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
80% 1RM
Author
Rating
Options

Ferrari

Quebec, CAN

Dr. Darden,

In previous books and in this one you indicate that 80% was the best area to train.

On Page 80 and 81 of your new book you state that 10 reps is the norm to a 20% inroad.

You later mention that if you get too many reps then perhaps 85% may give you a better set and if you don't get enough reps then perhaps 75% might be better. This seems to be going in the opposite direction.

What previous experience leads you follow and recommend the 80% guideline? Is it only based on Arthur Jones's testing?

Also, if you have a higher neurological efficiency than average, then how differently should you train compared to the normal recommendations?

On Friday I did a 1RM test on the Nautilus overhead and based on my normal reps I should have been able to lift 188 but instead lifted 205.

I am asking this because I am still seeing good results even though I am only performing 4-6 reps for the Nautilus pulldown, overhead press, and dips.

Your book seems to address the normal person as the intended audience but doesn't really spend any time on the trainees at the high and low ends of the spectrum.

What can you tell us about how a high NE type recovers when compared to the average person? Do they take longer or recover faster?

How about publishing something specific for the rest of us? If it's not enough volume to go to written press how about an electronic publication?
I'd certainly buy it!

Thanks in advance.
Open User Options Menu

Ellington Darden

Farrari,

Trainees with high neurological efficiencies have the ability to contract a greater percentage of their muscle fibers. Thus, they would make a deeper inroad with each rep. Thus, lower reps would be better for them.

Ellington
Open User Options Menu

Ferrari

Quebec, CAN

Dr. Darden,

Thanks for the reply. I guess I was expecting a little more but that's okay. I'll continue with my lower rep count and see where it takes me.

I still hope that you'll publish something for the opposite ends of the spectrum. I have a biased belief that many of the trainees that like to do HIT and are successful with 1 rep sets are at my end of the spectrum.

Thanks,
Ferrari
Open User Options Menu

fascialeffect

Ferrari-

Just curious about your (lower) rep scheme of 4-6 reps.

How much total time under tension is done in this range (32-48 seconds? less?, more?)?

Thanks in advance,

FE


Open User Options Menu

Ferrari

Quebec, CAN

They are reasonably slow reps. I try to keep the momentum under check.

I lift in about 3 secs and lower in about 4-5. The last rep is usually much longer as it takes 6-8 secs to lift and maybe 6 to lower. TUL usually 40-45 secs on average.

I'm lifting around 84% of 1RM so it's pretty tough to go fast anyway.

I timed myself one NTF workout where I did 3 reps and it was 30 secs. I was paying particular attention to going slowly that time so it averaged about 10 secs per rep.
Open User Options Menu

Gazz

Ferrari

How long have you been training on lower reps. I've just moved down to lower reps (4-6) using a 4/4 cadence. I read about reduced TUL on Drew Bayes site, and have been having problems with concentration & finishing a workout with the same intensity as I started.

I've only had 2 workouts (10exercises per workout) so far at lower reps but have found that the heavier load coupled with reduced TUL seems to have cured the concentration problem. I much prefer this method.

What sort of size gains have you had & how often are you hitting the weights.

All the best.
Gazz
Open User Options Menu

Ferrari

Quebec, CAN

Gazz,

About 1 year ago I dropped to 7-10. Then later 6-9, then 6-8. A few months I lowered again to 5-6 and Since August moved down to 4-6.

As I am working at a higher percentage of my 1RM it means that when I quit my set I am at a higher level of momentary strength. It seems to be easier to recover. In retrospect the higher reps were giving me too much inroad.
Open User Options Menu

Ferrari

Quebec, CAN

Dr. Darden,

If my 80% of 1RM means that I should do 4-6 reps and I am already well beyond the Nautilus weight stacks in the leg press or leg extensions.

How can I make the exercises harder for myself?

I tried using the machines one leg at a time and progressed very rapidly but then it caused problems for my lower back.

Is super slow a viable alternative and if so what would the cadence be for me based on a high neurological efficiency?

Thanks,
Ferrari
Open User Options Menu

Ellington Darden

Ferrari,

Yes, I believe Superslow is an alternative for you. And you should probably work with a TUL of 40-60 seconds. Drew Baye has been experimenting with this TUL and 3-4 reps per set with some interesting results.

Ellington
Open User Options Menu

Ferrari

Quebec, CAN

Thanks for your help.

Ferrari
Open User Options Menu

Ferrari

Quebec, CAN

Ellington Darden wrote:
Ferrari,

Yes, I believe Superslow is an alternative for you. And you should probably work with a TUL of 40-60 seconds. Drew Baye has been experimenting with this TUL and 3-4 reps per set with some interesting results.

Ellington


Friday I tried the weight stack on the leg press using the super slow protocal. I reached 4 reps with a TUL of 56 secs and did not approach failure.

Are there other techniques to make the weight appear heavier to the muscles without inroading past the 80 % mark or is my only recourse to try to add extra weight to the stack?

Ferrari
Open User Options Menu
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy