"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.
I've been wondering since I began E.D.'s HIT, why negative chins and dips with added weight are recommended and not the full rep? Is there a point where I get strong enough on the negatives that I should switch to the full reps?
Sure, you an do full chinups with any of the routines that call for NO chins. But it's pretty much established that the negative part of the exercise is more productive compared to the positive, as far as muscular size and strength are concerned. Thus, on any exercise that you can emphasize the negative, it's to your advantage to do so.
Negative-only chins and dips are two exercises that, with the proper attachments, you can assist yourself and perform very productively negatives.
I have one of the older Nautilus machines, the multi-exerciser, which makes both the these movements very convenient.
So you are suggesting that the positive part of dips and chins are not necessary for developing size and strength, then, and a trainee need not ever have to do them?
So you are suggesting that the positive part of dips and chins are not necessary for developing size and strength, then, and a trainee need not ever have to do them?
I'm not saying that you should never do them. I'm simply saying that NO chins and dips are better than the regular ones.
I think I phrased my question poorly:
I'm not opposed to doing NO chins. I just wonder if there would be any adverse effects from not doing the positive part or only only doing the positive part occasionally. I guess I'm trying to justify never doing regular chins.
EB Jones wrote:
Doctor Darden,
How slow should one move on the NO chin/dip?
EB,
Your goal is 10 good reps. The first 3 or 4 should be very slow, say 8 seconds lowering time on each. Then they get progressive faster: 2 at 6 seconds, another 2 at 4 or 5 seconds. Finally, your down to just guiding your self to the bottom in 2-3 seconds. When you can't guide yourself down in 2 seconds, STOP.
Of yeah, I forgot to add: You need to climb back to the top position QUICKLY. Don't take 4 or 5 seconds to get to the top. Get back there in 2 seconds or less.
lee20000 wrote:
I think I phrased my question poorly:
I'm not opposed to doing NO chins. I just wonder if there would be any adverse effects from not doing the positive part or only only doing the positive part occasionally. I guess I'm trying to justify never doing regular chins.
Okay, I see what you're getting at. Theoretically, I think you could justify never doing a positive chin -- if you had the proper frequency of performing negative-only chins.
I look forward to and dread NO chins. I look forward to the benefits, but dread the actual set because it's so demanding. The first time i did them i got dizzy and felt faint, but my lats and bi's were sore for 4 days. At a bodyweight of about 210, i'm up to an additional 130 lbs for 10 reps. It's a great exercise.
ZEZ wrote:
I look forward to and dread NO chins. I look forward to the benefits, but dread the actual set because it's so demanding. The first time i did them i got dizzy and felt faint, but my lats and bi's were sore for 4 days. At a bodyweight of about 210, i'm up to an additional 130 lbs for 10 reps. It's a great exercise.
