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
Dr. Darden's Personal Routine
Author
Rating
Options

s153015

New Brunswick, CAN

I was wondering, with Dr. Darden now being somewhere close to his sixties, a little under or over, if I'm not mistaken... what has he changed over time...

What type of volume, frequency and intensity does he use and how has that changed over the years... (and, assuming these things have reduced over the years, at about what age, did doing so start to yield better results.?)

Does he know how a Joe Mullen or Jim Flanagan for example may have made similar changes?

Thanks in advance for any help with this.
Open User Options Menu

Ellington Darden

I'm 65 years old now. About 10 years ago, when I was 55, I began to notice difference in my recovery. I needed more rest between workouts. Then, I noticed that I could not train as hard as I once could . . . or perhaps I didn't want to, or I wasn't motivated to. Whatever the reason(s), I chose to reduce the intensity -- not much, but a little.

So, the end result is that I've lost some muscle over the last 10 years. But I haven't lost interest in training. My workouts just aren't as intense as the once were. Plus, they are shorter.

Ellington
Open User Options Menu

karma50

Ellington,

There is good evidence that as long as the set ends with a hard effort, all the motor units/fibers have been used. The weight doesn't have to be that heavy. (Got this from Winnett's "Master Trainer" newsletter) Hard effort is still high intensity.

At 58, I can no longer recover well from more than a few (5-7) hard sets and maybe some grip and neck stuff. Shortening my workouts has allowed me to continue working out twice a week.

I am thinking of experimenting with even shorter workouts, still full body, more frequently.
Any thoughts?
Griff
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

Ellington Darden wrote:
I'm 65 years old now. About 10 years ago, when I was 55, I began to notice difference in my recovery. I needed more rest between workouts.

Then, I noticed that I could not train as hard as I once could . . . or perhaps I didn't want to, or I wasn't motivated to. Whatever the reason(s), I chose to reduce the intensity -- not much, but a little.

So, the end result is that I've lost some muscle over the last 10 years. But I haven't lost interest in training. My workouts just aren't as intense as the once were. Plus, they are shorter.

Ellington



Hi Ellington,

Count me in as a member of that club too.

In fact I'd say 55 sounds just about right as the age of noticable decline in recovery for me too.

If I trained as hard today as I did at 50, I'd be in the the hospital.

I seldom do the same exercises more than every 10 days. It is supposedly the Type IIx's that take the greatest hit and then the Type IIa's.

That's why codgers shuffle along rather than bounce. They're pretty much running on Type I's.

Glad to see so many "boomers" hanging out here, and realizing that maturity and aging do not mean "LIT" (low intensty training)

While it is importatant to not be silly and try to keep up with your lifting of 20 or 30 years ago, it is also important to keep intensity at a nice level. As you said just backing down a little bit.

At this point it is not about making the same progress we did "back in the day" but "keeping" the muscles, bones, joints, and connective tissues healthy strong, resilient, and functional.


Open User Options Menu

s153015

New Brunswick, CAN

Thanks very much for your reply. Obviously, I'm fishing for free training advice... wondering if, at age 49, I would progress better with once a week, and how many sets, and how far beyond failure (or to failure) would I go...

or is this somethhing that I simply need to determine by trial and error... after Oct. 25, and Nov. 8 with my competitions, I will have the reached the leanest I've ever been in my adult life, by far.

I plan to continue watching diet as diligently albeit with more calories and flexibility and am hoping to actually put on some amount of significant muscle before dieting down again to do this one more time next year...

I am making an assumption that having dieted to this low a level of body fat and having been in caloric deficit, almost since the beginning of the year, that the increase in calories alone will have an anabolic effect...

I don't want to gain a lot of fat, though, and hope to stay within 10 to 15 lbs of contest weight off season. I will probably compete at about 164 this year, and would be very pleased to compete next year in the over 50 category, at 170 and just as lean.

I am hoping that I can figure out...(as everyone is, I guess) the optimum combination of volume, intensity, and frequency to achieve this.

Thanks for any help and suggestions.... in advance....
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

BIO-FORCE wrote:
Ellington Darden wrote:
I'm 65 years old now. About 10 years ago, when I was 55, I began to notice difference in my recovery. I needed more rest between workouts.

Then, I noticed that I could not train as hard as I once could . . . or perhaps I didn't want to, or I wasn't motivated to. Whatever the reason(s), I chose to reduce the intensity -- not much, but a little.

So, the end result is that I've lost some muscle over the last 10 years. But I haven't lost interest in training. My workouts just aren't as intense as the once were. Plus, they are shorter.

Ellington


Hi Ellington,

Count me in as a member of that club too.

In fact I'd say 55 sounds just about right as the age of noticable decline in recovery for me too.

If I trained as hard today as I did at 50, I'd be in the the hospital.

I seldom do the same exercises more than every 10 days. It is supposedly the Type IIx's that take the greatest hit and then the Type IIa's.

That's why codgers shuffle along rather than bounce. They're pretty much running on Type I's.

Glad to see so many "boomers" hanging out here, and realizing that maturity and aging do not mean "LIT" (low intensty training)

While it is importatant to not be silly and try to keep up with your lifting of 20 or 30 years ago, it is also important to keep intensity at a nice level. As you said just backing down a little bit.

At this point it is not about making the same progress we did "back in the day" but "keeping" the muscles, bones, joints, and connective tissues healthy strong, resilient, and functional.




(This is not directed to you personally)

Simply put, codgers shuffle along because of a lifelong accumulation of injuries and physical insults to connective tissue, AND the natural progression of contraction of collagen about the joints. IE, STIFFENING of tissue from repeated 'insults'. Loss of suppleness.

One 'treatment' is methodical stretching to maintain joint ROM.

Open User Options Menu
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy