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
Advanced Max Contraction...
1 | 2 | 3 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

saseme

Are you really world-renowned Drew?

I read about the omega sets, and they seem as impractical as everything else Little has put out.

A repeated quarter second static hold...really.
Open User Options Menu

Drew Baye

Florida, USA

If you have equipment and training partners that will allow it, it is effective. Unfortunately, it requires more resistance than most current selectorized machines provide, unless you do it with one arm or leg, which can be dangerous with that amount of weight. It is more practical with plate-loaded equipment, but you'll need a few people to help you lift the weight into the fully contracted position.

We are starting the first of a series of experiments comparing rep protocols on identical twins tomorrow, and we'll be comparing our standard protocol (5/5 for a TUL of 50 to 80 seconds) with Max Contraction over a period of 8 weeks. I am also going to be using it exclusively for arm exercises for the next 8 weeks and will compare measurements.
Open User Options Menu

Drew Baye

Florida, USA

saseme wrote:

A repeated quarter second static hold...really.


The static is followed by a partial negative movement. The spotters help return the weight to the fully contracted position.
Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

Egad! 18 lbs in 4 weeks and you say Zone Training is hype...lol! Well its heavy so it must work ;^)
Open User Options Menu

simon-hecubus

Texas, USA

AShortt wrote:
Egad! 18 lbs in 4 weeks and you say Zone Training is hype...lol! Well its heavy so it must work ;^)


18 lbs in 4 weeks?! We'll look forward to...excuse me, I have to sneeze [ahhhhhhchbullshitooooo] ....er, your results.
Open User Options Menu

saseme



But don't you see, Jrep-Omega Sets. They're are natural combination...they're both Canadian...
Open User Options Menu

Drew Baye

Florida, USA

AShortt wrote:
Egad! 18 lbs in 4 weeks and you say Zone Training is hype...lol! Well its heavy so it must work ;^)


Guys, the book publishers choose the tag lines, and they pick the most outstanding examples rather than what's typical. I think you're well aware of this. The statement is based on the results of one of John's clients. The same is true of Dr. Darden's The New High Intensity Training, which says "Add up to 18 pounds of muscle in just two weeks" on the cover.

Publishers put this kind of thing on the cover to sell books.

Is it possible? Yes. Is it probable? Not for the vast majority of people. Will people make good gains from it? If done properly, yes.
Open User Options Menu

Growl

"Gain 18 pounds of muscle in 4 weeks" is different than "Add up to 18 pounds of muscle in just 2 weeks".
One is a promise and the other is a possiblity.
Jeff
Open User Options Menu

Paul Marsland

The thing is though Drew as you've stated it's not the most practical of methods due to the high level of loads employed. So in reality it's not that effective due to its limited application. 18lbs of muscle in four weeks? That's better gains than people make on steroids and IGF-1!!

The subject surely must have been detrained and new trainee???

I'll be interested to see you results from your experiment..(sincerely)

I bet you're cringing at the tag line "world renowned" though........

Paul.
Open User Options Menu

Drew Baye

Florida, USA

Paul Marsland wrote:
The thing is though Drew as you've stated it's not the most practical of methods due to the high level of loads employed. So in reality it's not that effective due to its limited application. 18lbs of muscle in four weeks? That's better gains than people make on steroids and IGF-1!!

The subject surely must have been detrained and new trainee???

I'll be interested to see you results from your experiment..(sincerely)

I bet you're cringing at the tag line "world renowned" though........

Paul.


I'm interested to see the results as well, as it is going to be both a test of how well the protocol works compared with our standard HIT protocol, as well as a test of how practical it is for us to do with clients. I suspect it will produce better results due to the higher load, and the fact that it is similar to negative-only training, which has traditionally been very effective.

My interest in the protocol is that it seems to be about as "high intensity" as you can get, mainly due to the resistance levels involved, but I agree that it isn't practical for the majority of people. The biggest problem is lack of weight.

Most newer selectorized machines are built smaller and with smaller weight stacks than the old Nautilus stuff. They're not made for big bodybuilders, they're made for the average gym-goer. Plate-loaded equipment would be far more effective, but then comes the problem of loading and unloading, not to mention getting people to help lift the weight for you.

For these reasons, my recommendation would be to use it occassionally for a few weeks at a time with bodyparts you want to focus on. If you're only doing a few exercises with it, you're not going to kill your training partners and it's not going to have as much of an impact on recovery time as if you were to attempt to do your full body this way. I'd treat it like an advanced HIT technique like negative-only or hyper, and use it sparingly.

If you have access to Eccentric Edge equipment, you could do it very easily, without killing your workout partner, and in a time efficient manner.

Our first set of twins are scheduled to meet with us tomorrow morning, and I've had a few others contact me, so hopefully we'll have a couple more to work with soon. If anybody knows identical twins in the Orlando area, please contact me.

We will post the results, including photos, measurements, etc. when the first set finishes.
Open User Options Menu

Paul Marsland

Another concern of mine regarding this method (and I'm not knocking it as it may prove productive) is due to the high levels of loads used won't it place undue stress on the joints? I remember when Power Factor Training came out and I used it, I got good results but due to the amount of weight I was able to use I abandoned it as my wrists start to really hurt.


Also in regards to the twins even though they may appear to be identical this is not entirely true. Is the reason for using them as they are as close to being one in the same, as you can get?


Paul.
Open User Options Menu

chaire

North Carolina, USA

Drew,
I am training 10 of my clients using max contractions on Eccentric Edge equipment. The results after 2 weeks have been very good. I am also using max contractions in my own training in prep for an over 50 bodybuilding contest in late October. I have gained 1/4 inch on my arms in 4 weeks and am on a low cal diet. John may be on to something.

To those who doubt, try it and check the results. Lets find the best way to train.
God Bless,
Charlie
Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

Drew Baye wrote:
AShortt wrote:
Egad! 18 lbs in 4 weeks and you say Zone Training is hype...lol! Well its heavy so it must work ;^)

Guys, the book publishers choose the tag lines, and they pick the most outstanding examples rather than what's typical. I think you're well aware of this. The statement is based on the results of one of John's clients. The same is true of Dr. Darden's The New High Intensity Training, which says "Add up to 18 pounds of muscle in just two weeks" on the cover.

Publishers put this kind of thing on the cover to sell books.

Is it possible? Yes. Is it probable? Not for the vast majority of people. Will people make good gains from it? If done properly, yes.


Drew dragging in Dr. Darden is just making you look sillier, I think you are just playing dumb to skirt the issue.

What I was getting at is this; Johnston has never involved himself with that sort of publicity and yet admonished him for much more minor AND 'personal' claims of physical change. See the problem?

I have seen pics of Little and he ain't no Johnston but guess what? ? So what right!? They shouldn't be compared against each other but...no one would know this technique better than Little so where is his personal proof of gains?

What you can do with some 'good responder' means very little as we both understand. You can take a big fellow (say over 200 lbs) and add back 7 lbs of lost muscle, 7 lbs of new muscle and 4 pounds of fat and there you go. I mean even I gained some 5-6 lbs blitzing years back ( in just 2 weeks) and working from the low 150's. In other words the percentage of gain to body weight wasn't that far off from these types of claims. However and that's a big however:

Over the top super demanding and unusual techniques like this tend to have a temporary effect. You may keep some muscle but much is lost as the alarm value of the technique wears off. Besides massive static contractions are nothing new. Little may have a neat new take on his whole max contraction thing but I doubt it will have far reaching implications and applications. For those of a certain muscle type it may be a good variable but that's about it. Furthermore, it seems far from efficient but that's a whole other can of worms.

The point is it may be a good technique but regardless your acceptance of this verse your JRep bashing stinks to high hell. Your complaint was that Johnston's talk was flagrant hype yet you think it fine to pass the buck to publishers. At least Brian stands up for and behind his own work. Besides Zone Training is a methodology that encompasses the full spectrum of training. It doesn't force one into a mold but allows you the tools to make all aspects fit.

I realize that you don't understand JReps and that is fine, your not interested, whoopdeedoo, but you could do yourself a favor and forget about taking sides if you catch my drift.

Open User Options Menu

Drew Baye

Florida, USA

AShortt wrote:

I realize that you don't understand JReps and that is fine, your not interested, whoopdeedoo, but you could do yourself a favor and forget about taking sides if you catch my drift.



I understand JReps well enough. It's not all that complex. As far as the tagline is concerned, regardless of the circumstances, I'm sure if Johnston had produced similar results with anyone using JReps we'd be hearing about that as well.

Perhaps if he could actually get published by a major publisher instead of having to self publish, he'd understand how that works.
Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

Not to be out done ;^)

Sorry Brian, couldn't resist...lol!

Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

Drew Baye wrote:

I understand JReps well enough. It's not all that complex. As far as the tagline is concerned, regardless of the circumstances, I'm sure if Johnston had produced similar results with anyone using JReps we'd be hearing about that as well.

Perhaps if he could actually get published by a major publisher instead of having to self publish, he'd understand how that works.


You do like to talk out of the side of your mouth don't you.

First off, from what I have read of your retort towards Zone Training you haven't a clue - haven't even scratched the surface. Just "more contractions per unit time" should have been your wake up call but oh well.

Second, we are about what changes someone can make with their own body NOT what the luck of the genetic draw lands us in our lap. We have plenty of folks making great gains but this about a method not selling a new fangled technique. The method speaks and stands up for itself, what you can do with it is another matter...as in your case.

Third, with the great depth and breadth of Johnston's work he has never moved to a mainstream publisher. Why? Because this sort of highly specialized material is more of an eductional based format. It isn't just full of sample routines and easy reading but the real McCoy. Just ask anyone who has read the second book where we delved far deeper into the subject.

Insinuating he 'couldn't' get a major publisher is stupid and needlessly nasty.

The more you comment the more you rub that muck into your cloths and leave a permanent stain.
Open User Options Menu

Drew Baye

Florida, USA

AShortt wrote:

The more you comment the more you rub that muck into your cloths and leave a permanent stain.


This whole attack on John's book seems to have more to do with my critique of JReps than anything else. Seems to me you're just upset about my bashing your pet exercise method.
Open User Options Menu

Cherry

What is 'advanced max training' protocol?

so far i know its partial negatives and 1/4 sec iso's... 1/4 sec iso's??? really?
Open User Options Menu

logicbdj

Ontario, CAN

It's always good to get the facts straight before making comment:

I never persued a publisher beyond Human Kinetics, and they outright told me that my stuff challenged and contradicted much of what they sold in their other books, and would not be interested in publishing my materials.

Because I don't make my living at writing or selling books, but have done so to support our instructors and whoever else is interested in reading what myself and others have to write (including authors such as Shortt, Marsland, Vost, Mannie, etc.), I have not looked into the issue further.

I doubt there is much money to be made in selling technical information and to receive pennies on each sale of a book. And I don't write for the mainstream... perhaps because I'm not a world-renowned personal trainer.
Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

Drew Baye wrote:
AShortt wrote:

The more you comment the more you rub that muck into your cloths and leave a permanent stain.


This whole attack on John's book seems to have more to do with my critique of JReps than anything else. Seems to me you're just upset about my bashing your pet exercise method.


Nonsense and now you try to play the politician and twist the facts just enough to come off clean without it being obvious.

I have NOT attacked John's book, in fact I seconded your notions about trying it properly in another thread. I say it sounds interesting and he has a really good looking gym which I intend to visit and hopefully meet the man at. I even posted the link to his gym's website in that thread!

As for your critique that wasn't a issue, it was lackluster and not nearly on par with a lot of other comments (like Hahn's) which led to interesting new points.

No Drew, it was your immediate belching before you had any idea what it was all about. Just a bunch of sounds like...and sour grapes.

Your half-hearted/half-assed critique wasn't really worth your time and buddy...you and I both know it.

Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

In my nearly 17 years of training, I've experimented (multiple times) with static holds, strong range reps, partials, Jreps (four times!), as well as other reps.

I always return to full-range reps.

I'm not saying any of the above can't offer any value, but for myself, full-range reps work best.
Open User Options Menu

Drew Baye

Florida, USA

AShortt wrote:

Your half-hearted/half-assed critique wasn't really worth your time and buddy...you and I both know it.



Not at all. A lot of people seemed to find it worthwhile and it brought up important points.
Open User Options Menu

Paul Marsland

Drew effectively what is being said here in regards to you having the prolougue in the book and you being touted as "world renowed" is that basically you sold out.

Let's face it you for many years proclaimed and argued aggressively the virues of superslow to your credit you've realised your errors and publically stated so. However to go on record and to support such a book and method basically makes you guilty by association. You APPEAR to bash Johnston for publishing and promoting a book which he wrote and self published on his own site with no real gain other than to make others aware of this method, yet here you are on a book which is going to be sold for commercial gain, pot calling the kettle black me thinks...


I mean, let's face it, there was power factor training, static contraction, max contraction and now this, but I ask the question. "where's the muscle".. these books were all sold in blaze of publicity but were are they now??


Fair enough for you believing there to be some merit to this method but you have to be prepared for the back lash when those who try it and gain very little from it.........after all you have put YOUR name to it. As you stated that was the publishers idea, I don't see you asking them to remove that tag line on the cover or stating something to contray, outside the internet no one has heard of you. What will it be next "Drew Baye, trainer of champions"....



Paul.

Open User Options Menu

Drew Baye

Florida, USA

Paul Marsland wrote:
Drew effectively what is being said here in regards to you having the prolougue in the book and you being touted as "world renowed" is that basically you sold out.


How is my having written the forward to the book "selling out" in any way?

I think the method has value, particularly for advanced trainees who might be close to the upper limits of their genetic potential and are looking for a way to expose the muscles to a more intense stimulus. If I didn't, I wouldn't have written it.


Paul Marsland wrote:
Let's face it you for many years proclaimed and argued aggressively the virues of superslow to your credit you've realised your errors and publically stated so. However to go on record and to support such a book and method basically makes you guilty by association.


I don't think John is guilty of anything. There's nothing wrong with wanting to sell books, as long as they provide the readers with something of value, and I believe readers will benefit from the book. Even if they don't use the protocol, there are other very helpful things in there, particularly the sections on physiological and psychological barriers to progress and motivation.


Paul Marsland wrote:
You APPEAR to bash Johnston for publishing and promoting a book which he wrote and self published on his own site with no real gain other than to make others aware of this method


No, I criticized problems with the claims he made about JReps being a solution to poor resistance curves and about the importance of the pump.

While they might not be making a lot of money, I'm sure Brian isn't selling books for the sole purpose of sharing information, and there's nothing wrong with that. I have no problem with anyone trying to make a profit, as long as they're offering people something worth the money they're paying for it.

If you recall, I've recommended various books of Johnston's here before.


Paul Marsland wrote:
...yet here you are on a book which is going to be sold for commercial gain, pot calling the kettle black me thinks...


Not at all. I wasn't criticizing Johnston's motives, just certain claims being made about the protocol.


Paul Marsland wrote:
I mean, let's face it, there was power factor training, static contraction, max contraction and now this, but I ask the question. "where's the muscle".. these books were all sold in blaze of publicity but were are they now??


John has been getting good results with the people he's training, and I received a lot of e-mail from people in response to my critiques of Power Factor Training and my critique of Max Contraction who claimed to have made significant gains using them.

Just for the record, just like JReps I never said PFT wouldn't work either, I only criticized some of the claims made about specific aspects of it.


Paul Marsland wrote:
Fair enough for you believing there to be some merit to this method but you have to be prepared for the back lash when those who try it and gain very little from it.........after all you have put YOUR name to it.


I think people will benefit from it, or I wouldn't have written what I did. I suspect it will produce results similar to or better than regular negative-only training if properly performed.


Paul Marsland wrote:
As you stated that was the publishers idea, I don't see you asking them to remove that tag line on the cover or stating something to contray, outside the internet no one has heard of you. What will it be next "Drew Baye, trainer of champions"....


That's not entirely true. I've had a bit of exposure outside of the net, including being interviewed by Muscular Development magazine a few years back, and mentioned in one of Mike Mentzer's Heavy Duty columns.

I receive a large amount of e-mail monthly from people all over the world with questions about training, so the description isn't that far off.
Open User Options Menu

Paul Marsland

How did you sell out?

Drew, because by doing the forward to a book that is built around pure commercial hype, such is the nature of the books written by both Sisco and Little. Using such things as "world renowed" and "add 18lbs in just four weeks!!" and you're telling me this is not pure hype designed to sell??

Don't get me wrong Sisco and Little are not the only ones guilty of this, in my youth I too bought into hype such as this, by books by the good Dr Darden ( Sorry Ellington)...

I buy Johnstons books because they are well written and informative, not for a flashy cover and some slick tagline.

Johnston even tried to go the commerical route with EP magazine, but as history shows, people don't want the TRUTH, they'd rather follow some champs routine or some new wonder supplement, and lambast in their poor gains, looking forward to the next glossy magazine in the HOPE that,......... that issue will contain the secret to their gains exploding. Little's books are built and sold on the same premise, hence as I said you sold out...


Personally I would have given you more credit than to contribute to a book such as this.

It appears that you have gone from one extreme to the other, once you were the arch enenmy of employing heavy loads for heavys sake ala superslow, now you proclaim that heavy resistance is the be all and end all to exercise. But,and which you deny to be true and even are as bold as to say Johnston or anyone else who employs zone training is deluded, or making it up.

However such is the experience of myself, Johnston, Short,Lipowski,....ALL who have travelled the load/intensity is king path, to find that superior gains have been brought about by using loads which are much less than what we were typically lifting a year ago.

Take it or leave it, but it's the truth Drew, zone training as produced better gains for me than any other method I have ever employed and believe me I've tried just about every method there is and then some.


In a nutshell Omega Reps may prove effective in the short term, however due to there very limited application and potential for injury this in my opinion makes the method an inferior method of training, as it has too many short falls, despite what the book may state. On the other hand zone training DOES work and can be used by anyone, requires no extra spotters or equipment, no extreme loads and there is minimal potential for injury, by this very nature it makes it far superior to omega reps for the purpose of increasing muscle mass and improving appearance. THAT'S why I've continued to use it for nearly eight months now and will continue to do so...


Paul.



Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | 3 | Next | Last
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy