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 | 11 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

Dan_The_man

I prefer myself to make a work-out easier if I can...

These machines might yeild excellent results on their own terms, but in a typical gym environment I always find training very, very hard. Unless you have the currency, and space to own these machines, or your own properly policed gym facility, the machines wont be as productive as they could be.

In commercial gyms your subjected to too many outside forces, such as loud music and other individuals making loud noises or hogging exercise equipment.

It's only when its just you and the tool you use, you can really appreciate the mind-muscle connection. In a commercial-gym it's much harder to ascertain a mind-muscle connection, and surely the makers of this equipment will be looking for commercial clients.

To be cynical, the only reason commercial gyms have preference for machines is that they make less mess than barbells. It's just a case of pulling a pin out, rather than having plates being scattered here there and everywhere. The smith-machine if you like...was an attempt at combining the efficienty of a machine with a barbell.


Dan

Dan
Open User Options Menu

Joshua Trentine

Ohio, USA

Did anyone notice that these machines are EXACTLY the same as the newest Nautilus line? I mean they are identical.The only difference is the weight stack.

Safe to say Nautilus is partnered with the guy who patented the tilting weight stack, on this project ???
Open User Options Menu

Ellington Darden

Joshua Trentine wrote:
Did anyone notice that these machines are EXACTLY the same as the newest Nautilus line? I mean they are identical.The only difference is the weight stack.

Safe to say Nautilus is partnered with the guy who patented the tilting weight stack, on this project ???


Josh,

You're wrong. Take the X-Force tilting weight stack off and SOME of the machines are SIMILAR. But they are certainly NOT exactly the same.

Look at X-Force's Horizontal Leg Curl, Leg Press, Lat Back Circular, Pec Arm Cross, and Abdominal Crunch? There are major differences between them and Nautilus' One versions.

You should realize that X-Force's Swedish engineers, who are perhaps the best in the world, and their attorneys, are fully aware of the necessary patents and trademarks required before they display machines at IHRSA.

X-Force is not Nautilus . . . and X-Force and Nautilus are not partnered in this new endeavor.

Ellington

Open User Options Menu

Joshua Trentine

Ohio, USA

Hmmmmmm....

could have fooled me.

Open User Options Menu

Joshua Trentine

Ohio, USA

Is it just coincidence that they look so alike.
Open User Options Menu

Joshua Trentine

Ohio, USA

Nautilus one.
Open User Options Menu

Joshua Trentine

Ohio, USA

Maybe the word EXACTLY is too strong but if you look at articulations and design , you would think there is some influence
Open User Options Menu

Joshua Trentine

Ohio, USA

Nautilus 1
Open User Options Menu

Joshua Trentine

Ohio, USA

If you go back and fourth you can see that , at least positionally, the bi & tri is much like nautilus.

their pullover looks like it is straight out of the nitro line.

Upon further review the Abdominal machines still look the same to me.

am i seeing things?
Open User Options Menu

Joshua Trentine

Ohio, USA

abs look the same
Open User Options Menu

Joshua Trentine

Ohio, USA

Nautilus One
Open User Options Menu

Joshua Trentine

Ohio, USA

Joshua Trentine wrote:
Nautilus one.


Open User Options Menu

Ellington Darden

Josh,

Reread my X-Force article. Mats Thulin, the owner, was a Nautilus distributor in Scandinavia for more than 25 years (and he still is) . . . and he had 127 Nautilus centers (and he still has 5). So, wouldn't you think that the Nautilus machines have influenced him?

In fact, three years ago, Mats offered his tilting weight stack concept to Nautilus. Guess what? Nautilus rejected his idea.

What do you do?

Mats chose to do it himself. And he has.

And I'm helping.

Ellington
Open User Options Menu

Joshua Trentine

Ohio, USA

I wasn't being critical of anyone.

At first glance i thought they were being manufactured in the same place.

Some of the designs are almost the same if not the same, if he can get away with it and the machines are great, so be it.

I just thought is was interesting, I'm not understanding the defensive posture.
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

Ellington Darden wrote:
Josh,

Reread my X-Force article. Mats Thulin, the owner, was a Nautilus distributor in Scandinavia for more than 25 years (and he still is) . . . and he had 127 Nautilus centers (and he still has 5). So, wouldn't you think that the Nautilus machines have influenced him?

In fact, three years ago, Mats offered his tilting weight stack concept to Nautilus. Guess what? Nautilus rejected his idea.

What do you do?

Mats chose to do it himself. And he has.

And I'm helping.

Ellington


I submitted a couple things to Nautilus 2 years ago also, and same result.

Looks like they know what they are doing

http://fitnessbusinesspro.com/...arter-20090310/

Open User Options Menu

Michael Petrella

Ontario, CAN

Hey Josh,

Maybe at the very least they should have changed the colour. lol.

I would be worried about getting sued by Nautilus. A jury with little interest in the actual difference may see it your way as well.

Michael
Open User Options Menu

saseme

I'm sure you could play the same game comparing the 'look' of other brands other than Nautilus to the X-Force stuff and come up with the same irrelevent conclusuions/argument.

'Look' is irrelevent, the 'how' is what counts, in all ways I'm sure, including patents.

Why would the creators of these machines have invested the big dollars to get these things to production just to risk a patent lawsuit? I think as Dr. Darden has said, being that he and the creators of X-Force have been so intimately involved with Nautilus, that they know what they're doing.

Or maybe this is a veiled attack from the crowd who indulges exclusively in those incy-wincy movements that these machines might not be suited to and are actually superior to? Mmm...
Open User Options Menu

Landau

Florida, USA

The X-Force Concept is a great one, but IMO it needs to incorporate positive/negative with the accentuated negative. I am not an engineer, but they know the machines also need some tweaking.

But with all that being said and unfortunately with the current "state of affairs," in this industry, it might be a day late and a dollar short. With that said, I will do what I can on my end to support their efforts. If they win, we all win.
Open User Options Menu

saseme

Landau wrote:
The X-Force Concept is a great one, but IMO it needs to incorporate positive/negative with the accentuated negative. I am not an engineer, but they know the machines also need some tweaking.

But with all that being said and unfortunately with the current "state of affairs," in this industry, it might be a day late and a dollar short. With that said, I will do what I can on my end to support their efforts. If they win, we all win.


David, can you expand on your first paragraph?
Open User Options Menu

Ellington Darden

Guys,

I didn't know I was defensive. I was simply stating facts and details.

Mats Thulin knows what he is doing. In his prototype shop in Sweden, he has several Nautilus machines and several X-Force machines, side by side.

I'm no patent attorney. But depending on the actual patent (the type, the wording, and the date), there are design concepts another company can use, modify to a certain degree, or not apply. Plus, many concepts are not patentable, were never patented, or were patented improperly initially. You and your attorneys have to dig thoroughly to discern what has been, and not been, filed.

Arthur Jones, for example, in the 1970s, patented a few things -- but failed to patent a lot of things he should have patented. And as many of you know, he was copied all over the world -- and he's still being copied today. Some was okay, some was not okay.

Someone once said, "The history of innovation is the history of litigation."

No one will care much about what Mats Thulin and X-Force do; unless -- and this is a BIG unless -- unless they are really successful.

Then, there will be all kinds of people coming at him with with some form of Arthur Jones's well-known comments: Ignore, Ridicule, Attack, Copy, and Steal. Jones said many times that those five concepts were the way of the world.

I believe Mats Thulin understands the above. And to him, I say . . .

BRAVO.

Ellington


Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

Ellington Darden wrote:
Guys,

I didn't know I was defensive. I was simply stating facts and details.

Mats Thulin knows what he is doing. In his prototype shop in Sweden, he has several Nautilus machines and several X-Force machines, side by side.

I'm no patent attorney. But depending on the actual patent (the type, the wording, and the date), there are design concepts another company can use, modify to a certain degree, or not apply. Plus, many concepts are not patentable, were never patented, or were patented improperly initially.

Arthur Jones, for example, in the 1970s, patented a few things -- but failed to patent a lot of things he should have patented. And as many of you know, he was copied all over the world -- and he's still being copied today. Some was okay, some was not okay.

Someone once said, "The history of innovation is the history of litigation."

No one will care much about what Mats Thulin and X-Force do; unless -- and this is a BIG unless -- unless they are really successful.

Then, there will be all kinds of people coming at him with with some form of Arthur Jones's well-known comments: Ignore, Ridicule, Attack, Copy, and Steal. Jones said many times that those five concepts were the way of the world.

I believe Mats Thulin understands the above. And to him, I say: BRAVO.

Ellington




I could be mistaken, but I doubt any of the Nautilus Stength Machines (with weight stacks)are protected with any enforceable patents.

Every company out there copies a design they saw or used.

The only thing patentable on the X-FORCE (if it is, since it has been done before) is the adjustable angle on the weight stack, or the "novel method" for making the adjustment.

The individual machine frames and actions would be an entirely separate issue.

Speaking of patent enforcement,I think Lloyd Lambert or Ray Stearn, told me that AJ sued Muscle Dynamics or DynaCam for using a cam, and that is how he got the chrome plating plant in Texas. But you know how rumors are.
Open User Options Menu

admnautilus

Washington, USA

They may look somewhat like a Nautilus machine but they sure don't feel or act like one. Just from the stand point of joint articulation and human movement exercise equipment will look like each other. What made Nautilus different than its competitors was the cam, protocol and Arthur. X-Force is way different in function and design where it counts. Deeper inroad and time efficiency are just two of those areas.

Also having Dr.Darden doing research and creating how to use them to get the best return on investment puts X-Force into a whole different market.

Remember the Nautilus books? I bought everyone and could not wait till the next one came out. I hope that X-force and Dr. Darden will do the same. It is not just about the equipment but how you use it. Imagine a line of equipment with a users manual to get results! Now how about better results in less time!
X-force will be that company(I hope)that has the whole package. Equipment, protocol, research and training. Jeff
Open User Options Menu

tpklose

There are a few photos from the Expo x-Force with Dr.D., D.Landau, G.Jones
by John Corlett on

www.ironhistory.com
www.ironage.us

You may have to register

BR from Germany

Thomas
Open User Options Menu

chasbari

Ohio, USA

Ellington Darden wrote:
Guys,

I didn't know I was defensive. I was simply stating facts and details.

Mats Thulin knows what he is doing. In his prototype shop in Sweden, he has several Nautilus machines and several X-Force machines, side by side.

I'm no patent attorney. But depending on the actual patent (the type, the wording, and the date), there are design concepts another company can use, modify to a certain degree, or not apply. Plus, many concepts are not patentable, were never patented, or were patented improperly initially. You and your attorneys have to dig thoroughly to discern what has been, and not been, filed.

Arthur Jones, for example, in the 1970s, patented a few things -- but failed to patent a lot of things he should have patented. And as many of you know, he was copied all over the world -- and he's still being copied today. Some was okay, some was not okay.

Someone once said, "The history of innovation is the history of litigation."

No one will care much about what Mats Thulin and X-Force do; unless -- and this is a BIG unless -- unless they are really successful.

Then, there will be all kinds of people coming at him with with some form of Arthur Jones's well-known comments: Ignore, Ridicule, Attack, Copy, and Steal. Jones said many times that those five concepts were the way of the world.

I believe Mats Thulin understands the above. And to him, I say . . .

BRAVO.

Ellington




Yep, general mechanical principles are general mechanical principles. You have to show new and unique ways of accomplishing them. And then, only your way of doing so is patentable. Other ways of accomplishing the same thing are not prevented. A design patent can protect the look of something to a certain degree. When doing a prior art search into the early Nautilus patents it is interesting to find a rotary variable resistance bicep curl from the late 1800's...

Vanity of vanities, there is truly nothing new under the sun. I have been working on a different mechanical approach to the eccentric upload concept for many years. It can be accomplished in numerous ways... and some not nearly so complex. Much more amenable to a home gym situation. Still, I wouldn't turn down the chance to train on this stuff. Looks like it would have a great feel to the enhanced intensity it can provide.
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

chasbari wrote:
Ellington Darden wrote:
Guys,

I didn't know I was defensive. I was simply stating facts and details.

Mats Thulin knows what he is doing. In his prototype shop in Sweden, he has several Nautilus machines and several X-Force machines, side by side.

I'm no patent attorney. But depending on the actual patent (the type, the wording, and the date), there are design concepts another company can use, modify to a certain degree, or not apply. Plus, many concepts are not patentable, were never patented, or were patented improperly initially. You and your attorneys have to dig thoroughly to discern what has been, and not been, filed.

Arthur Jones, for example, in the 1970s, patented a few things -- but failed to patent a lot of things he should have patented. And as many of you know, he was copied all over the world -- and he's still being copied today. Some was okay, some was not okay.

Someone once said, "The history of innovation is the history of litigation."

No one will care much about what Mats Thulin and X-Force do; unless -- and this is a BIG unless -- unless they are really successful.

Then, there will be all kinds of people coming at him with with some form of Arthur Jones's well-known comments: Ignore, Ridicule, Attack, Copy, and Steal. Jones said many times that those five concepts were the way of the world.

I believe Mats Thulin understands the above. And to him, I say . . .

BRAVO.

Ellington




Yep, general mechanical principles are general mechanical principles. You have to show new and unique ways of accomplishing them. And then, only your way of doing so is patentable. Other ways of accomplishing the same thing are not prevented. A design patent can protect the look of something to a certain degree. When doing a prior art search into the early Nautilus patents it is interesting to find a rotary variable resistance bicep curl from the late 1800's...

Vanity of vanities, there is truly nothing new under the sun. I have been working on a different mechanical approach to the eccentric upload concept for many years. It can be accomplished in numerous ways... and some not nearly so complex. Much more amenable to a home gym situation. Still, I wouldn't turn down the chance to train on this stuff. Looks like it would have a great feel to the enhanced intensity it can provide.


Hi Charles,

Sorry I mised your earlier question.

I'll PM you with my phone number so we can talk.

Sounds like we have covered much of the same ground at one time or another.
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