wasting around 50% of every rep of every set, with a underloaded condition.

However, it is even a bit more important than that. This underloading is at the HIGHEST MUSCLE TENSION of the set.

THAT is a pretty nice improvement to the training stimulus.

While the mechanical means is simple and even crude, it does make these forces available to those who are fortunate enough to have access to them.

That said I cannot vouch for the total function of any of the machines discussed here, and their implementation may not be as good as the concepts themslves.

Time will tell.



When you think that for less cost you could probably more than double the size of the weight stack it seems like using a sledge hammer to crack a walnut to me. The concept of the machine will not appeal as much to people who are not already initiated into strength training and they'd get more use out of a bigger stack!


The barbell is on its way out. Just like the heavy stone it's a DEVICE.

Machines are the device of the future of resistance training, maybe not for guys like you that can't make the change in paradigm. many can't learn anything new, :|
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

Acerimmer1 wrote:
BIO-FORCE wrote:
Acerimmer1 wrote:
BIO-FORCE wrote:

Being able to train effectively with an adequately loaded eccentric is hardly "cracking a walnut".



Nobody is saying that it isn't important to crack walnuts. The saying is intended to illustrate that you do not need a sledge hammer to do so.

Understood, and there are no "simple" or easy ways to change the load to the eccentric action that will cause the benefit.

What benefit?

In essense without a partner or device of this type you are simply wasting around 50% of every rep of every set, with a underloaded condition.

However, it is even a bit more important than that. This underloading is at the HIGHEST MUSCLE TENSION of the set.

THAT is a pretty nice improvement to the training stimulus.

While the mechanical means is simple and even crude, it does make these forces available to those who are fortunate enough to have access to them.

That said I cannot vouch for the total function of any of the machines discussed here, and their implementation may not be as good as the concepts themslves.

Time will tell.



When you think that for less cost you could probably more than double the size of the weight stack it seems like using a sledge hammer to crack a walnut to me. The concept of the machine will not appeal as much to people who are not already initiated into strength training and they'd get more use out of a bigger stack!


Got it.

I am not defending or promoting this specific "technology" since I have already designed something that doesn't require a sledge hammer (as you put it, but I do support the capability of properly loading the eccentric in a training sequence.

Open User Options Menu

Waynes

Switzerland

BIO-FORCE wrote:
Acerimmer1 wrote:
BIO-FORCE wrote:
Acerimmer1 wrote:
BIO-FORCE wrote:

Being able to train effectively with an adequately loaded eccentric is hardly "cracking a walnut".



Nobody is saying that it isn't important to crack walnuts. The saying is intended to illustrate that you do not need a sledge hammer to do so.

Understood, and there are no "simple" or easy ways to change the load to the eccentric action that will cause the benefit.

What benefit?

In essense without a partner or device of this type you are simply wasting around 50% of every rep of every set, with a underloaded condition.

However, it is even a bit more important than that. This underloading is at the HIGHEST MUSCLE TENSION of the set.

THAT is a pretty nice improvement to the training stimulus.

While the mechanical means is simple and even crude, it does make these forces available to those who are fortunate enough to have access to them.

That said I cannot vouch for the total function of any of the machines discussed here, and their implementation may not be as good as the concepts themslves.

Time will tell.



When you think that for less cost you could probably more than double the size of the weight stack it seems like using a sledge hammer to crack a walnut to me. The concept of the machine will not appeal as much to people who are not already initiated into strength training and they'd get more use out of a bigger stack!

Got it.

I am not defending or promoting this specific "technology" since I have already designed something that doesn't require a sledge hammer (as you put it, but I do support the capability of properly loading the eccentric in a training sequence.



If you are talking, when you say support the capability of properly loading the eccentric in a training sequence, and that means full force on negative and positive, I think I made a very good debate against this.

And of yet, I have not heard a good argument against my points from anyone here at all, or for any reason to do full positives and full negatives, against full positive onlys {meaning normal positive negative training, with underloaded negatives, separately, and also full loaded negatives done separately.

Wayne
Open User Options Menu

Michael Petrella

Ontario, CAN

Barbells are on the way out? Now I know you don't ever go to the gym.

Machine makers across the board are seeing declining sales. I hope the declining market doesn't hurt x-force to much.

The price of a barbell and all its ability to provide exercise for every part of the body will not be going away anytime soon. And yes this exercise is safe and productive.

Many people have built great physiques using the barbell as there primary tool.

I have 50+ medx and Nautilus machines and although I love them and use them I will not be selling my barbells anytime soon.

Michael
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

Michael Petrella wrote:
Barbells are on the way out? Now I know you don't ever go to the gym.

Machine makers across the board are seeing declining sales. I hope the declining market doesn't hurt x-force to much.

The price of a barbell and all its ability to provide exercise for every part of the body will not be going away anytime soon. And yes this exercise is safe and productive.

Many people have built great physiques using the barbell as there primary tool.

I have 50+ medx and Nautilus machines and although I love them and use them I will not be selling my barbells anytime soon.

Michael


why not get rid of your barbell with all those machines?
Open User Options Menu

Acerimmer1

A heavy stone is a device huh? How did you arrive at this... concussion?

Sorry my mistake I meant to say: How did you arrive at this...Conclusion.
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

Acerimmer1 wrote:
A heavy stone is a device huh? How did you arrive at this... concussion?

Sorry my mistake I meant to say: How did you arrive at this...Conclusion.


My point is we lifted stones as a a convenient and efficient analog for all else we might encounter in nature. then came the barbell as we became sophisticated.

then... came the NAUTILUS MACHINE. (thanks to the genius of AJ!)

what's next for mankind.. back to the barbell. or stone lifting?? i think not, maybe for YOU :|
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

IMHO, the OLYMPIC barbell will soon go the way of kettlebell.
Open User Options Menu

Larry T

North Carolina, USA

southbeach wrote:
Larry T wrote:
Being able to train with the same concentric as normal but with a heavier eccentric means that you will be able to do less reps this way than with the same weight on both concentric and eccentric. The naysayers will call this "much ado about nothing". What makes this new development so important?

and why is that less productive?



I'm asking the questions.
Open User Options Menu

Larry T

North Carolina, USA

southbeach wrote:

The barbell is on its way out. Just like the heavy stone it's a DEVICE.

Machines are the device of the future of resistance training, maybe not for guys like you that can't make the change in paradigm. many can't learn anything new, :|


What a tool. More proof that your involvement in strength training never made it from the hypothetical to the actual.
Open User Options Menu

the_iron_goose

southbeach wrote:
IMHO, the OLYMPIC barbell will soon go the way of kettlebell.


I don't think so.
Open User Options Menu

Acerimmer1

Anybody else seen Westsides tread sled?
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Portugal

What is lost in this thread is:

Very good results can be had with heavy concentrics.

One can choose to ignore this FACT, but history does leave clues!
Open User Options Menu

alex////doom

Ontario, CAN

Michael Petrella wrote:
Barbells are on the way out? Now I know you don't ever go to the gym.

Machine makers across the board are seeing declining sales. I hope the declining market doesn't hurt x-force to much.

The price of a barbell and all its ability to provide exercise for every part of the body will not be going away anytime soon. And yes this exercise is safe and productive.

Many people have built great physiques using the barbell as there primary tool.

I have 50+ medx and Nautilus machines and although I love them and use them I will not be selling my barbells anytime soon.

Michael


I agree with you there Mike....There is just nothing so pure and so iconic to man's struggle against an immense weight bearing upon his shoulders than the barbell squat or the stiff leg deadlift.

Though I am a strong proponent of intelligently designed machines that are safer and more efficient than barbells...there is nothing that gets my adrenaline pumping more than to have hundreds of pounds on my back or in my hands that has no quarrels about killing me if I don't get back up and make that last rep.

Alex
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

alex////doom wrote:
Michael Petrella wrote:
Barbells are on the way out? Now I know you don't ever go to the gym.

Machine makers across the board are seeing declining sales. I hope the declining market doesn't hurt x-force to much.

The price of a barbell and all its ability to provide exercise for every part of the body will not be going away anytime soon. And yes this exercise is safe and productive.

Many people have built great physiques using the barbell as there primary tool.

I have 50+ medx and Nautilus machines and although I love them and use them I will not be selling my barbells anytime soon.

Michael

I agree with you there Mike....There is just nothing so pure and so iconic to man's struggle against an immense weight bearing upon his shoulders than the barbell squat or the stiff leg deadlift.

Though I am a strong proponent of intelligently designed machines that are safer and more efficient than barbells...there is nothing that gets my adrenaline pumping more than to have hundreds of pounds on my back or in my hands that has no quarrels about killing me if I don't get back up and make that last rep.

Alex


I too agree with you and Mike.

The development of the plate loaded barbell was the single greatest development in strength technology to date as a complete training tool/device.

I think there is a way to combine the good qualities of the barbell and the good qualities of machines in a way that allows you to use the best of both, but I'm not disclosing it, unless someone wants to build it.

Open User Options Menu

ackew

Nice! I live in Stockholm, so I really hope I get to try these machines soon.
Open User Options Menu

Acerimmer1

BIO-FORCE wrote:
I'm not disclosing it, unless someone wants to build it.



Who would commit to building it without knowing what it was? Who can even know that they could build it?
Open User Options Menu

Acerimmer1

alex////doom wrote:

There is nothing that gets my adrenaline pumping more than to have hundreds of pounds on my back or in my hands that has no quarrels about killing me if I don't get back up and make that last rep.

Alex


Drama Queen!
Open User Options Menu

admnautilus

Washington, USA

I just got back from San Francisco and the IHRSA show. I spent a lot of time at the X-FORCE booth and trained(to failure) on 13 of the the 14 pcs. Wow! is all I can say. They have a great feel and the switch between the positive to negative was better than I expected. .

As you begin the move either from pos. to neg. or vise versa the weight comes on and falls off very smoothly. There is no wabble or machine shake at all from the switch of the stack to the frame or client.No extra noise. They were almost silent. You would not know it was happening except from the change in resistance.

I know there has been a lot of speculation about these but from my opinion and use I am very impressed. I was so fatigued from these machines that I could not get comfortable on the plane home or trying to sleep.

Of course today I am very sore. The inroad was amazing- I was able to do around 6-8 reps with the correct resistance and the fatigue came on quickly but managable. Think what it would feel like to do your normal positive and then turn and add 30-40% on the negative!! It was great.

Some movements will need some tweeking and that is just why they brought them out now. They won't be ready for Us market till December 2009 according to the owner Mats Thulin.
From my perspective this is the greatest leap forward in equipment design and strength training since Arthur and Nautilus- Medx.

Oh what fun could be had if you could have 6-8 of these in a room. Deeper inroad in less time. I again was very impressed and look forward to seeing them come to market.
The machines are a little bigger than a typical Nautilus piece but not too big. They are well built and pleasing to look at. Their fit and finish was very good.

I wish I could have spent more time with the group. Oh and it was fun to have Dr. Darden push me through my workout. David Landau was there as well as one of my favorite people, Big Jim Flanagan.

As Arthur would say "Always look for ways to make a workout harder not easier!" X-Force fits this to a tee!!Jeff
Open User Options Menu

overfiftylifter

Sounds like a great trip and look forward to pictures and video.

If we are 40% stronger on the eccentric side of lifting and the machines compensate for this, did the lifting feel more balanced-concentric/eccentric in execution? Did Dr. Darden have you try any stage reps?

Did they show or talk about a home gym unit?

Overfiftylifter-inquiring minds want to know.
Open User Options Menu

chasbari

Ohio, USA

BIO-FORCE wrote:
alex////doom wrote:
Michael Petrella wrote:
Barbells are on the way out? Now I know you don't ever go to the gym.

Machine makers across the board are seeing declining sales. I hope the declining market doesn't hurt x-force to much.

The price of a barbell and all its ability to provide exercise for every part of the body will not be going away anytime soon. And yes this exercise is safe and productive.

Many people have built great physiques using the barbell as there primary tool.

I have 50+ medx and Nautilus machines and although I love them and use them I will not be selling my barbells anytime soon.

Michael

I agree with you there Mike....There is just nothing so pure and so iconic to man's struggle against an immense weight bearing upon his shoulders than the barbell squat or the stiff leg deadlift.

Though I am a strong proponent of intelligently designed machines that are safer and more efficient than barbells...there is nothing that gets my adrenaline pumping more than to have hundreds of pounds on my back or in my hands that has no quarrels about killing me if I don't get back up and make that last rep.

Alex

I too agree with you and Mike.

The development of the plate loaded barbell was the single greatest development in strength technology to date as a complete training tool/device.

I think there is a way to combine the good qualities of the barbell and the good qualities of machines in a way that allows you to use the best of both, but I'm not disclosing it, unless someone wants to build it.



What kind of a budget will I need to build it?... always interested in the next step. I have two other protos in the works presently.
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

admnautilus wrote:
As Arthur would say "Always look for ways to make a workout harder not easier!" X-Force fits this to a tee!!Jeff


Thanks for the report Jeff, I was wondering about the transitions since that is the most difficult thing to get right.

I might re-phrase or maybe clarify what Jones said.

While I cannot claim to know what he meant when he said that, I think he really meant, "make an exercise MORE INTENSE".

That is, Increasing the eccentric load, allows you to use greater INTENSITY during the eccentric action. (INTENSITY being using a higher magnitude or density of momentary ability)

Previously, the eccentric ability was HIGH, and the load did not allow you to expend the high muscle forces that you were capable of. Subsequently the whole eccentric effort was FAR BELOW your momentary ability in each degree of the ROM.

X-FORCE now seems to provide the tool to come closer to the eccentric abilities.

No artificial slowing (which actually doesn't work) now that these are able to produce 140% load eccentric.

Look forward to taking them for a spin and evaluatiing. Maybe they will be brave and see fit to send a few to GOLDS in Venice.

If they survive that, and are accepted by such a varied training group, that would demonstrate pretty good market coverage.
Open User Options Menu

saseme

Do we know roughly what the per unit price will be? I'm guessing at least what MedX is plus some for the electric motor. Great looking equipment.
Open User Options Menu

admnautilus

Washington, USA

Hey Overfifty,
It was a great trip. I pretty much told everybody I talked with today about them.
The transition was very smooth. When the stack flipped vertical it did not hit you like a brick but came on in a very controlled fashion. I think this was do to the fact that it doesn't flip till you are already moving. Works vry well.

So I would say the rep felt balanced even though it was a different feel and has a slight learning curve.

As with any new movement, it will take a few times to get it down just right. Overall though, pretty simple to set up and get a great feel from the first rep. As I said in earlier post I was more impressed then I thought I would be, I thought that they would be still pretty rough yet since this is such a novell concept . Not the case. I am excited about how these could be appllied in a workout..

BTW all machines use gas shock seat adjustments and they weight stacks are set pretty much like a normal stack. each machine is adjustable for many different frames sizes and feel very much like sitting in a Nautilus machine. Jeff
Open User Options Menu

admnautilus

Washington, USA

Oh and they did not talk to me about a home unit. That of course does not mean that one is not in the works.
I could see how you could set up a unit with a number of movemnts hooked up to one X-Force stack that would flip. That would be a fun home piece!! Jeff
Open User Options Menu
First | Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | Next | Last
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy