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
JReps vs. Negatives
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

McNultyEssex

Reading through some of Arthur Jones' writings, I can see how the theory behind JReps came about, and I find the idea interesting.

I've heard that performing JReps produces a greater EMG activity than negatives, so more muscle fibres are recruited?

However, it seems feasible that any benefit of JReps over negatives from greater fatigue, is reduced by additional work performed as a result of JReps (less recovery ability)?

I guess different individuals respond best to different stimuli. Therefore, whilst some benefit from greater fatigue (JReps), others may respond better to slightly less fatigue, and attenuated recovery ability (as in negatives)?
Open User Options Menu

logicbdj

Ontario, CAN

The extent of fatigue from any method of weight training is relative to the load and how far you push yourself. For example, stoping 2-3 reps short of fatigue in each zone during JReps would be LESS fatiguing that going all out with traditional full range reps.

As well, do note that negative-only training (with about 40% more load than typical training) produces the SAME EMG output as traditional training with 40% less load.

For those who don't believe it, I own EMG equipment and have run several experiments. This one, and several others will be in the new Z3 book.
Open User Options Menu

RW Hawk

Virgin Islands

Anything from the IART should be taken with a grain of salt and carefully examined in light of what we already know. Fred Hahn and others have pointed out numerous flaws in the JReps theory, and every single time Johnston has resorted to name-calling instead of addressing/resolving the issue.

Bottom line... Darden HIT (including Darden's stage reps) has been tried and proven, JReps has not. Further, on the Zone Training website Johnston calls testimonials "case studies." A testimonial is hardly a case study. When Dr. Darden trains a person or group and documents the diet, training, and related factors as set forth in his books... that's a case study.
Open User Options Menu

logicbdj

Ontario, CAN

Comments from the peanut gallery.

You have no idea the work we are doing here, and yet you comment.

In regard to Hahn, here is a guy who can't develop his physique worth a beans, focusing on powerlifting on machines. Yes... that's proven effective.

In regard to results, personal experience says it all... not what researchers in universities have to say. Each person is his or her own case study. The reports on the Zone site are not testimonials, but explanations of what these people have done relative to the new-found gains they have received since doing Zone Training. Get it? Probably not.

There's no name calling here... research details are presented in Z3... not that I had to do such work to know that I'm building muscle... the mirror, body composition testing, the weight scale, photographs, and tape measurements tell it all.

By the way, my lean mass (with no fat increase) is up another 7 pounds from last year, now at age 42. At age 40 I could not budge my weight past 190 (and I'm currently 205-207) no matter how many negatives, forced reps, training to failure, etc., I did in a traditional manner.

Yup... Zone Training doesn't work. Scientists haven't proven it (no one has studied it!!!!); therefore, ignore it.

When all you geniuses actually can produce some muscle and demonstrate what works after 30 years of exercise, of trying to push those limits beyond the beginner and intermediate stages, then do, please, share your expertise. However, most of you have not been alive longer than I've been training, and others are habitual in what they do (afraid or too obtuse to experiment), and so I don't expect much.

Take that with a grain of salt.
Open User Options Menu

simon-hecubus

Texas, USA

logicbdj wrote:
...When all you geniuses actually can produce some muscle and demonstrate what works after 30 years of exercise, of trying to push those limits beyond the beginner and intermediate stages, then do, please, share your expertise. However, most of you have not been alive longer than I've been training, and others are habitual in what they do (afraid or too obtuse to experiment), and so I don't expect much...


That last part hits hard. Kainotophobia (yes, I just looked that up) seems to run rampant in HIT. When you poke and prod people on things they've held so dear for so long, the reaction is bound to be defensive.

On the other hand, doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is a form of insanity --- whether we're talking about training regimens or troop surges.

I also seriously doubt anyone who cites Fred Hahn as an authority on anything.

My own two cents:

Negatives = Lots of soreness, not much in the growth department

Stage/Zone/J-Reps = Instant results. I am still determining their long-term effects for me.

Later,
Scott
Open User Options Menu

MikaelPR

Alex
I have gotten great results from the following bicep routine performed one arm at a time that combines JReps, static holds, and JRep negatives:

Compound position curl on overhead cable, top third DB Incline curl, elbow braced, static hold, full stretch
Machine preacher curl, negative emphasized, mid third

Performing short range negative movements relative to joint position has proven to be much more effective than longer range movements i.e. mid third pullovers vs. full range pullovers. Any time you can, perform exercises on machines with single, fused movement arms. Lift the weight with 2 limbs and lower it with the same limb until you can no longer control the descent of the weight.

It never ceases to amaze me how some people continually dismiss the value of negative training because "their system" doesn't/can't incorporate it. All methods(SuperSlow, JReps,etc.) would be vastly improved by equipment with heavier negative to positive resistance.

If I had access to such machines, I would use them exclusively, still in short range zones, only lowering slower.
Mike
Open User Options Menu

RW Hawk

Virgin Islands

logicbdj wrote:You have no idea the work we are doing here, and yet you comment. You're only here to sell your method/product and to take cheap shots at Darden every so often.

Like I said, anything from the IART should be taken with a grain of salt... for years the IART claimed that Mentzer's Heavy Duty was the only valid training method, etc. The IART was wrong.

Open User Options Menu

tsg2513

Florida, USA

I really enjoy this forum but typically, I don't respond to these threads as they usually degrade to nothing more than a pissing match. However, after over 30 years of training (with the majority being in HIT fashion) I was convinced that at 44 years old, my body was just no longer going to respond beyond just maintaining what I had. In fact, after 3 operations (2 shoulder and 1 lower back) I was fighting like hell just to control the downward spiral of my body's muscle-to-fat composition.

Well, to get to the point, last year I decided that I would clean up my diet permanently and get into lean condition. I went from 215 down to 185 over a 12 month period but into month 4, I started training exclusively with JReps.

Let me add that I do not belong to the IART, never met Brian or anyone else associated with the IART but after years of looking the same, I thought I would purchase the Zone Training manuals and give it a try. Now, 8 months later, I am close to my best condition of my life. I have been leaner (for competitions) but overall, my shape and size for a drug-free trainer is personally, very satisfying. At 185 lbs., I believe I could be in contest shape within 3 weeks or so.

I am not here to debate and I am only speaking from my own personal experience, JReps/Zone Training works and continues to provide positive changes to my physique.
Open User Options Menu

Rich Fitter

New Jersey, USA

I have worked as a trainer for the past 23 years. I have been strength training for nearly 28. I have tried enough training progams to know what works and what doesn't. JREPS works. I have read Brian's manuals and find nothing wrong with his research.

This past year I achieved my lifetime best condition as a Pro Natural bodybuilder using zone training and my clients have achieved great results as well. I am not going to knock someone elses program but JREPS is one of the most effective methods I have tried.
Open User Options Menu

bdog


In regard to results, personal experience says it all... not what researchers in universities have to say.


Exactly.


By the way, my lean mass (with no fat increase) is up another 7 pounds from last year, now at age 42.


Brian, would you mind posting more pics?
Open User Options Menu

RW Hawk

Virgin Islands

Beware of wild claims not supported by evidence, especially when they involve the marketing of a product... Johnston claims he has gained 17 pounds of pure muscle using JReps and Andrew Shortt claims to have gained 20.

That's a huge amount of muscle that I just don't see in their pics. Do they have dated body comp documentation to prove this? What about side-by-side before and after photos?
Open User Options Menu

Crotalus

What about the rest of us who have also gotten great results using JREPS ? We're all lying out the ass, too ?

I don't see a need for pictures of anyone for proof that the methods work. It's been working for a bunch of us so what other proof do we need ? If I gain on it, that's all I care about not whether a name on an internet message board believes it or not.

Why do so many people give a shit about how the next guy trains ?
Open User Options Menu

medici

Spain

Guess I'll have to exercise seniority here - or endurance! Like Ellington, I've trained for 48 years - both with weights and with the mind that creates, sustains, and changes realities. Both have been both a long period of experimentation, and with that learning. Life-long learning. It just don't stop.

We seem to be in an age of synthesis and syncreticism right now. T-Nation evidences it with Christian Thibadeau and others; Ironman relishes it, embodied with Jerry Brainum and Steve Holman; and Ellington Darden's bibliography of publications demonstrates him to be the pioneering figure of our joint generation.

None of these guys claims to be a victim, ahead of their times, none seems narcistic or meglomaniacal. All endorse both open forums and free/open exchange of data and information (free in the sense of no-strings attached, no politics). None of them is a grandstander.

Name calling is really a cheap shot aimed at demeaning what another has to say, certainly at distracting attention away from embarrassing points one wishes to evade and avoid. Haven't we witnessed enough of this?

Healthy social groups tend to ignore name-callers and rude behavior in favor of simply ignoring them: why dignify such behavior with a response? In that manner, such persons are marginalized even further than they already are, then silently forgotten. The game is over.

I for one vote in favor of conduct becoming dignified, rational, thoughtful adults. Those who require puerility to bolster their otherwise weak positions are best ignored unto ostricizing them, or welcoming them into the fold of civilized behavior once they gain a modicum of genteel conduct.

In my mind a lot of the rude words thrown around here aren't much different than someone walking in from the barnyard with horse poop all over their boots and no gbod mind to clean up before coming inside.

Stage reps, along with rest/pause, negs, pre-exhausts, post-exhausts, chains & bands, drop sets all work. One key point Poloquin has made many times over is that most folks adapt to any program in 4-6 weeks, while better trained folks can adapt in as few as 2-3 training sessions. So keep your options open, keep those muscles supercompensating, and rage on into that good night a calling.

cheers,

kayo
Open User Options Menu

McNultyEssex

Good point kayo, I agree.

Can any JReppers tell me how often they exercise? I guess it would be less frequently than with conventional training?

Open User Options Menu

logicbdj

Ontario, CAN

Side by Side photos? Yes. Go to the Zone site and click on the case studies section. There you can see photos of Andrew (although he has yet to supply his latest photo, but you will see a marked difference).

Also, you can see photos of myself since I was a teenager. If you can't see a difference between my weight at age 40 and 42, then you are blind. If you can't tell the difference between my physique at age 35, about 14 pounds lighter (WITH overhead lighting and fully carb loaded, compared to age 42 without overhead lighting, no carb load, and not even a pump), then what can I say.

It comes down to this: Some people understand the concept of bodybuilding, whereas others are 'into' exercise. Bodybuilders seem to thrive on Zone Training and 'get it,' whereas fitness enthusiasts, who are fixated on heaving loads for its own sake get frustrated and don't get it.

In the case studies section on the Zone site there is a woman named Julie Peavey... check her out. This is what she emailed me today:

"We are using JReps with great success with our clients and I'm using them myself in preparation for my next show. I believe it will be the Masters Nationals in July. I'm currently at my all time high body weight of 180 lbs and am starting to tighten up my diet. If all goes well, I'll come in far bigger than ever."

And then you have those who think it's too difficult to record all the information associated with the method (as if one needs to)... or those who don't even apply it properly and they look like they're full-body rocking the weight back and forth, although the method clearly states to flex into the movement while eliminating outlying participation.

There are those who can get into the exercise experience and those who feel a need to become absorbed in the mathematics behind training... counting and recording everything while placing the exercise experience in the back seat as a secondary consideration at best. The first get Zone Training, the second group will not and can not. And that is fine.

The problem is when the second group complain and ask for evidence, which has been provided more than once, but it's never good enough. Some of us do have body composition report histories (including myself), but when presented, it's ignored...

when measurements and body weight changes, and photos are presented, "nope, I don't see a difference," although it a difference is clear. Then the person wants scientific evidence that the method works, and we have been doing that at our end with several means of technology, but that's not good enough since we're 'biased.'

And so, who, exactly, will be conducting research in this matter? Who will pay for it?

Show me the scientific evidence that any other training method works, including twice per week full-body training? How about Slowburn or Superslow? It should be evident that nearly ANY program will produce results... some results... or very good results.

My focus is on discovering methods to maximize muscular growth. Jones attempted this through means of the exercise tool. I'm doing this through means of how the tool is used.

Thus far no one on this board is dismissing Jones' machines, although NO study has shown his machines to produce superior gains than free weights or cables (to my knowledge). But when I present information or evidence (some of which has yet to be released, although both Shortt and Fitter has been privy to it), then those ignorant of what actually is happening behind the scence claim "take it with a grain of salt."

This coming from a person who not only does not 'get it,' but who has not earned the right to even comment on it. It's like me commenting on some aspect of politics or some other area without even knowing anything about what I'm commenting on. Yes, I have the right to voice an opinion, but it has no value.
Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

I have to imagine Dr. Darden gets tired of seeing this same problem get tied to the HIT name.

Research doesn't conclude anything about Fitness, exercise, nutrition, bodybuilding etc. We have mountains of snippets of experimentation performed that sort of hints one way and the other. Some research is good (by my standards) lots is for the money period. None of it is integrated together which is a friggen shame but I do understand that it would be costly as hell to do so.

We INTERPRET research how we like/can that is all, there is NO final proof to be found as of yet. There are simply too many competing influences when you look into exercise/nutrition. It is a huge issue to decipher.

HIT is so riddled with those who supposedly luv the science yet construe it so narrowly that much of the fitness community laughs at anything attached to HIT. I never get that excited about it because much of the fitness world is so ass backwards I can barely stand to look at it.

My gripe is you have all sorts of people in the HIT community rallying around people like Ryan Hall who read through everything then wow us with stuff Brian said a decade ago. I say more muscle and less paper pushing, everyone is expected to get their homework done. Experiment in your own training and stop trying to compartmentalize it all.

Regards,
Andrew
Open User Options Menu

M Lipowski

New York, USA

alexmac wrote:
Good point kayo, I agree.

Can any JReppers tell me how often they exercise? I guess it would be less frequently than with conventional training?



I too agree and wish things would change but I'm not holding my breathe...it's unfortunate.

To answer your question Alex. I don't have a set frequency. I will go from training twice per week to training 4x's/week (using Zone Training) depending on the level of demands I'm trying to impose or recover from. My "maintenance" programs ususally consist of training 3x's/week on a split.

I think it's best to not lock one's self into a certain frequency just like they shouldn't lock themselves into any one aspect or component of exercise in general. Of course if your schedule/lifestyle only allows you to train a certain number of days per week that's one thing but for continual gains I find it best to cycle frequency (as well as volume and intensity).

Open User Options Menu

cargo

logicbdj wrote:


By the way, my lean mass (with no fat increase) is up another 7 pounds from last year, now at age 42. At age 40 I could not budge my weight past 190 (and I'm currently 205-207) no matter how many negatives, forced reps, training to failure, etc., I did in a traditional manner.

.


Brian, I went and looked at your pics, clearly you are telling the truth about your gains.
What changes have you made in your diet from age 40-42?

Open User Options Menu

M Lipowski

New York, USA

alexmac wrote:
Reading through some of Arthur Jones' writings, I can see how the theory behind JReps came about, and I find the idea interesting.

I've heard that performing JReps produces a greater EMG activity than negatives, so more muscle fibres are recruited?

However, it seems feasible that any benefit of JReps over negatives from greater fatigue, is reduced by additional work performed as a result of JReps (less recovery ability)?

I guess different individuals respond best to different stimuli. Therefore, whilst some benefit from greater fatigue (JReps), others may respond better to slightly less fatigue, and attenuated recovery ability (as in negatives)?



In speaking to what this thread was orginally about I recently came off a JReps program and a Negative Only & Full ROM program. The results were disapointing to say the least. Let me rephrase that. The results of the Zone Training program was fantastic and the results of the Neg O/FROM was disapointing.

I started by doing 6 weeks of Zone Training on a 4-way split, training 4 days per week on average (sometimes less). The results of this were great. I gained 4 lbs. of muscle and lost a pound of fat according to my Bioanalogics ELG. I spoke about this in length on the Team H.I.T. website so I won't get into it here.

Following this I took a few days extra days off before starting my Neg O/FROM program. This program consisted of training twice per week with one workout being all Neg O. and the other a basic FROM workout. Both were full body with about 8 exercises.

The result of this program was a LOSS of a half a pound and a 2 lb. gain in BF. Diet and lifestyle were unchanged during this program compared with the Zone Training program so that factor can be eliminated.

As hard as Neg O training as well as the basic full body HIT routine can be, they simply do not do as much for effectively targeting the muscles as does Zone Training. I also believe--as I've stated numerous times before--that the REDUCED systemic fatigue from Zone Training goes far in allowing more recovery resources to be used for muscle tissue repair and growth. I believe the whole body integration resulting from FROM and NEG O training to be a negative where muscle growth is of high priority.

Strength (particularly demonstrated strength) is totally different story but for bb'ing and this is something I noted long before Zone Training when I used to do periods of Neg O. training.

Like Rich and tsg noted, Zone Training has been a HUGE help in my contest prep getting me last year to achieve my best conditioning to date.

Open User Options Menu

logicbdj

Ontario, CAN

I recently conducted an experiment, in comparing full ROM exercise to basic JReps Halves. Measurement was done in three ways: force gauge, EMG, and stress response (sympathetic and parasympathetic responses). The same load was used for both exercises; one biceps trained one day; the other biceps the next day. One set of exercise each, together with pre- and post-exercise functional tests using a force gauge.

1. The JReps set produced an inroad of 26%; the traditional set to failure an inroad of 16%. In other words, after exercise, the JReps set resulted in 37% more fatigue/loss of function.

2. The micro-volt (EMG) output was higher and more consistent (more stable and consistent loading) with the JReps set.

3. The alarm reaction (stress response) was higher with the JReps set, during and after the set.

All of which suggests clearly that the degree/magnitude of stimulus is higher with something so basic as Halves (not nearly as stressful as other applications of Zone Training) than with traditional full-ROM training - which also explains why people who are doing full-body training can't cope with Zone Training, and need to select some muscles to train that way.

The details will be presented in the near future, in the Journal of Applied Fitness. But as some people would tell you, take it with a grain of salt, lol.
Open User Options Menu

logicbdj

Ontario, CAN

Cargo:

I eat the same foods, and likely too much alcohol and junk. I do take NanoGreens 10, which I doubt has much of an anabolic effect, although it has a noticeable effect on increasing one's immune system (which affects recovery). The biggest difference is that I cycled my training differently: Fri-Sat-Sun. On those days more carbohdyrate and moderate protein. On the other four days, more protein and modest carbs.

I made a lot of training and nutrition changes (such as above, in regard to re-arranging things) and so it's difficult to point to only one thing - but, rather, the totality of the training application.

I plan on doing one full-body session one weekend, and then the following weekend do the Fri-Sat-Sun split... and alternate these two frequencies. More compound movements on the full-body day, and then more single-joint movements on the split.
Open User Options Menu

jmcb

My two cents
Jreps work. I've worked out for 39 years. I believe jreps are the most significant advance in exercise theory since AJ's first bulletin. I don't belong to IART,but I do try to keep an open mind!
Jim
Open User Options Menu

RW Hawk

Virgin Islands

jmcb wrote:
My two cents
Jreps work.


As far as I'm aware, no one is claiming JReps don't work. Virtually all training methods work, that's not the issue. The issue is that we have very experienced trainees alleging to have put on 17 and 20 pounds of muscle by using JReps with other factors remaining the same (using JReps being the only change they've made).

If that be the case (very experienced trainees making the alleged lean mass gains), then JReps truly are the latest, greatest thing and everyone should be using them.

That being said, I can't imagine why these trainees wouldn't take standardized before photos, body comp, etc. and then use JReps for 6 or 8 weeks and then take standardized after photos, body comp, etc. and place the photos, etc. side-by-side to demonstrate the alleged results. Rather, we're shown photos from years apart and expected to see a 17 pound lean mass gain, which I just don't see.

And in Shortt's case, I'm sorry, but he does not look like he has gained 20 pounds of pure muscle.
Open User Options Menu

logicbdj

Ontario, CAN

1. I only take photos once a year... since I have nothing to prove. But in any case, my photo age age 40 was taken in the same location with the same lighting as age 42. You can't see a difference? LOL

2. How many times did YOU get a surge of growth, for whatever reason and NOT take before and after photos? Many people often buy a book, give something a try, and then are disappointed or suprised.

Where are your photos over the years, or anyone on this board not doing JReps? Let's see standardized photos of anyone on this board. I bet no one has them, or very darn few. I have body comp reports over the years, and my measurements.

How much will you pay me to provide them to you, since it is apparent individuals like yourself are the ones wanting the information, and information often costs.

3. Just how much size do you think 20 pounds makes on a person? You are looking at about a half-inch on the thighs, a half-inch on the chest, and a quarter inch on the arms (besides being distributed throughout if the person trained 'evenly'); one does not become Lou Ferrigno as a result.

I recently trained a steroid user who increased his weight by a good 20 pounds and you really could not see the difference... not much, and yet the scale clearly showed the change.

4. It was clearly stated early (you must have missed it... big surprise) that Andrew HAS NOT released his latest photos to demonstrate his full 20 pound gain over the past two years. Yes, that's in the past two years, not two months.

Is 20 pounds over two years such a huge exaggeration? How unfortunate for some to make almost no mass increases in two years, only to mock others who are happy in their training and making those changes.

Remember, it was only weeks that Lipowski gained 4 pounds of lean, and so he must be lying too. How about you, Rich Fitter... what lies are you telling?
Open User Options Menu

Rich Fitter

New Jersey, USA

I konw this: The only change I made in my training this past year was the incorporation on JREPS. At 40 years old I stepped on stage at the WNBF Pro Natural World Championships in the best shape of my life. I added more lean mass to my chest, back and legs in 4 months of zone training than I had in 6 years of conventional HIT.

I firmly believe JREPS was a major reason for my improvement.
Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Next | Last
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy