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
Negative Only Study
1 | 2 | 3 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

SanSooMan

I heard through the HIT grape vine that John Little of "Static Contractions" will be buying some Negative Attitude machines for a study on Negative Only training. I'm excited to see his results. From what I'm told, I'm the only one in the Western half of the US to have Negative Only pieces. And I only have good to say of them. Chris.
Open User Options Menu

logicbdj

Ontario, CAN

Charlie Haire did a research project using the equipment, which can be read by visiting the Journal of Applied Fitness link (bottom, far left) on the IART site. I believe he's doing another one because he has found superior growth and pump from combining JRep Zone Training with his negative training, i.e., doing a series of negatives in select zones throughout the full ROM.
Open User Options Menu

Michael Petrella

Ontario, CAN

Myself and 3 other people I train have recently switched over to Almost all Exercises being done in a Negative Only fashion. The results have been great, espcially in Strength. I was just wandering if the J-reps exploded view will touch on the idea of doing J-reps in a negative fashion.

Michael
Open User Options Menu

logicbdj

Ontario, CAN

It will talk about it 'in a way,' in that much of zone training needs to be done eclectically, based on feel, control, strength levels,etc., and there is nothing stopping a person from doing negatives within zones as a consequence. Mr. Haire has included his own case study for the book, which will discuss what he did specifically. Even after years of exercise, he has produced some of his best results with this method, and he is able to handle loads that match what he did years ago.
Open User Options Menu

Jammyface

Ontario, CAN

Here we go. My first post. I would like to say that I'm 17 years old and just got into Strength Training in the past year or so. With this interest I decided to take a Co-Op program through my high school to seek out what it's like to be a Personal Trainer and had the privilege to Co-Op at Nautilus North along side John.

I really enjoy the placement and have gained so much knowledge through John it's unbelievable! In my opinion Nautilus North is one of the best Personal Training Centers in the world!

Well, the rumor about John soon to be receiving Negative Attitude machines to do a study is in fact true. John should be getting the new equipment very shortly.
Open User Options Menu

chaire

North Carolina, USA

Sansoo,
John Little is getting some Eccentric Edge equipment (negative attitude). He is also getting a new machine made by EE. Anyone who gets to work with John is blessed, he is a class guy.

Brian I am still progressing fast with negative jreps. I think by the end of July I will be using the same weights on no chins/dips I used 25 years ago.

Dr. Darden you are right about recovery. I will be training for 3 weeks then 10 days off.
God Bless,
Charlie
Open User Options Menu

DSears

Charlie,

Which movements are you doing the negative J-Reps on? Also, are you doing 1/2's or 1/3's or what?

Thanks,

David
Open User Options Menu

chaire

North Carolina, USA

David,
The only exercises I did not do jreps on were no chins and dips. The first 6 weeks I did 1/2, after a 10 day layoff I did 6 weeks of 1/3.
Some NO exercises were better done with 1/2, short range movement ones. I did a split workout of about 5 exercises, back/bicep, legs, chest/delts/triceps. I had never done a split before. It was a good change.
David negative jreps are HARD. You have to really concentrate. Good luck.
God Bless,
Charlie
Open User Options Menu

Michael Petrella

Ontario, CAN

Hi Charlie

Is there anyway we can get some more detailed information on what your are doing with Negative Partials.

Michael
Open User Options Menu

chaire

North Carolina, USA

BigMike,
I will be glad to share information, just ask.
Charlie
Open User Options Menu

cmg

chaire wrote:
BigMike,
I will be glad to share information, just ask.
Charlie


What are your splits and how do you perform the negatives (on machines- training partner)?

Thank you,

Ron

Open User Options Menu

chaire

North Carolina, USA

Ron,
I use a 3 way split, back/bicep, legs, chest/delts/tricep.I use Eccentric Edge equipment (negative attitude).
I decide which 1/3 of an exercise is the hardest and that is done first. My partner raises the movement arm to that range of motion.On his count I contract as hard as I can and lower the weight slowly, about 3to 4 seconds. I perform 4 to 6 reps in that range. I will then move to the next hardest range and repeat. Last is the easiest range done in the same way.
I did 5 exercises, sometimes 6 for the first 6 weeks. Later I reduced the workout to 4 exercises for 4 weeks. I now do 3 exercise per workout for 4 weeks then take 10 days off.
My last back/bicep workout was
NO behind neck 4 reps
NO chins 160 for 6 reps
NO shrugs 300 for 4 reps.
I hope that helps.
God Bless,
Charlie
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Portugal

Charlie Haire did the only eccentric study I know of.

http://www.docstoc.com/...Week-Case-Study
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

Here's a great question if I don't say so myself, why can we lower a greater weight than we can raise? Have you ever thought about this? What mechanism allows us to lower more than raise? Great question, right? Anyone venture an answer?
Open User Options Menu

garethit

southbeach wrote:
Here's a great question if I don't say so myself, why can we lower a greater weight than we can raise? Have you ever thought about this? What mechanism allows us to lower more than raise? Great question, right? Anyone venture an answer?


It requires less force to control the lowering of a certain weight than it takes to lift it.

Open User Options Menu

southbeach

garethit wrote:
southbeach wrote:
Here's a great question if I don't say so myself, why can we lower a greater weight than we can raise? Have you ever thought about this? What mechanism allows us to lower more than raise? Great question, right? Anyone venture an answer?

It requires less force to control the lowering of a certain weight than it takes to lift it.



what control is greater during the positive phase? the motion is identical about the joint except one is lowering the other raising.
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

Wait a sec, just thought of this.

You are saying control is greater during the negative phase, well isn't that just begging the question?

Control may be greater because the weight FEELS lighter during the descent.

Why does the weight feel lighter? It's the same weight that we raised. a 100lbs is 100lbs under the same gravity field.

But we can lower more than we can raise, why?
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Portugal

Negative only lifting most likely uses LESS energy consumption....less ATP....less strain on the phosphagen pool......food for thought.
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

marcrph wrote:
Negative only lifting most likely uses LESS energy consumption....less ATP....less strain on the phosphagen pool......food for thought.



why? it's the same 100lbs, up or down.
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Portugal

southbeach wrote:
marcrph wrote:
Negative only lifting most likely uses LESS energy consumption....less ATP....less strain on the phosphagen pool......food for thought.


why? it's the same 100lbs, up or down.


Good question.......Clue.....with negative-only reps.....breathing rate is significantly less.......think....I know it is hard work........think.
Open User Options Menu

traunsee

Thought most would have known or worked this out by now. What happens when you hold a weight and let it go, it falls to the ground, thus it is far easier for a 100 pounds to go down, the negative, than to be moved up, the positive, and it just takes more force to lift a weight against gravity, than with it. Think of the muscles more like a Fish scales. Going up with the scales is easy, the positive, but going down against them is very hard, the negative.

Hope you?re all looking forward to my holiday photos.

Traunsee
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

marcrph wrote:
southbeach wrote:
marcrph wrote:
Negative only lifting most likely uses LESS energy consumption....less ATP....less strain on the phosphagen pool......food for thought.


why? it's the same 100lbs, up or down.


Good question.......Clue.....with negative-only reps.....breathing rate is significantly less.......think....I know it is hard work........think.

you got little game man :/
Open User Options Menu

garethit

southbeach wrote:
garethit wrote:
southbeach wrote:
Here's a great question if I don't say so myself, why can we lower a greater weight than we can raise? Have you ever thought about this? What mechanism allows us to lower more than raise? Great question, right? Anyone venture an answer?

It requires less force to control the lowering of a certain weight than it takes to lift it.



what control is greater during the positive phase? the motion is identical about the joint except one is lowering the other raising.


If you had a hundred pound barbell and wanted to press it overhead the muscles involved would have to produce more than a hundred pounds of force to do this. If they produced exactly one hundred pounds of force the barbell would remain static (you would be holding it not lifting it). How much force do you need to produce to lower the barbell?? Less than a hundred pounds, the less force you produce the faster it will descend, the more you produce, as long as it's still less than one hundred pounds, the slower the lowering will be.

The above is an over simplification but I'm sure you'll see what I'm getting at.



Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Portugal

southbeach wrote:
marcrph wrote:
southbeach wrote:
marcrph wrote:
Negative only lifting most likely uses LESS energy consumption....less ATP....less strain on the phosphagen pool......food for thought.


why? it's the same 100lbs, up or down.


Good question.......Clue.....with negative-only reps.....breathing rate is significantly less.......think....I know it is hard work........think.
you got little game man :/


I'm not interested in "game" man
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

marcrph wrote:
southbeach wrote:
marcrph wrote:
southbeach wrote:
marcrph wrote:
Negative only lifting most likely uses LESS energy consumption....less ATP....less strain on the phosphagen pool......food for thought.


why? it's the same 100lbs, up or down.


Good question.......Clue.....with negative-only reps.....breathing rate is significantly less.......think....I know it is hard work........think.
you got little game man :/


I'm not interested in "game" man


good 4 you, cause you have none
Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | 3 | Next | Last
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy