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
SuperSlow a Requirement for HIT?
1 | 2 | 3 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

Nick1971

Texas, USA

One of the constant themes I see on this forum, and from some HIT advocates elsewhere, is that rep speed must be extremely slow during each exercise, or somehow the workout performed doesn't qualify as HIT. A person can have perfect form, never bounce, go to momentary muscular failure - or beyond, to complete muscular failure, but if the rep speed is remotely "fast" then the trainee is chided for not being intense.

Dr Darden has backed off from requiring SS. He advocates literally "slow and smooth" movements, but there's no requirement to be extremely slow with regard to rep speed.

Mike Mentzer endorsed SS as an intensity technique, but even he backed off over time and even came out against it as being a requirement for generating intensity. As a rule he advocated these intensity techniques as something to be done infrequently, not all the time, as it could cause too many inroads.

I don't know much about Arthur Jones's stance on SS, but what I recall, his exercise routines were always done in a fast cadence.

Let me give just one example of a slow and controlled HIT workout, not using the Super Slow technique, from this very website:

http://www.drdarden.com/...ic.do?id=459177

The subject (Marc Middleton) uses a 3/0/3 rep speed for the Leg Press, 6/0/6 for Pullups (and he was asked to "speed it up a little" twice) and 3/0/4 for Bench Press. Hardly Super Slow.

So with all that in mind, how did a vocal minority, not in line with the very founders and most popular advocates of High Intensity Training, get to be in charge of deciding whether or not a workout is high intensity, just because rep speed isn't super slow?
Open User Options Menu

howard1976

Ive got most of what mike mentzer published! Where does he endorse Super Slow Reps??
Open User Options Menu

RW Hawk

Virgin Islands

"Slow" training is legit and advocated by Darden. If you don't like it, THEN DON'T USE IT. No one is forcing Superslow on anyone.
Open User Options Menu

Bastion

I'm with Howard. To my knowledge, Mike Mentzer never mentioned SS reps. I was a phone client of Mike's for a few years, and all he ever said to me was to make sure the reps were done under complete muscular control, without any momentum, using 4/2/4 as a guideline.
Open User Options Menu

coach-jeff

Louisiana, USA

I look at SS simply as a subset of HIT.
Open User Options Menu

Rogue HIT

SuperSlow a Requirement for HIT?

Definitely not.

HIT a requirement for Superslow?

Not necessarily in my opinion.

Many people seem to lump superslow together with HIT/Nautilus principles and that's quite a big mistake.

I certainly believe that Superslow CAN be High Intensity but they're not mutually inclusive.
Open User Options Menu

Mark S

coachjeff wrote:
I look at SS simply as a subset of HIT.


How many times is this sort of thing going to crop up on here? attempting to pigeon hole various methods as HIT or not.
Nothing is a subset of High Intensity Training on paper or in a book.It's how a person applies his/her training which dictates whether or not it is high intensity.

Open User Options Menu

Nick1971

Texas, USA

I stand corrected on Mentzer endorsing Superslow - I thought I read somewhere that he believed it was good but eventually thought it had no significant effect so he distanced himself from it. But I am probably thinking of someone else.

Regardless, it's good to hear other people's stance on this issue. I personally believe slow and controlled movement is the way to go for HIT, but I've seen a view SS vids out there and I personally couldn't force myself to slow down that much. :)

Do you guys think something like 3/1/3 is a good cadence for something like a Chest Press? And for curiosity sake, what is the fastest you think is safe to go on any exercise? What rep ranges do you guys typically recommend?
Open User Options Menu

iflyboats

Seems to me that SuperSlow sacrifices loading for fatigue.
Open User Options Menu

spud

Nick,

Watch Mark's training video on the thread "Great HIT Workout".

That is the fastest you should be moving.

It's a lot faster than Superslow but still well within the realms of what is safe and controlled.
Open User Options Menu

physcult

What happened to, "the weight is just so heavy I cant move it any faster" or "moving slowly requires a heavier weight, not a lighter one" ?.

As it is quite clear that superslow doesnt provide greater results (in regards to size and strength), and probably provides less results when compared to ANYTHING else, the only reason I can see to perform it are,

A: You enjoy it
B: You are selling it
C: You gain something from belonging to a cult.

I think B could make a decent business if you have the special machines, and strong marketing, in a nice studio, in a good location. The business competition should be considered yoga/pilates rather than the weights room. (and MedX machines should be made from recycled materials and sustainable timber with hemp covers lol)
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

Rogue HIT wrote:
SuperSlow a Requirement for HIT?

Definitely not.

HIT a requirement for Superslow?

Not necessarily in my opinion.

Many people seem to lump superslow together with HIT/Nautilus principles and that's quite a big mistake.

I certainly believe that Superslow CAN be High Intensity but they're not mutually inclusive.


But I think you would agree that ballistic training is not only NOT a principle of HIT but antithetical?
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

Mark HIT wrote:

Nothing is a subset of High Intensity Training on paper or in a book.It's how a person applies his/her training which dictates whether or not it is high intensity.



Exactly right.
Open User Options Menu

Nick1971

Texas, USA

I would personally go as far as to say rep speed or cadence is irrelevant with regard to intensity. The whole point to HIT is short and brief workouts where the goal is momentary muscular failure or beyond. And while I don't believe that ballistic movement is good with regard to machine-based exercises, quite frankly some of the free weight exercises can be ballistic due to their nature (Power Clean comes to mind).

Here's something to think about. Is minimal rest time between sets or exercises a requirement for HIT? An argument can be made that short and brief is the name of the game, yet an argument can also be made that some rest time is needed to ensure quality of each set. I'm kind of up in the air on this, as I've done Circuit Training in the past, and HIT with some rest between sets.

That's one of the things I like about HIT, is that there are variations of the theme - each with different goals. You can have something like Darden's 5-minute workout on one end of the extreme, and something cooked up by Dorian Yates on the other side. :p
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

Nick1971 wrote:
I would personally go as far as to say rep speed or cadence is irrelevant with regard to intensity.


INTENSITY can be observed to a rep, a set, a task, or a WORKOUT.

It would be observed as "the magnitude of effort to each of those relative to your ability".

So it would NOT actually be rep speed, but the relative magnitude of effort to a rep. (or a set, task, or WORKOUT)

This is being discussed in another thread.

Nick1971 wrote:
The whole point to HIT is short and brief workouts where the goal is momentary muscular failure or beyond.


Brief low rest sessions can also be observed as HIGHER in Intensity over the whole workout, via the same evaluation of magnitude of relative effort to the workout itself.

Nick1971 wrote:

Here's something to think about. Is minimal rest time between sets or exercises a requirement for HIT? An argument can be made that short and brief is the name of the game, yet an argument can also be made that some rest time is needed to ensure quality of each set. I'm kind of up in the air on this, as I've done Circuit Training in the past, and HIT with some rest between sets.


I don't know if I would call it a "requirement" but it certainly could be a designate or qualification to be termed HIT. It is clear that if a workout is done in a SPRINT STYLE, that it is HIGH in intensity to the workout itself.

However, it is clear that the "individual components" such as each rep, or each set may not reach the same performance levels as they might with more rest, that would not reduce the "overall" intensity analysis of the Workout.

Nick1971 wrote:
That's one of the things I like about HIT, is that there are variations of the theme - each with different goals. You can have something like Darden's 5-minute workout on one end of the extreme, and something cooked up by Dorian Yates on the other side. :p


Exactly.
Open User Options Menu

Rogue HIT

southbeach wrote:
Rogue HIT wrote:
SuperSlow a Requirement for HIT?

Definitely not.

HIT a requirement for Superslow?

Not necessarily in my opinion.

Many people seem to lump superslow together with HIT/Nautilus principles and that's quite a big mistake.

I certainly believe that Superslow CAN be High Intensity but they're not mutually inclusive.

But I think you would agree that ballistic training is not only NOT a principle of HIT but antithetical?


Ballistic training speeds would necessarily reduce the intensity of a workout. So I'd certainly agree with you that it doesn't fit into any HIT principle.
Open User Options Menu

Waynes

Switzerland

Rogue HIT wrote:
southbeach wrote:
Rogue HIT wrote:
SuperSlow a Requirement for HIT?

Definitely not.

HIT a requirement for Superslow?

Not necessarily in my opinion.

Many people seem to lump superslow together with HIT/Nautilus principles and that's quite a big mistake.

I certainly believe that Superslow CAN be High Intensity but they're not mutually inclusive.

But I think you would agree that ballistic training is not only NOT a principle of HIT but antithetical?

Ballistic training speeds would necessarily reduce the intensity of a workout.


How ???

Wayne

Open User Options Menu

Mr. Strong

southbeach wrote:
Rogue HIT wrote:
SuperSlow a Requirement for HIT?

Definitely not.

HIT a requirement for Superslow?

Not necessarily in my opinion.

Many people seem to lump superslow together with HIT/Nautilus principles and that's quite a big mistake.

I certainly believe that Superslow CAN be High Intensity but they're not mutually inclusive.

But I think you would agree that ballistic training is not only NOT a principle of HIT but antithetical?



What about running?
Open User Options Menu

Nick1971

Texas, USA

Rogue HIT wrote:

Ballistic training speeds would necessarily reduce the intensity of a workout. So I'd certainly agree with you that it doesn't fit into any HIT principle.


I don't really understand that. If you reach momentary muscular failure, it's not a factor of tempo/cadence/rep speed. Intensity techniques like Super Slow, Negatives, Forced Reps, etc are just means to an end. The goal is the same: muscular failure.
Open User Options Menu

physcult

Nick1971 wrote:
Rogue HIT wrote:

Ballistic training speeds would necessarily reduce the intensity of a workout. So I'd certainly agree with you that it doesn't fit into any HIT principle.

I don't really understand that. If you reach momentary muscular failure, it's not a factor of tempo/cadence/rep speed. Intensity techniques like Super Slow, Negatives, Forced Reps, etc are just means to an end. The goal is the same: muscular failure.

I cant really see how superslow can be considered an intensity technique, as far as I can see it is an intensity lowering technique.

Maximum effort with a suitable load, is maximum effort.If the weight moves too fast, its too light (unless thats the desired effect). If a weight moves ridiculously slow, its being purposely slowed, or PERHAPS its a 1 RM on a specially cammed machined that dramatically alters the loading. If a second rep can be performed, the eccentric must of been easy enough to allow recovery.
Open User Options Menu

Ciccio

Reminder:

The best of the best, the BIG routine!

by Ellington Darden, done in 10/5, 4-8 reps (TUL 60-120s), mostly free weights.

Open User Options Menu

Rogue HIT

Waynes wrote:

How ???

Wayne



Because!!!

Rogue HIT
Open User Options Menu

Rogue HIT

Nick1971 wrote:
Rogue HIT wrote:

Ballistic training speeds would necessarily reduce the intensity of a workout. So I'd certainly agree with you that it doesn't fit into any HIT principle.

I don't really understand that. If you reach momentary muscular failure, it's not a factor of tempo/cadence/rep speed. Intensity techniques like Super Slow, Negatives, Forced Reps, etc are just means to an end. The goal is the same: muscular failure.


Hi Nick

I'm agreeing with Chris here. SuperSlow isn't NECESSARILY a HIT technique.

Good form observance IS a HIT principle and in my opinion you can't keep good form while moving a weight in a ballistic manner.
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

Rogue HIT wrote:
Nick1971 wrote:
Rogue HIT wrote:

Ballistic training speeds would necessarily reduce the intensity of a workout. So I'd certainly agree with you that it doesn't fit into any HIT principle.

I don't really understand that. If you reach momentary muscular failure, it's not a factor of tempo/cadence/rep speed. Intensity techniques like Super Slow, Negatives, Forced Reps, etc are just means to an end. The goal is the same: muscular failure.

Hi Nick

I'm agreeing with Chris here. SuperSlow isn't NECESSARILY a HIT technique.

Good form observance IS a HIT principle and in my opinion you can't keep good form while moving a weight in a ballistic manner.


great point, you are right that proprioception declines as the rate of movement increases. that's a fact of physiology.

what that boils down to is the faster you perform a rep, the less control you have over the movement/resistance and increasing risk in direct proportion to speed of unloading the resistance over the range of movement, not only the greater risk of injury.

that's a fact of physiology. ben known for quite some time
Open User Options Menu

Joshua Trentine

Ohio, USA

iflyboats wrote:
Seems to me that SuperSlow sacrifices loading for fatigue.


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