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
Trentine
First | Prev | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

Average Al

sirloin wrote:
Grant D. wrote:
BTW Here is my last session all to failure ... meaning cannot move another millimeter or hold another second ...

Lower Back Max Pyramid: gain in 5 pounds
Chest Press Max Pyramid: added 2 steps and 10 pounds!
Chest Row: DoneInOne added 6 seconds and 2-1/2 pounds

All gains see you in two weeks!


Never really got the max pyramid protocol, I get working up to a weight that you fail on (simmer to the boil as John Little put it), but to then preform what essentially is several drop sets is completely unnecessary!
I also never really got why John Little went from promoting a system (MCT) that advocated a time under tension of 1-6 seconds on isolation exercises, to then promoting a protocol that has a trainee spend up to several mintues under tension, and like a cat he's done his best to cover up MCT ever existing...by taking down the site and video and by never talking about anymore. Its almost like hes embarrassed by it. I reckon if the publisher let him, he'd take the books off sale aswell.





I agree - the two methods are quite different. In addition to differences in load and TUT, the maximum contraction protocol is supposed to be done with the muscle fully contracted (shortened), whereas the max pyramid is typically done at the position of maximum moment arm, where the muscle is usually at mid range in terms of contraction.

The timing of his promotion of these two protocols was also interesting. First he writes a pair of books that promote the max contraction method. Then he follows this with a series of posts on the BBS site about a more practical 'variation' that basically doesn't fit a lot of the theory put forth in the max contraction books.

And it isn't clear that he has abandoned the max contraction stuff. On the Nautilus North web site, which was redone in the past year, you still find this:

"HOW WE DIFFER

Unlike traditional fitness approaches, Nautilus North utilizes the unique method of exercise that was developed by Founder & Lead Trainer: John Little. This method is formally known as: Max Contraction Training."



Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

So Little now is promoting something called 'max pyramid'? I find nothing on google about this, was this jst a post he made your saying?

He might have realized that full muscular tension isn't possible in the fully contracted position due to actin-myosin overlap, that was a huge flaw with max contraction.

Any links to anything about his new ideas? Fun to read these wild methods.


Average Al wrote:
sirloin wrote:
Grant D. wrote:
BTW Here is my last session all to failure ... meaning cannot move another millimeter or hold another second ...

Lower Back Max Pyramid: gain in 5 pounds
Chest Press Max Pyramid: added 2 steps and 10 pounds!
Chest Row: DoneInOne added 6 seconds and 2-1/2 pounds

All gains see you in two weeks!


Never really got the max pyramid protocol, I get working up to a weight that you fail on (simmer to the boil as John Little put it), but to then preform what essentially is several drop sets is completely unnecessary!
I also never really got why John Little went from promoting a system (MCT) that advocated a time under tension of 1-6 seconds on isolation exercises, to then promoting a protocol that has a trainee spend up to several mintues under tension, and like a cat he's done his best to cover up MCT ever existing...by taking down the site and video and by never talking about anymore. Its almost like hes embarrassed by it. I reckon if the publisher let him, he'd take the books off sale aswell.





I agree - the two methods are quite different. In addition to differences in load and TUT, the maximum contraction protocol is supposed to be done with the muscle fully contracted (shortened), whereas the max pyramid is typically done at the position of maximum moment arm, where the muscle is usually at mid range in terms of contraction.

The timing of his promotion of these two protocols was also interesting. First he writes a pair of books that promote the max contraction method. Then he follows this with a series of posts on the BBS site about a more practical 'variation' that basically doesn't fit a lot of the theory put forth in the max contraction books.

And it isn't clear that he has abandoned the max contraction stuff. On the Nautilus North web site, which was redone in the past year, you still find this:

"HOW WE DIFFER

Unlike traditional fitness approaches, Nautilus North utilizes the unique method of exercise that was developed by Founder & Lead Trainer: John Little. This method is formally known as: Max Contraction Training."





Open User Options Menu

sirloin

Nwlifter wrote:
So Little now is promoting something called 'max pyramid'? I find nothing on google about this, was this jst a post he made your saying?

He might have realized that full muscular tension isn't possible in the fully contracted position due to actin-myosin overlap, that was a huge flaw with max contraction.

Any links to anything about his new ideas? Fun to read these wild methods.


Average Al wrote:
sirloin wrote:
Grant D. wrote:
BTW Here is my last session all to failure ... meaning cannot move another millimeter or hold another second ...

Lower Back Max Pyramid: gain in 5 pounds
Chest Press Max Pyramid: added 2 steps and 10 pounds!
Chest Row: DoneInOne added 6 seconds and 2-1/2 pounds

All gains see you in two weeks!


Never really got the max pyramid protocol, I get working up to a weight that you fail on (simmer to the boil as John Little put it), but to then preform what essentially is several drop sets is completely unnecessary!
I also never really got why John Little went from promoting a system (MCT) that advocated a time under tension of 1-6 seconds on isolation exercises, to then promoting a protocol that has a trainee spend up to several mintues under tension, and like a cat he's done his best to cover up MCT ever existing...by taking down the site and video and by never talking about anymore. Its almost like hes embarrassed by it. I reckon if the publisher let him, he'd take the books off sale aswell.

He's had videos of the max pyramid videos up on youtube for several years, he also give a detailed description of max pyramid on the BBS site, however long before the site ended, the posts had been taken down.

Another flaw with regards to max contraction, is that he advocaded holding times of 1-6 seconds, this was based on the research A E Muller did in the 50s, the problem with that is that Muller's "findings" could not be replicated and turned out to be overstated.




I agree - the two methods are quite different. In addition to differences in load and TUT, the maximum contraction protocol is supposed to be done with the muscle fully contracted (shortened), whereas the max pyramid is typically done at the position of maximum moment arm, where the muscle is usually at mid range in terms of contraction.

The timing of his promotion of these two protocols was also interesting. First he writes a pair of books that promote the max contraction method. Then he follows this with a series of posts on the BBS site about a more practical 'variation' that basically doesn't fit a lot of the theory put forth in the max contraction books.

And it isn't clear that he has abandoned the max contraction stuff. On the Nautilus North web site, which was redone in the past year, you still find this:

"HOW WE DIFFER

Unlike traditional fitness approaches, Nautilus North utilizes the unique method of exercise that was developed by Founder & Lead Trainer: John Little. This method is formally known as: Max Contraction Training."







Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

He's had videos of the max pyramid videos up on youtube for several years, he also give a detailed description of max pyramid on the BBS site, however long before the site ended, the posts had been taken down.

Another flaw with regards to max contraction, is that he advocaded holding times of 1-6 seconds, this was based on the research A E Muller did in the 50s, the problem with that is that Muller's "findings" could not be replicated and turned out to be overstated.


Ah ok, kinda like how he was into powerfactor, then suddenly went to super low TUL statics, and PFT mentioned those 'two types of people' that need either short heavy or more TUL, then he bailed on that idea.

I just had never heard of his max pyramid stuff, I figured he just went dark after the MCT stuff.
Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

OK, found the youtubes of it. Huh... interesting, well, it's got a better chance of doing 'something' than those 6 second max contraction 'sets' did..... at least this has several sets of work and gets some fatigue in the muscles. But still.... hmmmm...


Open User Options Menu

sirloin

S.M.Punisher wrote:
sirloin wrote:
I actually agree here, but with regards to extended recovery, yeah.. maybe a day or two, but training once every two weeks?? I dont care how advanced or strong someone is, no one requires a two week recovery period! If indeed we did need such a recovery period from a such a breif amount of intense physical stress, we'd never had made as a species.

I'm not sure about the extended recovery, but I think it's highly dependent on fiber-type make up. For the most part I don't need two weeks' recovery, but my legs and lats seem to if I train them very hard, even with low volume. I can train something like lateral raises multiple times per day and arms several times per week.

I recently did a body-weight pullover for a few low-rep sets to failure, and two weeks later I hadn't recovered my initial strength, and that was from a first-time effort doing that exercise.

On the other hand, I recently tried a lateral raise at a different angle, and besides being surprised that that slight change meant my usually stronger side was now the weaker side, I gained significant strength in a matter of hours never mind days! I'm going to continue ultra high frequency and see where I can take it.

About whether we would have survived as a species or not, you have to take into account that we are generally a high-endurance species. We can hunt for hours without burning more than a small meal's worth of calories. A much more powerful animal cannot exert itself for anywhere near as long lest it overheat and die. A female lion can run at maximum speed for something like 9 meters before she gets exhausted.

So I think that when we train highly fast-twitch muscles hard to failure we're putting demands on recovery way over and above what we're adapted to do most efficiently by nature. And maybe not everyone is going to benefit from extended recovery for any particular muscle group because some people won't even have one major muscle group particularly predominant in fast-twitch fibers.


Interesting points. Ive observed how competitive sprinters (who are fast twitch dominated athletes) train, its several days a week, for as much as 3-4hrs a day. Now, obviously they dont excert maximally effort every time, but they do several times a week.
If sprinters, speed stakers, indoor pursuit cyclists etc (who are fast twitch dominated athletes) can excert maximal effort several days a week, then why would an average (a "high endurance species") need two weeks between workouts?















Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter



Interesting points. Ive observed how competitive sprinters (who are fast twitch dominated athletes) train, its several days a week, for as much as 3-4hrs a day. Now, obviously they dont excert maximally effort every time, but they do several times a week.
If sprinters, speed stakers, indoor pursuit cyclists etc (who are fast twitch dominated athletes) can excert maximal effort several days a week, then why would an average (a "high endurance species") need two weeks between workouts?




Yes, exactly. And oly lifters, and gymnasts and speed skaters....

Their not lacking any muscle either!

Why would a species be setup to where it can only exert maximum survival effort for 10 minutes every two weeks, we get hungry more often than that.

Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

Nwlifter wrote:


Interesting points. Ive observed how competitive sprinters (who are fast twitch dominated athletes) train, its several days a week, for as much as 3-4hrs a day. Now, obviously they dont excert maximally effort every time, but they do several times a week.
If sprinters, speed stakers, indoor pursuit cyclists etc (who are fast twitch dominated athletes) can excert maximal effort several days a week, then why would an average (a "high endurance species") need two weeks between workouts?




Yes, exactly. And oly lifters, and gymnasts and speed skaters....

Their not lacking any muscle either!

Why would a species be setup to where it can only exert maximum survival effort for 10 minutes every two weeks, we get hungry more often than that.



As I've harped on many times, the issue is failure training. When it's done 100% of the time on every set, it just requires more and more recovery time to where you're down to one workout a week or less to eek out another rep or few pounds.
Open User Options Menu

sirloin

Nwlifter wrote:
He's had videos of the max pyramid videos up on youtube for several years, he also give a detailed description of max pyramid on the BBS site, however long before the site ended, the posts had been taken down.

Another flaw with regards to max contraction, is that he advocaded holding times of 1-6 seconds, this was based on the research A E Muller did in the 50s, the problem with that is that Muller's "findings" could not be replicated and turned out to be overstated.

Ah ok, kinda like how he was into powerfactor, then suddenly went to super low TUL statics, and PFT mentioned those 'two types of people' that need either short heavy or more TUL, then he bailed on that idea.

I just had never heard of his max pyramid stuff, I figured he just went dark after the MCT stuff.


Oh there was more, lol, "done in one" came after the max pyramid protocol and then in the interview he did with coperate warrior a year or so ago, he was talking about circut training similar to Bruce Lees and the need for variation in training.
Again, this against everything else, given the point of the static protocols and "done in one" was to reduce wear and tear by avoiding "positions of disadvanged leverage".

Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

Oy!


sirloin wrote:
Nwlifter wrote:
He's had videos of the max pyramid videos up on youtube for several years, he also give a detailed description of max pyramid on the BBS site, however long before the site ended, the posts had been taken down.

Another flaw with regards to max contraction, is that he advocaded holding times of 1-6 seconds, this was based on the research A E Muller did in the 50s, the problem with that is that Muller's "findings" could not be replicated and turned out to be overstated.

Ah ok, kinda like how he was into powerfactor, then suddenly went to super low TUL statics, and PFT mentioned those 'two types of people' that need either short heavy or more TUL, then he bailed on that idea.

I just had never heard of his max pyramid stuff, I figured he just went dark after the MCT stuff.

Oh there was more, lol, "done in one" came after the max pyramid protocol and then in the interview he did with coperate warrior or year or so ago, he was talking about circut training similar to Bruce Lees and the need for variation in training.
Again, this against everything else, given the point of the static protocols and "done in one" was to reduce wear and tear by avoiding "positions of disadvanged leverage".



Open User Options Menu

sirloin

Average Al wrote:
sirloin wrote:
Grant D. wrote:
BTW Here is my last session all to failure ... meaning cannot move another millimeter or hold another second ...

Lower Back Max Pyramid: gain in 5 pounds
Chest Press Max Pyramid: added 2 steps and 10 pounds!
Chest Row: DoneInOne added 6 seconds and 2-1/2 pounds

All gains see you in two weeks!


Never really got the max pyramid protocol, I get working up to a weight that you fail on (simmer to the boil as John Little put it), but to then preform what essentially is several drop sets is completely unnecessary!
I also never really got why John Little went from promoting a system (MCT) that advocated a time under tension of 1-6 seconds on isolation exercises, to then promoting a protocol that has a trainee spend up to several mintues under tension, and like a cat he's done his best to cover up MCT ever existing...by taking down the site and video and by never talking about anymore. Its almost like hes embarrassed by it. I reckon if the publisher let him, he'd take the books off sale aswell.





I agree - the two methods are quite different. In addition to differences in load and TUT, the maximum contraction protocol is supposed to be done with the muscle fully contracted (shortened), whereas the max pyramid is typically done at the position of maximum moment arm, where the muscle is usually at mid range in terms of contraction.

The timing of his promotion of these two protocols was also interesting. First he writes a pair of books that promote the max contraction method. Then he follows this with a series of posts on the BBS site about a more practical 'variation' that basically doesn't fit a lot of the theory put forth in the max contraction books.

And it isn't clear that he has abandoned the max contraction stuff. On the Nautilus North web site, which was redone in the past year, you still find this:

"HOW WE DIFFER

Unlike traditional fitness approaches, Nautilus North utilizes the unique method of exercise that was developed by Founder & Lead Trainer: John Little. This method is formally known as: Max Contraction Training."

Ive seen that, ive also seen a few people ask on the nautilus north facebook page what happened to the MCT site, none have had a response in spite of regular posts being made, Ive also have pm'ed them myself to ask the same, i received no response.
Id love to know what happened to this "groundbreaking system" (thats how it was marketed), or the "revolutionary omega set..where you could "gain up to 18lbs of muscle in 4 weeks", Rich coming from a man who has done nothing but put down supplement companies and other individuals within the industry for using "seductive marketing" lol.







Open User Options Menu

sirloin

HeavyHitter32 wrote:
Nwlifter wrote:


Interesting points. Ive observed how competitive sprinters (who are fast twitch dominated athletes) train, its several days a week, for as much as 3-4hrs a day. Now, obviously they dont excert maximally effort every time, but they do several times a week.
If sprinters, speed stakers, indoor pursuit cyclists etc (who are fast twitch dominated athletes) can excert maximal effort several days a week, then why would an average (a "high endurance species") need two weeks between workouts?




Yes, exactly. And oly lifters, and gymnasts and speed skaters....

Their not lacking any muscle either!

Why would a species be setup to where it can only exert maximum survival effort for 10 minutes every two weeks, we get hungry more often than that.



As I've harped on many times, the issue is failure training. When it's done 100% of the time on every set, it just requires more and more recovery time to where you're down to one workout a week or less to eek out another rep or few pounds.


You've guys (who are obese) claiming they need six months between workouts on the Pete Sisco site (who is also obese). For me it goes beyond just muscle building, ive 3 herniated discs, regular training is a pain killer, my back gets as stiff as a board without it and becomes very painful, moreover, Ive suffered with depression for a long time, training more regularly improves my mood.

Open User Options Menu

S.M.Punisher

HeavyHitter32 wrote:
As I've harped on many times, the issue is failure training. When it's done 100% of the time on every set, it just requires more and more recovery time to where you're down to one workout a week or less to eek out another rep or few pounds.


Yes. Speed athletes don't train to exhaustion. They don't "run to failure." Oly lifters also don't for the most part train to failure. If you avoid failure you can get in some serious frequency. I find benefits to both approaches.

And you also don't have to hunt "to failure" to kill an animal. If it were about physical force against a large animal you'd obviously lose. Hence we relied on our endurance and intelligence from a survival/evolutionary perspective.
Open User Options Menu

S.M.Punisher

I just realized, thinking about the endurance vs. power thing from an evolutionary perspective... Can you imagine a typically (over)muscled bodybuilder being in any fit state to go out and hunt, imagining you were to send him back in time to those days?

The whole point about trying to build as much muscle as possible is to move away from a genetically predetermined "normal" human stature to a superhuman one - regardless of the cost of necessarily sacrificing endurance capabilities. It is to aspire to the raw muscular power of the lion. Bodybuilders don't care if that means getting tired walking up a flight of stairs. You can't have it all.

Arthur Jones alluded to this on several occasions I think, though I can't remember exactly where, talking about lions and gorillas and the immense power they demonstrate in brief bursts after doing mostly nothing most of the time. And, as I said before, they have to be even more wary of "going to failure" than we do.

This is in essence the idea behind high-intensity, low-frequency training. If you want to walk around with higher than average levels of muscle, you can't think like a typical endurance-orientated human, as a hunter by nature, when it comes to physical activity.

Maybe the value of HIT and training to failure is in taking a longer recovery rate as the price to pay for endlessly striving, with even more effort than a powerful animal would expend on a kill, to escape well-evolved human constraints on power and strength to become like that animal.
Open User Options Menu

sirloin

S.M.Punisher wrote:
HeavyHitter32 wrote:
As I've harped on many times, the issue is failure training. When it's done 100% of the time on every set, it just requires more and more recovery time to where you're down to one workout a week or less to eek out another rep or few pounds.

Yes. Speed athletes don't train to exhaustion. They don't "run to failure." Oly lifters also don't for the most part train to failure. If you avoid failure you can get in some serious frequency. I find benefits to both approaches.

And you also don't have to hunt "to failure" to kill an animal. If it were about physical force against a large animal you'd obviously lose. Hence we relied on our endurance and intelligence from a survival/evolutionary perspective.


Many speed athletes do to train and race to exhaustion, like indoor pursuit cyclists. Heck, I even recall Linford Christie saying in an interview in the 90s, that after a 200 metre sprint he barely had the energy left to do his lap of honour.

I agree, living by rivers were foodstuffs are, trapping, using a bow & arrow etc, are indeed methods of preserving energy. However fighting ( in some cases to the death) for dominance and pick of the female, avoiding becoming pray, climbing to high terrain etc, are all high to maximal effort endeavours that would have been common place.


Open User Options Menu

S.M.Punisher

sirloin wrote:
Many speed athletes do to train and race to exhaustion, like indoor pursuit cyclists. Heck, I even recall Linford Christie saying in an interview in the 90s, that after a 200 metre sprint he barely had the energy left to do his lap of honour.


That was after a competition race, though. An exceptional event. I have seen cyclists training brutally hard, but I don't know how frequently they can do it.

I agree, living by rivers were foodstuffs are, trapping, using a bow & arrow etc, are indeed methods of preserving energy. However fighting ( in some cases to the death) for dominance and pick of the female, avoiding becoming pray, climbing to high terrain etc, are all high to maximal effort endeavours that would have been common place.

A fight between two evenly matched humans is as much a test of endurance as it is power. Two minutes of constant grappling is absolutely exhausting. Compare that to the few seconds it takes a lion to kill its prey.
Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

S.M.Punisher wrote:
HeavyHitter32 wrote:
As I've harped on many times, the issue is failure training. When it's done 100% of the time on every set, it just requires more and more recovery time to where you're down to one workout a week or less to eek out another rep or few pounds.

Yes. Speed athletes don't train to exhaustion. They don't "run to failure." Oly lifters also don't for the most part train to failure. If you avoid failure you can get in some serious frequency. I find benefits to both approaches.

And you also don't have to hunt "to failure" to kill an animal. If it were about physical force against a large animal you'd obviously lose. Hence we relied on our endurance and intelligence from a survival/evolutionary perspective.


I've been going to failure over the last month or so on most moves (about two workouts a week) and the increased systematic fatigue became noticeable fairly quickly and progressively. I've started to back off by shying short of failure...recovery speeds up a lot even with extra volume thrown in.
Open User Options Menu

sirloin

S.M.Punisher wrote:
I just realized, thinking about the endurance vs. power thing from an evolutionary perspective... Can you imagine a typically (over)muscled bodybuilder being in any fit state to go out and hunt, imagining you were to send him back in time to those days?

The whole point about trying to build as much muscle as possible is to move away from a genetically predetermined "normal" human stature to a superhuman one - regardless of the cost of necessarily sacrificing endurance capabilities. It is to aspire to the raw muscular power of the lion. Bodybuilders don't care if that means getting tired walking up a flight of stairs. You can't have it all.

Arthur Jones alluded to this on several occasions I think, though I can't remember exactly where, talking about lions and gorillas and the immense power they demonstrate in brief bursts after doing mostly nothing most of the time. And, as I said before, they have to be even more wary of "going to failure" than we do.

This is in essence the idea behind high-intensity, low-frequency training. If you want to walk around with higher than average levels of muscle, you can't think like a typical endurance-orientated human, as a hunter by nature, when it comes to physical activity.

Maybe the value of HIT and training to failure is in taking a longer recovery rate as the price to pay for endlessly striving, with even more effort than a powerful animal would expend on a kill, to escape well-evolved human constraints on power and strength to become like that animal.


By oversized bodybuilders, I take your talking about the drug users? I ask because the average Joe by natural means does not have "oversized" muscles...even after many years of training.

Was Arthur Jones talking about observing those animals in the wild or when lock up in an inclosure? Theres a big difference. In the wild they are not only having to hunt, but also feed and protect their young, fend out rivals, cover a lotvof ground etc.
On a side note, have you seen the video of Terri and the gorilla on a the Pullover, by the look on its face its going all out (am joking of course:)

Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

I've noticed that many times too. I can do way more, way more often, and still make progress. In fact, the progress just kinda 'happens' instead of having to eek out one more rep.


HeavyHitter32 wrote:
S.M.Punisher wrote:
HeavyHitter32 wrote:
As I've harped on many times, the issue is failure training. When it's done 100% of the time on every set, it just requires more and more recovery time to where you're down to one workout a week or less to eek out another rep or few pounds.

Yes. Speed athletes don't train to exhaustion. They don't "run to failure." Oly lifters also don't for the most part train to failure. If you avoid failure you can get in some serious frequency. I find benefits to both approaches.

And you also don't have to hunt "to failure" to kill an animal. If it were about physical force against a large animal you'd obviously lose. Hence we relied on our endurance and intelligence from a survival/evolutionary perspective.

I've been going to failure over the last month or so on most moves (about two workouts a week) and the increased systematic fatigue became noticeable fairly quickly and progressively. I've started to back off by shying short of failure...recovery speeds up a lot even with extra volume thrown in.


Open User Options Menu

S.M.Punisher

sirloin wrote:
By oversized bodybuilders, I take your talking about the drug users? I ask because the average Joe by natural means does not have "oversized" muscles...even after many years of training.


Yes, "oversized" is pretty well out of reach for a natural. It just represents one extreme on the continuum. To get big regardless - or at least to the extent you've got the fast-twitch fibers to get big - you've got to sacrifice endurance, and that means lower frequency, though not necessarily "extended" recovery. I also find it interesting that with the advent of steroids the frequency of a typical bodybuilder has gone down not up. Once per week per muscle is low frequency.

Was Arthur Jones talking about observing those animals in the wild or when lock up in an inclosure? Theres a big difference. In the wild they are not only having to hunt, but also feed and protect their young, fend out rivals, cover a lotvof ground etc.
On a side note, have you seen the video of Terri and the gorilla on a the Pullover, by the look on its face its going all out (am joking of course:)


I can't remember what Jones was saying exactly. But in the wild or not, very powerful animals have a very limited capacity to sustain maximum effort. I never saw that gorilla video.

Even talking of humans, I've often seen and heard about very powerful athletes like Jason Kenny and Ray Lewis being very calm and relaxed in every day life, slow even, and I don't think it's a coincidence.
Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

and that's the thing... There's
'hard training' that's hard enough for stimulation, then there is 'Hard training' that's too hard and just for the sake of training HARD.

The muscles on speed skaters, gymnasts, and many other athletes show that hard regular training works so I don't think people need to nuke themselves, so bad that they are in a hospital bed for 2 weeks between their 3 minute workouts
Enough stimulation, often enough to accumulate and induce a summation of muscle proteins is all that is needed as far as training goes.




S.M.Punisher wrote:
sirloin wrote:
Many speed athletes do to train and race to exhaustion, like indoor pursuit cyclists. Heck, I even recall Linford Christie saying in an interview in the 90s, that after a 200 metre sprint he barely had the energy left to do his lap of honour.

That was after a competition race, though. An exceptional event. I have seen cyclists training brutally hard, but I don't know how frequently they can do it.

I agree, living by rivers were foodstuffs are, trapping, using a bow & arrow etc, are indeed methods of preserving energy. However fighting ( in some cases to the death) for dominance and pick of the female, avoiding becoming pray, climbing to high terrain etc, are all high to maximal effort endeavours that would have been common place.

A fight between two evenly matched humans is as much a test of endurance as it is power. Two minutes of constant grappling is absolutely exhausting. Compare that to the few seconds it takes a lion to kill its prey.


Open User Options Menu

sirloin

Nwlifter wrote:
and that's the thing... There's
'hard training' that's hard enough for stimulation, then there is 'Hard training' that's too hard and just for the sake of training HARD.

The muscles on speed skaters, gymnasts, and many other athletes show that hard regular training works so I don't think people need to nuke themselves, so bad that they are in a hospital bed for 2 weeks between their 3 minute workouts
Enough stimulation, often enough to accumulate and induce a summation of muscle proteins is all that is needed as far as training goes.




S.M.Punisher wrote:
sirloin wrote:
Many speed athletes do to train and race to exhaustion, like indoor pursuit cyclists. Heck, I even recall Linford Christie saying in an interview in the 90s, that after a 200 metre sprint he barely had the energy left to do his lap of honour.

That was after a competition race, though. An exceptional event. I have seen cyclists training brutally hard, but I don't know how frequently they can do it.

I agree, living by rivers were foodstuffs are, trapping, using a bow & arrow etc, are indeed methods of preserving energy. However fighting ( in some cases to the death) for dominance and pick of the female, avoiding becoming pray, climbing to high terrain etc, are all high to maximal effort endeavours that would have been common place.

A fight between two evenly matched humans is as much a test of endurance as it is power. Two minutes of constant grappling is absolutely exhausting. Compare that to the few seconds it takes a lion to kill its prey.



Most real fights are over in a few seconds, i even think Geoff Thompson had a book called the 3 second fighter, based on him witnessing and being involved in thousands of fights.

Open User Options Menu

sirloin

Nwlifter wrote:
and that's the thing... There's
'hard training' that's hard enough for stimulation, then there is 'Hard training' that's too hard and just for the sake of training HARD.

The muscles on speed skaters, gymnasts, and many other athletes show that hard regular training works so I don't think people need to nuke themselves, so bad that they are in a hospital bed for 2 weeks between their 3 minute workouts
Enough stimulation, often enough to accumulate and induce a summation of muscle proteins is all that is needed as far as training goes.




S.M.Punisher wrote:
sirloin wrote:
Many speed athletes do to train and race to exhaustion, like indoor pursuit cyclists. Heck, I even recall Linford Christie saying in an interview in the 90s, that after a 200 metre sprint he barely had the energy left to do his lap of honour.

That was after a competition race, though. An exceptional event. I have seen cyclists training brutally hard, but I don't know how frequently they can do it.

I agree, living by rivers were foodstuffs are, trapping, using a bow & arrow etc, are indeed methods of preserving energy. However fighting ( in some cases to the death) for dominance and pick of the female, avoiding becoming pray, climbing to high terrain etc, are all high to maximal effort endeavours that would have been common place.

A fight between two evenly matched humans is as much a test of endurance as it is power. Two minutes of constant grappling is absolutely exhausting. Compare that to the few seconds it takes a lion to kill its prey.



Very will put:)


Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

Nwlifter wrote:
I've noticed that many times too. I can do way more, way more often, and still make progress. In fact, the progress just kinda 'happens' instead of having to eek out one more rep.


HeavyHitter32 wrote:
S.M.Punisher wrote:
HeavyHitter32 wrote:
As I've harped on many times, the issue is failure training. When it's done 100% of the time on every set, it just requires more and more recovery time to where you're down to one workout a week or less to eek out another rep or few pounds.

Yes. Speed athletes don't train to exhaustion. They don't "run to failure." Oly lifters also don't for the most part train to failure. If you avoid failure you can get in some serious frequency. I find benefits to both approaches.

And you also don't have to hunt "to failure" to kill an animal. If it were about physical force against a large animal you'd obviously lose. Hence we relied on our endurance and intelligence from a survival/evolutionary perspective.

I've been going to failure over the last month or so on most moves (about two workouts a week) and the increased systematic fatigue became noticeable fairly quickly and progressively. I've started to back off by shying short of failure...recovery speeds up a lot even with extra volume thrown in.



Mike Mentzer talked a lot about how special the last rep was as far as stimulation. It's been debated a lot on the forum.

However, there is no debate of the systematic fatigue of that last rep.
Open User Options Menu

Grant D.

Systemic Fatigue is due to your outroading. You are likely unloading the load from your targeted muscle by gaming the movement. You would not be able to sustain two workouts a week to so-called failure; you would need more recovery than a few days. Moving weight will eventually lead to skill development outpacing muscle gains due to outroading.

John Little evolved his protocols (like Dr. Darden) because, when one applied his protocol correctly, the gains eventually maxed out machines, recovery, and joints. Thus ... without a new protocol one would stagnate. My experience is a great example ...

SuperSLow stagnation after 14 months led to
BBS stagnation after 9 months led to
BBS set extenders with no gains after 2 months led to
Max Contraction with stagnation after 8 months led to
Advanced Max Contraction with stagnation after 16 months in which I evolved into BBS Grant Edition in which major reduction in volume, increases in recovery, and elimination of all momentum and most movement has resulted in constant, consistent, expected, prescribed, predictable and showable gains ... now going on five years since my evolution beyond AMC.

Please DO NOT underestimate the importance of Volume Reduction and Extended Recovery assuming you rare Intensely Focused
Open User Options Menu
First | Previous | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | Next | Last
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy