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
Stage Reps And Its Variants
First | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

Drew,

In the interest of saving time I have commented on your points and placed your points in quotations.
________________________________________
Drew: "The primary function of muscle is force production, and nearly everything going on in the muscle is in support of that function, and stressed by placing a demand on it's ability to perform that function. A sufficiently hard set of sufficient duration will do the job, regardless of the repetition method used."

Me: Nonsense, sufficiently hard? What constitutes sufficiently hard? It is harder to do rest pause than straight sets but harder in a different manner.
________________________________________

Drew: "This is not true. At first you are capable of increasing the resistance you use quickly because your starting level is well below what your muscles are actually capable of. As you become more skilled in performing the exercise and as you become more confident and overcome mental inhibitions to pushing yourself harder, you'll get to the point where further improvements will come mostly from real muscle gains, and not just further skill improvement. It is those first six to eight weeks where a baseline is established from which to start real progress. Unfortunately, many people confuse this with the real progress, and assume the slowdown after six to eight weeks is a plateau, when it's really the point where you're at the starting line and the real progress begins."

Me: You are still talking novice stuff, move on and study human energetics, skill improves continuously but like muscle growth it does so at a slower rate. It takes over as the stress becomes very familiar and practice allows for subtle changes in performance. This is basic very basic sport/skill stuff Drew!
________________________________________

Drew: "Jones was brilliant and insightful, but not infallible. MedX equipment can be very useful for testing purposes, but it's not perfect, nor are all study designs.

I prefer full-range training because most exercises involve more than a single muscle and the relative contribution of those muscles varies over the full ROM, thus the effectiveness of the exercise for the different muscles involved (thus strength over the full ROM) depends somewhat on the resistance curve. However, as you mention, there is carryover to either side, and as long as there is meaningful load for enough of the ROM, the exercise will be effective.

If an exercise has a terribly unbalanced resistance curve, it can be alternated with an exercise with a complementary resistance curve. Instead of alternating zones, why not alternate performing partials with exercises working the muscle in different portions of the ROM if you don't have equipment with balanced resistance curves? Perhaps do dumbbell kickbacks in the top half only, followed immediately by dumbbell overhead extensions in the bottom half only? You'd probably be better off performing a different exercise with a more balanced resistance curve altogether, however.

Most free weight and cable exercises can be performed in a manner that provides a more balanced resistance curve, and as long as there is meaningful resistance over a significant portion of the ROM, it will be effective for stimulating hypertrophy.

In any case, if a resistance curve is way off, fatiguing a muscle prior to performing the exercise in the underloaded portion of the ROM isn't going to change the fact that the actual load - the tension on the muscle, not the percentage of momentary strength - isn't any higher, and that any additional work after performing partials in the first, hardest portion of the ROM probably contributes little additional growth stimulus.

Someone else, who I'm not sure would like to be quoted on this or not, compared J-reps to a mechanical manipulation of the exercise to accomplish the same effect as a drop set. You're basically fatiguing the muscle at the hardest portion of the ROM, then going to an easier portion and fatiguing it further, then doing it again if dividing the exercise in thirds. While this certainly adds more fatigue to the set, and it does so while still staying within a reasonable TUL, it doesn't address the inadequate load in some portions of the ROM on some exercises, which is what I was pointing out."

Me: Wake up and forget cams and forget that it can be done Stage Rep style. This argument was posed at S.B. and shot down months ago. We don't just use fatigue and we don't just flatten force curves you are totally missing the point of the method. No cam or machine can create a force curve in line with what happens as we fatigue and for different people with different body shapes and qualities. The situation is to dynamic to bother trying to creat such a machine. In fact I get better gains with a dumbbell and JReps than I ever did with any cammed machine.
________________________________________

Drew: "No, it doesn't, and that's my point. It doesn't affect the actual load/tension on the muscle, but rather the perceived difficulty as a result of fatigue. It may be an effective way of producing a very deep level of fatigue, but it doesn't solve the problem of unbalanced resistance curves, or improve the quality of loading during the exercise."

Me: Again you are lost in the fatigue issue, time to read more carefully and apply earnestly.
________________________________________

Drew: "The pump is not a significant factor, and is not necessarily an indication of more fibers worked or fatigued, and is not an indication of a quality set, a "better hormonal response", or any of these things. One can get a good pump doing all sorts of things that will have none of the above effects, and something as simple as hydration and current blood volume will affect one's degree of pump."

Me: Again you are playing context games I am speaking of pump gained during heavy anaerobic work not the crap you mention.
________________________________________

Drew: "Proper form and practice will improve muscular feel and the ability to isolate particular muscle groups during exercise, without relying on the pump."

Me: Again games, we don't rely on pump it just helps as a by product of higher quality muscular work (relative to full ROM reps).
________________________________________

Drew: "This simply is not true. Regardless of how good your motor control, kinesthetic sense, "mind muscle connection" or whatever you want to call it is, if you are not working your muscles against a meaningful level of resistance, you're not going to stimulate growth. By dismissing the importance of load, you're dismissing the most fundamental principles of resistance training: overload and progression, not to mention a lot of research showing a linear relationship between load and microtrauma."

Me: I am not dismissing the importance of load, my loads are always heavy and causing work within the anaerobic threshold! Holy-Moly you are way out in left field buddy!
________________________________________

Drew: "Not necessarily, and this isn't necessarily a good thing either. Consider research suggesting vascular occlusion contributes to greater growth stimulation."

Me: We get tons of "vascular occlusion" ;^)
________________________________________

Drew: "Nervous function is not "grossly hindered" by lactic acid concentration or edema."

Me: No it is hindered by the constriction caused by excessive swelling and a lack of the proper amounts and balance of chemicals needed. We bleed the situation dry and excessive swelling is a natural final result.
________________________________________

Drew: "The point of exercise for bodybuilding isn't to cause swelling and burning sensation, it is primarily to cause microtrauma to stimulate growth, which is directly related to load."

Me: only if the load is borne by the targeted muscle and not unloaded as you go through bracing and inter/intra muscular coordination. Something that is very tought to avoid when using big weights and with years of practice (ingrained habits).

Regards,
Andrew
Open User Options Menu

eintology

California, USA

AShortt wrote:

This shows you only one thing, if you are really interested read carefully. This shows you that Drew does NOT understand the method. It shows you the type of thing that derails people from true bodybuilding.





Oh come on Andrew, if Drew "doesn't understand" the Jreps method at this point; even though he said he bought the book, then who exactly is supposed to?

Say it's a conflict of interest, but to say someone like Drew wouldn't understand a weight training method? He may not like it, and he may have different views, but if he doesn't understand it, then realistically, I seriously doubt anyone else does either.

We are talking about weight training.

And you claim to be worried about the new trainees coming on this site? And how they will see the information presented?

If Drew, or Dean Jones, or anyone else doesn't really understand this method, it's because it has been presented under such a cloud of convoluted writing and misdirection advertising plays, that very few people could ever be fualted for not fully understanding.

Seven months to get comfortable with a weight training system, is longer than it would take someone to learn how to master the oboe.

Erik






Open User Options Menu

deanjones

Ok, well... I'm on a plateau with my gains and I'm going to be my own case study on Jreps and judge it from there... I always track my calories, food eaten and take measurements, so it will be somewhat controlled.

I'm on an 1,800 calorie diet right now to drop some fat, but I do have fat on me (around 15% bf), so I'll be interested to see the results. I'll keep measurments, track my food via www.fitday.com and log every workout and I'll even post the results on here. I'm not biased on any one method. I'll just be excited to see progress.

I'm going to try to read the JReps book I have over the next few days and start a new routine on Sunday.
Open User Options Menu

Bill De Simone

New Jersey, USA

Nice try, Andrew. A little sensitive today?

No sarcasm or nastiness intended.

You guys have your niche, and it's the same one as the bodybuilders. Which I think, by the way, you guys admit when you're not just trolling for a fight.

Weider and Phillips gave that up for the fitness crowd. I wonder why. But you guys can have it. It's all yours.

But if you're in that niche, the good gets lumped in with the bad, and that includes the supplements, toys, and gear.

Can't have it both ways. Can't take the academic high ground and then belittle academics. Can't claim to be a niche for hypertrophy and then reject the bodybuilding label. Can't use your own research as a defense, and then claim research doesn't count.

And hey, Mr. Moral Superiority--you're lashing out at me personally over pointing out the obvious?

Moment Arm Exercise may be "wrong" as you say, but it's at least consistent with established science. I didn't cherry pick some isolated studies to prove my points, or speculate on why to do it that way.

And just because you can't figure out how to apply stabilization work safely and usefully, doesn't mean I can't. You're doing hypertrophy (BODYBUILDING), remember?

Get a thicker skin. Maybe "subdermal J-reps" will help.


Open User Options Menu

TheSofaKing

Manitoba, CAN

AShortt wrote:
Drew, in the interest of saving time I have commented on your points and placed your points in quotations.


If trying to help people understand and implement Zone Training is Brian's goal, the best thing he could do right now is shorten your leash. Your pretentious attitude is clouding your ability to get your points across. It also isn't that difficult or time consuming to format your posts properly. Responding to one lengthy post with 5 seperate replies is lazy and makes your responses that much harder for others to quote and respond to.

Open User Options Menu

simon-hecubus

Texas, USA

deanjones wrote:
I'm going to try to read the JReps book I have over the next few days and start a new routine on Sunday.


I had trouble starting it too, Dean. I often come home from work all brain-drained and it didn't seem to beckon me as very relaxing reading.

Once I got into it though, it was fairly easy going.

I look forward to your info and conclusions.

Regards,
Scott
Open User Options Menu

Drew Baye

Florida, USA

davise wrote:
Sorry to interrupt your argument, but asking some honest questions.....with a properly setup 12 machine circuit done 2-3 times a person could build strength and muscle, cardiovascular fitness and full range flexibility.
Can JREPS do that?


Yes, J-reps could do that. However, there would probably be little difference in the results, assuming all else is equal.

ANY method of resistance training involving hard work with adequate resistance, progression, and a volume and frequency appropriate to the individual, will produce results. For normal, healthy individuals, the specific rep modality used probably has less to do with the outcome than the effort put into the workout, and the proper adjustment of volume and frequency. Some might be better than others in terms of safety, and some might be slightly more effective for particular goals, but ultimately, what matters is simply that one work hard and try to always improve.
Open User Options Menu

henry_bordeaux

Bill De Simone wrote:
Nice try, Andrew. A little sensitive today?

No sarcasm or nastiness intended.

You guys have your niche, and it's the same one as the bodybuilders. Which I think, by the way, you guys admit when you're not just trolling for a fight.

Weider and Phillips gave that up for the fitness crowd. I wonder why. But you guys can have it. It's all yours.

But if you're in that niche, the good gets lumped in with the bad, and that includes the supplements, toys, and gear.

Can't have it both ways. Can't take the academic high ground and then belittle academics. Can't claim to be a niche for hypertrophy and then reject the bodybuilding label. Can't use your own research as a defense, and then claim research doesn't count.

And hey, Mr. Moral Superiority--you're lashing out at me personally over pointing out the obvious?

Moment Arm Exercise may be "wrong" as you say, but it's at least consistent with established science. I didn't cherry pick some isolated studies to prove my points, or speculate on why to do it that way.

And just because you can't figure out how to apply stabilization work safely and usefully, doesn't mean I can't. You're doing hypertrophy (BODYBUILDING), remember?

Get a thicker skin. Maybe "subdermal J-reps" will help.







Bill,

this website is 100% about hypertrophy....so what's your point?


best regards.


Open User Options Menu

saseme

eintology wrote:
AShortt wrote:

This shows you only one thing, if you are really interested read carefully. This shows you that Drew does NOT understand the method. It shows you the type of thing that derails people from true bodybuilding.





Oh come on Andrew, if Drew "doesn't understand" the Jreps method at this point; even though he said he bought the book, then who exactly is supposed to?

Say it's a conflict of interest, but to say someone like Drew wouldn't understand a weight training method? He may not like it, and he may have different views, but if he doesn't understand it, then realistically, I seriously doubt anyone else does either.

We are talking about weight training.

And you claim to be worried about the new trainees coming on this site? And how they will see the information presented?

If Drew, or Dean Jones, or anyone else doesn't really understand this method, it's because it has been presented under such a cloud of convoluted writing and misdirection advertising plays, that very few people could ever be fualted for not fully understanding.

Seven months to get comfortable with a weight training system, is longer than it would take someone to learn how to master the oboe.

Erik








You just don't seem to get it Erik. Ever since I started J-reps finger flexions, extensions, adductions and abductions my oboe performance has been tremendous. What I do is dangle fractional plates from my fingers as I play, and then perform only 1/2 and 1/4 notes. The pump is amazing and my fingers are looking leaner and more muscular than ever.

People like you and Drew are just here to troll while BJ, Andy Shorts and myself are at work revolutionizing the world, free of charge. We're on pa-troll for the likes of you.

Doug and El have already sactioned the validity of this theory and are practicing it now. The proofs are there. Why do you continue to resist?
Open User Options Menu

logicbdj

Ontario, CAN

Bill:

I, too, am not too excited about 'revolutionary' methods... like moment arm exercise. It supports 'established science?' Science about what? How is moment arm exercise more effective than standard reps... does it build more strength... more muscle? And please don't say it is more safe, since when a person tears a muscle, as you did (at the point of stretch) it's obvious that the forces exceeded the integrity of the tissues, which means that the weight was too heavy, or you misused a weight that under proper lifting circumstances would not be too heavy. In either instance, you are responsible and it is not an issue of "don't go toward the point of stretch."

You stated: "With J-reps morphing from a technique to a way of life, Brian's tapping into the same aspirations that kept us feeding Joe Weider and then Bill Phillips month after month."

Keep up the insults. Never have I started a JReps thread on this board, on Slowburn, etc. However, you sure were fast to get momentum arm exercise t-shirts produced, while promoting your book on Slowburn, telling people where to get it on ebay, etc. And what is it about? Avoid the stretch and full contraction of exercises and work the mid-range. Wow! In any case, others have been promoting my ideas on other boards because they are getting the results they've always wanted or thought they could get.

What exactly are the 'cons' of JReps, as you suggest? More muscle? More strength? Better physique? Heaven forbid!!!

And Drew did NOT hit the nail on the head as to why JReps work... why are its users fuller and thicker from workout to workout, when such was never present with other "advanced" techniques? Why does this hold true even after months of implementation, when the novelty should have worn of? You don't think that we have experimented before, with most of us having 15+ years of intense training experience? Everything else has been short-lived, whereas the application of zone training is so diverse that its ability to stimulate change and to maintain that change far exceeds anything else we have tried.

And so, it is not "any change," since we all have changed plenty, many times on different methods over the years. If simply making a change is the case, then I encourage all zone trainees to pick up moment arm exercise, since it is different, and go to it... or how about Slowburn, or Omega reps. I challenge zone trainees to do so and report the findings. I'm certainly not afraid of such a challenge, since diversity and change has been a cornerstone of my training for a few decades.

This method, IN FACT, is the only method I have noticed, after 25 years, to have staying power. I promote it for that very reason, not to sell books on ebay or Amazon (neither of which I have used, since I make my living away from the IART... I work the IART voluntarily, and have done so for years). In any case, I busted my butt to get beyond 190 pounds and could never do it (not without carb depleting and loading)... then I gained beyond that, and gained significantly for my age, years of training, not making any more progress, etc. Shortt, Coombes, and the others who have tackled the method with gusto are claiming the exact same things... claims that do not get paid any money to say as much, and who are free to drop the method when and as they like... but they haven't.

You stated: "I could have taken (name a Superslow advocate here), put him on Delorme's 3 sets of 10 from the 1940s, and gotten new results."

Then why don't you do that now, and take the challenge I provided Drew: Get some ADVANCED trainees... people who are complaining that they are no longer making progress.... make certain they have done HIT, volume, POF, and just about anything else you can find, and then YOU do your thing. Show us how it's done and how you can make changes that would satisfy them. And make certain they stick with the method for at least six months and see how happy they are at the end of that time.

You stated: "Internet chatter aside, my only concern with J-reps from a biomechanical point of view might be the emphasis on the stretched position."

Goes to show how much you even understand the basic concept. There is no EMPHASIS on any specific zone, but equal emphasis on the entire ROM. This is explained clearly with the free information on the Net. And, yes, Drew does not fully understand the basis of the method, since his focus was so heavily on using ideal machines with good force curves, that he completely glossed over all the other attributes of why the method works so well.

In regard to your biomechanics texts, there is plenty of physiology support for placing strain on tissues at the point of stretch, to trigger hypertrophy. Studies are quoted in the second JReps book. Nonetheless, I never promote an exaggerated stretch, such as pulling the arms back to and extreme point when doing pec flyes, for example.

And then you end with an insult: "But to Brian's credit, he does say it is a niche product. And just like Crash Weight Gain 7 or vanadyl sulfate or Arnold Arm Blasters, it's not my niche."

And what is your niche product... to tell people to work within the mid-range and then to sell a book on it? You may lump zone training in with bodybuilding, and bodybuilding actually is a good thing (it is a good thing to develop muscle... muscle is functional), but the JReps application fits very well with strength athletes, rehabilitation, and sporting athletes. I recommend viewing the article on such on the zone site. I have years experience with traditional training, and the results I make with these special groups, with zone training, is far superior... but you can ignore that, as well.
Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

Bill De Simone wrote:

1. But if you're in that niche, the good gets lumped in with the bad, and that includes the supplements, toys, and gear.

2. Get a thicker skin. Maybe "subdermal J-reps" will help.



1. True

2. Ok that is funny, I'll try to chill a bit ;^)

Regards,
Andrew
Open User Options Menu

RX Fitness

New York, USA

Sasame,

why do you utilze a picture of an individual who achieved great results from JREPS and than bashes it and the IART?

Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

eintology wrote:

Oh come on Andrew, if Drew "doesn't understand" the Jreps method at this point; even though he said he bought the book, then who exactly is supposed to?

Say it's a conflict of interest, but to say someone like Drew wouldn't understand a weight training method? He may not like it, and he may have different views, but if he doesn't understand it, then realistically, I seriously doubt anyone else does either.

We are talking about weight training.

And you claim to be worried about the new trainees coming on this site? And how they will see the information presented?

If Drew, or Dean Jones, or anyone else doesn't really understand this method, it's because it has been presented under such a cloud of convoluted writing and misdirection advertising plays, that very few people could ever be fualted for not fully understanding.

Seven months to get comfortable with a weight training system, is longer than it would take someone to learn how to master the oboe.

Erik


Well, well Erik my man...

First off it isn't uncommon to find those who are steeped in their 'ways' to find understanding something new very tough. Personal bias has brought down more than one large organization let alone country in the past.

Second who says Drew even really read the book or read it and cared to remain active minded enough to try it. I mean he got a book and CD from me for free in lew of offering a case study to the 2005 IART contest and not only did he not contribute but he never even bothered to drop a line and explain himself.

Drew has an agenda like everyone else. I am not saying he is totally in the dark about the method but he sounds just like other dogmatic HITters. He gets only part of the picture and can't see the forest for the trees. Besides this is bodybuilding not english lit. class. You have to use the method to fully understand it. This is no different than how people often understand something far better when they see it in action than just reading about it. What Mike was saying about 7 months was getting good at it. If bodybuilding were so easy then there would be far more of us with good builds it isn't all genetics.

BTW I know at least two Oboe players who would strongly disagree with your statement about mastering it in 7 months, but that?s neither here nor there is it.

Regards,
Andrew






Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

Rx Fitness wrote:
Sasame,

why do you utilze a picture of an individual who achieved great results from JREPS and than bashes it and the IART?



He is just a wannabe Troll.

Regards,
Andrew
Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

Drew Baye wrote:
davise wrote:
Sorry to interrupt your argument, but asking some honest questions.....with a properly setup 12 machine circuit done 2-3 times a person could build strength and muscle, cardiovascular fitness and full range flexibility.
Can JREPS do that?

Yes, J-reps could do that. However, there would probably be little difference in the results, assuming all else is equal.

ANY method of resistance training involving hard work with adequate resistance, progression, and a volume and frequency appropriate to the individual, will produce results. For normal, healthy individuals, the specific rep modality used probably has less to do with the outcome than the effort put into the workout, and the proper adjustment of volume and frequency. Some might be better than others in terms of safety, and some might be slightly more effective for particular goals, but ultimately, what matters is simply that one work hard and try to always improve.


So basically you are saying I either have no experience with such or am not telling the truth...nice Drew very nice.

Open User Options Menu

bdog

I only post here occasionally but it seems to me after observing this post and many others that people in the HIT community are resistant to trying J-reps and I don't know why. If you are to make an assumption about J-reps based on 'science' or 'theories' without trying them, you are missing the boat in my opinion. This technology of J-reps could REVOLUTIONIZE bodybuilding and yet people are bashing it before even trying it. I don't get it.

Fellow HITers, why not try J-reps and see how it works? Do it exactly as described and see what it does for you? I've seen some of the most intelligent comments lately by Andrew and Brian on muscle physiology and biomechanics that I've ever heard about weight training and bodybuilding in general. Being dogmatic doesn't let you progress in any endeavor and if someone like BDJ who thought he was at his genetic potential can add 10 pounds of muscle from J-reps then it's an idea worth listeining to!

My two cents....
Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

TheSofaKing wrote:

If trying to help people understand and implement Zone Training is Brian's goal, the best thing he could do right now is shorten your leash. Your pretentious attitude is clouding your ability to get your points across. It also isn't that difficult or time consuming to format your posts properly. Responding to one lengthy post with 5 seperate replies is lazy and makes your responses that much harder for others to quote and respond to.



First off I was using separate threads in order to make it easier for Drew to respond to individual items without constantly reposting the whole thing and...wait you don't care anyway you just want to insult me personaly and add zero.
Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

bdog wrote:
I only post here occasionally but it seems to me after observing this post and many others that people in the HIT community are resistant to trying J-reps and I don't know why. If you are to make an assumption about J-reps based on 'science' or 'theories' without trying them, you are missing the boat in my opinion. This technology of J-reps could REVOLUTIONIZE bodybuilding and yet people are bashing it before even trying it. I don't get it.

Fellow HITers, why not try J-reps and see how it works? Do it exactly as described and see what it does for you? I've seen some of the most intelligent comments lately by Andrew and Brian on muscle physiology and biomechanics that I've ever heard about weight training and bodybuilding in general. Being dogmatic doesn't let you progress in any endeavor and if someone like BDJ who thought he was at his genetic potential can add 10 pounds of muscle from J-reps then it's an idea worth listeining to!

My two cents....


One thing that my eyes have been opened to with my involvement with Zone Training - There are those in the HIT community who went way too far off in the opposite direction as HVT mainstream bodybuilding. Their knee jerk reaction has hurt HIT over the long run and kept it cult-ish and small. This is sad and this thread is a perfect example of their reluctance to move past...the past.

HIT as Drew and HD-ers and S.S.ers suggest is decades old and they don't want it to change because as it was, it never gained any real acceptance and the notoriety it deserved. Their knowledge of research and talk is all to solidify their point of view not to broaden it and allow it to grow and thrive. Like their muscle mass nothing has changed or been added in a very long time...sad. I know this sounds sarcastic in this post in this chat board but I sincerely mean 'sad'. I really don't think the good Doctor deserved to get stuck with this state of affairs.

Regards,
Andrew

Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

simon-hecubus wrote:

Andrew,

Please expand on what you're syaing here. What exactly did full-body traning have to "give up" and how does JReps/ZT "put it back"?

Regards,
Scott


Ok Scott I am sorry I forgot you, but you are the rare challenge in the group as usual ;^)

Johnston as you may have read covered this a bit. Full body HIT has you training single sets to failure. It uses intensity as a replacement for volume. More volume at a lower intensity works as well and I think you know this.

Now volume has its drawbacks because adding more past a point sucks up energy and recovery without giving much if anything back. Intensity can do the same but offers way more in return. I think this is because high intensity is closer in keeping with the nature of anaerobic exercise (brief, intense, infrequent). Volume is secondary and becomes more of a necessary evil in many ways.

Now Dr. Darden's approach to using 3 sessions a week (or two) and his new addition of a NTF full body sessions are smart. You are training muscles while they are still a bit fatigued but only with one or two sets. This adds a volume type effect (training an all ready fatigued muscle, especially with NTF) without costing too much metabolically speaking. Darden even shows us that you have room to body part specialize and from this we see: Pure volume in the form of reps and sets does have something to offer. It offers more anaerobic fatigue, more choices in exercises (different attacks), deeper fatigue in a muscle per workout, enhanced feel and mind-muscle connection, more muscular contractions and draining of stored resources, more chances to take a muscle to complete muscular failure with good isolation intact etc. Body part specialization does this but you must make many concessions to implement it.

With JReps, all that is there in the workout...without adding any extra TUT to the clock!

Full body sessions (especially to failure ones) necessitate very little volume per muscle. The frequency thing (hitting the muscle multiple times per week) helps make up for it but Zone Training goes a step further. That and a whole host of other good stuff.

Look at Dr. Darden's shoulder specilization routine he ask me to look in on. A Zone Training workout is like that all the time for all the muscles, it is grand to say the least and doesn;t drain you as much as traditional full ROM training!

Regards,
Andrew
Open User Options Menu

john38

Oklahoma, USA

AShortt wrote:
simon-hecubus wrote:

Andrew,

Please expand on what you're syaing here. What exactly did full-body traning have to "give up" and how does JReps/ZT "put it back"?

Regards,
Scott

Ok Scott I am sorry I forgot you, but you are the rare challenge in the group as usual ;^)

Johnston as you may have read covered this a bit. Full body HIT has you training single sets to failure. It uses intensity as a replacement for volume. More volume at a lower intensity works as well and I think you know this.

Now volume has its drawbacks because adding more past a point sucks up energy and recovery without giving much if anything back. Intensity can do the same but offers way more in return. I think this is because high intensity is closer in keeping with the nature of anaerobic exercise (brief, intense, infrequent). Volume is secondary and becomes more of a necessary evil in many ways.

Now Dr. Darden's approach to using 3 sessions a week (or two) and his new addition of a NTF full body sessions are smart. You are training muscles while they are still a bit fatigued but only with one or two sets. This adds a volume type effect (training an all ready fatigued muscle, especially with NTF) without costing too much metabolically speaking. Darden even shows us that you have room to body part specialize and from this we see: Pure volume in the form of reps and sets does have something to offer. It offers more anaerobic fatigue, more choices in exercises (different attacks), deeper fatigue in a muscle per workout, enhanced feel and mind-muscle connection, more muscular contractions and draining of stored resources, more chances to take a muscle to complete muscular failure with good isolation intact etc. Body part specialization does this but you must make many concessions to implement it.

With JReps, all that is there in the workout...without adding any extra TUT to the clock!

Full body sessions (especially to failure ones) necessitate very little volume per muscle. The frequency thing (hitting the muscle multiple times per week) helps make up for it but Zone Training goes a step further. That and a whole host of other good stuff.

Look at Dr. Darden's shoulder specilization routine he ask me to look in on. A Zone Training workout is like that all the time for all the muscles, it is grand to say the least and doesn;t drain you as much as traditional full ROM training!

Regards,
Andrew


What's with the stupid ad for a pic? Your others were more impressive.
Open User Options Menu

saseme

AShortt wrote:

BTW I know at least two Oboe players who would strongly disagree with your statement about mastering it in 7 months, but that?s neither here nor there is it.

Regards,
Andrew



Yes! I am one of those Oboe'rs!

Open User Options Menu

saseme

Rx Fitness wrote:
Sasame,

why do you utilze a picture of an individual who achieved great results from JREPS and than bashes it and the IART?



Rx Fitness, that's me in the shot and I'm a world class Oboe-ist, but wasn't always, not until, as you point out, my great success with jreps. By the way, do you, in your wildest, stressed out, over-emotionally invested mind think that I'm a natty obo-ist and my success is due to the jreps, or the j-uice?
Open User Options Menu

saseme

AShortt wrote:
Rx Fitness wrote:
Sasame,

why do you utilze a picture of an individual who achieved great results from JREPS and than bashes it and the IART?



He is just a wannabe Troll.

Regards,
Andrew


I didn't think I could sink any lower, thanks Andy. Funny, as dark and lonely as it is down here you must be around here somewhere to continue giving me recognition. You know I'm bad for you but you just can't give me up, can you?
Open User Options Menu

saseme

bdog wrote:
I only post here occasionally but it seems to me after observing this post and many others that people in the HIT community are resistant to trying J-reps and I don't know why. If you are to make an assumption about J-reps based on 'science' or 'theories' without trying them, you are missing the boat in my opinion. This technology of J-reps could REVOLUTIONIZE bodybuilding and yet people are bashing it before even trying it. I don't get it.

Fellow HITers, why not try J-reps and see how it works? Do it exactly as described and see what it does for you? I've seen some of the most intelligent comments lately by Andrew and Brian on muscle physiology and biomechanics that I've ever heard about weight training and bodybuilding in general. Being dogmatic doesn't let you progress in any endeavor and if someone like BDJ who thought he was at his genetic potential can add 10 pounds of muscle from J-reps then it's an idea worth listeining to!

My two cents....


The table minimum is 4 cents! Beat it!
Open User Options Menu

saseme

AShortt wrote:
I really don't think the good Doctor deserved to get stuck with this state of affairs.

Regards,
Andrew



Then leave, we won't stop you.
Open User Options Menu
First | Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Next | Last
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy