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
Tired of People Bashing Arthur
Author
Rating
Options

Bill Sekerak

California, USA

How many guys out there are sick of the idiots that come to this site to bash Arthur , his work and insights ?

Many of them couch their true motives with back handed compliments. Many of these guys are simply envious of Arthur. Others are "trolling " for sycophants
or simply believe that knocking Arthur down will somehow give them stature.
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

I don't like seeing anyone bashed on this site regardless of who it is,,,,We'll maybe with the exception of Joe Weider, ha,ha..Anyway there's not much question in my mind that Jones made a huge contribution to our world of bodybuilding and strength and yes he was wrong at times but there is no one else who even comes close to the contribution he made to the science of building muscle and strength and machines.

Carefully thought out and meaningfull and friendly critisism on anything is alaways welcome to me,it's the "everything he said is wrong" attitude that gets real old.

Scott
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

count me in
Open User Options Menu

Landau

Florida, USA

Bill Sekerak wrote:
How many guys out there are sick of the idiots that come to this site to bash Arthur , his work and insights ?

Many of them couch their true motives with back handed compliments. Many of these guys are simply envious of Arthur. Others are "trolling " for sycophants
or simply believe that knocking Arthur down will somehow give them stature.


Agreed 100% - Bashers - get lost.

Open User Options Menu

johnbhoy

Armed Forces - Europe

I think it's an unfortunate and unpleasant aspect of human nature that makes some people want to have a go at anyone who is outstanding in any field. What i admire most about Arthurs work is that he tested and observed everything for himself. I don't recall him ever quoting "studies" and he often admitted being wrong.
Maverick is the best word i can think of at the moment.
Open User Options Menu

alex////doom

Ontario, CAN

southbeach wrote:
count me in


Me too. Far too many attack Arthur or any other intellectuals of such magnitude with bias and no demonstrable evidence. Many quote this or that study but do not actually grasp the actual facts of reality. Most scientists (particularly in our field) have their hand so far up the ass of the public, looking for any penny that they can take from a confused generation of "I want it now, but do not want to work for it," that their heads are stuck up in that particular dark cavity.

Many "scientist" today are bought off to produce the "results" that their patrons are looking for to prove their particular point, whether it is by incorrectly analyzing their own data or compromising the results with a variety of outside factors.

Yes there must be counter arguments made in order to identify or rectify mistakes in theories or their application...but a blind disregard for the basic laws of nature is just that, blind, unknowing, nonsensical...not the inability to see the truth but a complete disregard of it for the sole purpose of argument.

If anyone on this site is here for the sole purpose of attacking other individuals with no demonstrable evidence to disprove them I suggest that you start your own forum for that purpose. Though I do not know Dr. Darden personally or many of the members of this forum, I believe that I have seen enough to draw the fairly accurate conclusion that the individuals on this site are here for intellectual discussion and to attempt to correct any of their premises that may be wrong. Not to fight amongst each other and see who can throw their s*** the farthest.

Alex
Open User Options Menu

crazeeJZ

Depends on what is said and its validity. There's nothing wrong with questioning with a basis, but simply bashing would be useless.
Open User Options Menu

RX Fitness

New York, USA

Count me in as well.
Open User Options Menu

Ciccio

I'm with you.

Franco
Open User Options Menu

coach-jeff

Louisiana, USA

I'm not about bashing for the heck of it. And I'm HIGHLY skeptical of most opinions contrary to Jones ideas. The guy was clearly a genius and did lots of real world testing on real people. And HIT football teams seem to have done ok.

Having said that, if Arthur Jones was absolutely proven wrong about something - and you KNEW it - would you consider it wrong to say so?
Open User Options Menu

chasbari

Ohio, USA

I am still too new to understand all the dynamics here on the board but I have noticed a few things. If you are willing to talk intelligently about concepts, I see nothing wrong with that. If you come in dragging the baggage of pre biased non hit concepts trying to hybridize them to suit your own theories it doesn't work.

Arthur was more than willing to admit when he didn't fully understand or if new information came to light. He was able to make such a paradigm shift because he was easily able to let go of bias and falsehood. That takes courage. If you come here and try HIT in it's absolute and disciplined form and then find out something is not responding, then ask away and question what is missing but if you dilute it with some half and half compromise, that dirties the water.

I am still not sure what battles go on among HIT camps as it is becoming apparent to me that there are several factions. I still return to the basics of good form when I run into problems. I think we need to be able to personally filter out honest discussion from bashing. Bashing has no use anywhere but it seems to be part and parcel in the world of the internet.

I think if we were all talking face to face the dynamic would be much different... for one thing you could actually point out, in the flesh, the difference between what someone thinks they are doing and what they are really doing. I have tried distance teaching in one on one situations and it is severely limited. Nothing like instructing in person. This place is too much of a lifeline to what I feel is a good community for me to be bothered too much by the little issues. It's the best I have found in spite of the minor annoyances that are part of human interaction.
Open User Options Menu

kurtvf

Discussion=good
Disagreement=good
Formulating own opinion=Really good
logic, reason, fact=good
Bashing=Bad
pissing contest=ridiculous
Idol Worship= Really bad

One of my late uncles used to say "Don't get into a pissing contest with a skunk"
Open User Options Menu

Landau

Florida, USA

chasbari wrote:
I am still too new to understand all the dynamics here on the board but I have noticed a few things. If you are willing to talk intelligently about concepts, I see nothing wrong with that. If you come in dragging the baggage of pre biased non hit concepts trying to hybridize them to suit your own theories it doesn't work.

Arthur was more than willing to admit when he didn't fully understand or if new information came to light. He was able to make such a paradigm shift because he was easily able to let go of bias and falsehood. That takes courage. If you come here and try HIT in it's absolute and disciplined form and then find out something is not responding, then ask away and question what is missing but if you dilute it with some half and half compromise, that dirties the water.

I am still not sure what battles go on among HIT camps as it is becoming apparent to me that there are several factions. I still return to the basics of good form when I run into problems. I think we need to be able to personally filter out honest discussion from bashing. Bashing has no use anywhere but it seems to be part and parcel in the world of the internet.

I think if we were all talking face to face the dynamic would be much different... for one thing you could actually point out, in the flesh, the difference between what someone thinks they are doing and what they are really doing. I have tried distance teaching in one on one situations and it is severely limited. Nothing like instructing in person. This place is too much of a lifeline to what I feel is a good community for me to be bothered too much by the little issues. It's the best I have found in spite of the minor annoyances that are part of human interaction.


WELL PUT! I don't think you could've found Arthur in an "absolute" wrong.

Open User Options Menu

Nick1971

Texas, USA

Jones is not above criticism, but I agree there is needless bashing sometimes. I think the point should be to discuss and debate these sorts of things (ie, disagreements with what he may have said in the past), rather than rely on personal attacks.
Open User Options Menu

rtestes

Mississippi, USA

Count me in.

I have stated my opinion on the anti-HIT types that have taken over and trashed the site. Can it be repaired? I am unsure.

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