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
Rep Speed
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

summaHIT

Ontario, CAN

Yes! Here is another post about rep speed since it seems people are constantly looking for that ultimate speed to boost their muscle gains. Is it 2/4 or 5/5 or maybe 10/10.

I believe, as the following links show, that the proper speed is where you push as hard and fast as you can throughout the set but as you drop motor units your ability to perform will naturally decrease. This is the way most muscled bodies have been made for centuries. Looking for a better way is a step in the wrong direction.
Manipulating rep ranges, exercises, nutrition, volume, and recovery is where it at.

One of the following studies shows that low load but fast speed exercises will actually shift type one fibers to type 2. Wow!

The other study shows how faster speeds increase EMG activity in muscles worked. This is what most people have believed for ever but was taken off course by fake scientists and the uninformed "logic" crowd.

http://suppversity.blogspot.co...

http://suppversity.blogspot.co...


Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Portugal

summaHIT wrote:
Yes! Here is another post about rep speed since it seems people are constantly looking for that ultimate speed to boost their muscle gains. Is it 2/4 or 5/5 or maybe 10/10.

I believe, as the following links show, that the proper speed is a where you push as hard and fast as you can throughout the set but as you drop motor units your ability to perform will naturally decrease. This is the way most muscled bodies have been made for centuries. Looking for a better way is a step in the wrong direction.
Manipulating rep ranges, exercises, nutrition, volume, and recovery is where it at.

One of the following studies shows that low load but fast speed exercises will actually shift type one fibers to type 2. Wow!

The other study shows how faster speeds increase EMG activity in muscles worked. This is what most people have believed for ever but was taken off course by fake scientists and the uninformed "logic" crowd.

http://suppversity.blogspot.co...

http://suppversity.blogspot.co...




Rep speed should be dictated by a goal.

Since the goal of weight training is
M-O-R-E strength, and not...more mass, (which is a bodybuilding goal which has been shown to lead to perverted personalities and unapproved drug usage), why not logically let rep speed be dictated by that which increases strength the most. HINT: It ain't superslow.

85-100 % of one's maximum weight will ensure a slow rep speed. The fast twitch muscles fibers have a maximum ATP capacity of around 10 seconds in exercise duration. This is no secret.

Train heavy with multiple sets which consist of a few reps....has been shown to dramatically increase strength.....and is the METHOD of choice of ALL weight lifting champions.

RIP....superslow protocol
Open User Options Menu

douglis

Why don't you post directly the studies and instead you post two links from a blog with an unknown author?
Open User Options Menu

coach-jeff

Louisiana, USA

Rep speed...now that is indeed opening a can of worms on this site buddy. (<:

...Coach Jeff gets popcorn and gets ready for the show this post is sure to cause.
Open User Options Menu

coach-jeff

Louisiana, USA

Where's Wayne?

Why isn't he all over this yet?!
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Portugal

No studies are needed.

A blind man can see slow rep speed with heavy weights for a very few reps have led to the most strength.

Take off the blinders.
Open User Options Menu

db144

CoachJeff:

He's still posting daily all by himself on the stupid tension thread.

d
Open User Options Menu

summaHIT

Ontario, CAN

My point here is that people are getting misdirected by this rep speed argument.

There is not some magical slow rep speed that works the muscle more than a regular "as fast as you can" speed. It does feel harder but it is not working the total muscle harder.

I understand that some erroneously believed through some poorly designed studies about force and tension that going slower created more force and tension but this is a case where pseudo science was already trumped by empirical evidence for a hundred years.


Don't be distracted by REP SPEED or REP PERFORMANCE.



Open User Options Menu

traunsee

douglis wrote:
Why don't you post directly the studies and instead you post two links from a blog with an unknown author?


Read and learn Douglis.

What gets me, is why an intelligent man like you cannot see it, only reason maybe as you live in paper physics, and can not equate that with the real world and how it happens the same out there bit different, I mean you cant take anything of the acceleration force when it deccelerats, but you try to, hahaha, sorry, it does not work like that, you accelerate, and that?s the force that has to be used and is used, you CANT take from it.

Traunsee
Open User Options Menu

chasbari

Ohio, USA

Another potentially interesting thread ruined.
Open User Options Menu

db144

Thanks Wayne for soiling another thread.

d
Open User Options Menu

summaHIT

Ontario, CAN

marcrph makes a good point.
I would discuss it this way with an anecdote: When I was in my teens and early twenties I was training a lot for multiple sports. I was very motivated to succeed and primarily used Dr. Darden's routines from his various books. I used super slow reps (10/10) and the more traditional 2/4 cadence and took every set to failure and beyond. My primary focus was rep performance (no supposed momentum) and making sure failure was achieved. I didn't focus on what was actually the most important thing I needed to achieve, which was to get stronger. All my sporting accomplishments would have been improved by getting stronger.

Even though the books told me that focussing on slow reps, too failure sets, and 8-12 total reps per set was the way to get stronger, this was actually counter productive to my end goal.

What I should have focussed on was adding weight to the bar and pushing as hard as I could using low reps. Focussing on whether the turn around was ideal or if the set lasted between 40 and 70 seconds was all bs.

I know what many of you have to say about safety and I mostly agree but when that is your obsessive focuss you also miss the point. You need to control the weights but lifting at a certain slowed tempo does not guarantee anything. You can get hurt getting out of bed. That is a fact. Lift within your means under control is a better way to approach it. A heavy low rep set is performed slowly anyhow.



Open User Options Menu

summaHIT

Ontario, CAN

traunsee wrote:
douglis wrote:
Why don't you post directly the studies and instead you post two links from a blog with an unknown author?

Read and learn Douglis.

What gets me, is why an intelligent man like you cannot see it, only reason maybe as you live in paper physics, and can not equate that with the real world and how it happens the same out there bit different, I mean you cant take anything of the acceleration force when it deccelerats, but you try to, hahaha, sorry, it does not work like that, you accelerate, and that?s the force that has to be used and is used, you CANT take from it.

Traunsee


Just to be clear, this is not a thread to debate rep speed but a thread showing how making this the primary focus is a distraction.

You are distracted!

You would be better off focussing on other aspects of your training.
Open User Options Menu

summaHIT

Ontario, CAN

douglis wrote:
Why don't you post directly the studies and instead you post two links from a blog with an unknown author?


I don't take requests but there are 3 references you can look up yourself at the end of this article.

http://doctorpg.org/...eps-better.html

Open User Options Menu

summaHIT

Ontario, CAN

Here is a portion of one the studies cited in one of the articles I posted.


PubMed Citation
Articles by Shepstone, T. N.
Articles by Phillips, S. M.

Short-term high- vs. low-velocity isokinetic lengthening training results in greater hypertrophy of the elbow flexors in young men
Tim N. Shepstone,1 Jason E. Tang,1 Stephane Dallaire,1 Mark D. Schuenke,2 Robert S. Staron,2 and Stuart M. Phillips1
1Exercise and Metabolism Research Group, Department of Kinesiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; and 2Department of Biomedical Sciences, College of Osteopathic Medicine, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio

Submitted 16 September 2004 ; accepted in final form 29 December 2004


We performed two studies to determine the effect of a resistive training program comprised of fast vs. slow isokinetic lengthening contractions on muscle fiber hypertrophy. In study I, we investigated the effect of fast (3.66 rad/s; Fast) or slow (0.35 rad/s; Slow) isokinetic high-resistance muscle lengthening contractions on muscle fiber and whole muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) of the elbow flexors was investigated in young men. Twelve subjects (23.8 ? 2.4 yr; means ? SD) performed maximal resistive lengthening isokinetic exercise with both arms for 8 wk (3 days/wk), during which they trained one arm at a Fast velocity while the contralateral arm performed an equivalent number of contractions at a Slow velocity. Before (Pre) and after (Post) the training, percutaneous muscle biopsies were taken from the midbelly of the biceps brachii and analyzed for fiber type and CSA. Type I muscle fiber size increased Pre to Post (P < 0.05) in both Fast and Slow arms. Type IIa and IIx muscle fiber CSA increased in both arms, but the increases were greater in the Fast- vs. the Slow-trained arm (P < 0.05). Elbow flexor CSA increased in Fast and Slow arms, with the increase in the Fast arm showing a trend toward being greater (P = 0.06). Maximum torque-generating capacity also increased to a greater degree (P < 0.05) in the Fast arm, regardless of testing velocity. In study II, we attempted to provide some explanation of the greater hypertrophy observed in study I by examining an indicator of protein remodeling (Z-line streaming), which we hypothesized would be greater in the Fast condition. Nine men (21.7 ? 2.4 yr) performed an acute bout (n = 30, 3 sets x 10 repetitions/set) of maximal lengthening contractions at Fast and Slow velocities used in the training study. Biopsies revealed that Fast lengthening contractions resulted in more (185 ? 1 7%; P < 0.01) Z-band streaming per millimeter squared muscle vs. the Slow arm. In conclusion, training using Fast (3.66 rad/s) lengthening contractions leads to greater hypertrophy and strength gains than Slow (0.35 rad/s) lengthening contractions. The greater hypertrophy seen in the Fast-trained arm (study I) may be related to a greater amount of protein remodeling (Z-band streaming; study II).

Open User Options Menu

Joshua Trentine

Ohio, USA

summaHIT wrote:
traunsee wrote:
douglis wrote:
Why don't you post directly the studies and instead you post two links from a blog with an unknown author?

Read and learn Douglis.

What gets me, is why an intelligent man like you cannot see it, only reason maybe as you live in paper physics, and can not equate that with the real world and how it happens the same out there bit different, I mean you cant take anything of the acceleration force when it deccelerats, but you try to, hahaha, sorry, it does not work like that, you accelerate, and that?s the force that has to be used and is used, you CANT take from it.

Traunsee

Just to be clear, this is not a thread to debate rep speed but a thread showing how making this the primary focus is a distraction.

You are distracted!

You would be better off focussing on other aspects of your training.




true!

focusing on a 'speed'...bad idea for anyone beyond introductory phases

internal cues always trump external
Open User Options Menu

sgb2112

http://www.charlespoliquin.com/..._Revisited.aspx

The most relevant parts..

"My interest in manipulating the speed of contraction of exercises was heightened in the early ?80s after I spent a day with German strength experts Rolf Feser and Lothar Spitz. During our discussions, they explained how athletes not only need to perform explosive ballistic contractions to create central nervous adaptations but also need to use other types of training protocols to create muscular adaptations. Also at that time Pierre Roy, a national weightlifting coach in Canada, told me he was using five-second eccentric contractions for sets of six when he wanted one of his lifters to gain size in preparatory training periods.


There were also the writings of Soviet lifting coach Michael Rudolf Plugfelder, who had trained Olympic weightlifting champions Vasily Alexeev and David Rigert. Alexeev was the first man to clean and jerk 500 pounds, and he broke 80 world records. Rigert started training with Plugfelder in 1969, set his first world record in 1971 and went on to break 68 world records and win Olympic gold. Plugfelder was also a proponent of varying the tempo for strength enhancement, and his ideas were supported by Professor Alexei Medvedev, head coach of the Russian weightlifting team.

As I evolved as a strength coach, I came across many weightlifting coaches from the Eastern Bloc who all believed in varying the speed of contraction, whether they were Hungarian, Polish, East German or Romanian.

When designing tempo prescriptions, there are some general guidelines you can follow that are backed by sport science. Slow-speed lifting brings about more metabolic adaptations than high-speed lifting. High-intensity, slow-speed training using isokinetic loading is also associated with increases in muscle glycogen, CP, ATP, ADP, creatine, phosphorylase, PFK, and Krebs cycle enzyme activity. Training at faster speeds does not induce these changes. Also, slow reps build the connection between the mind and the muscle, and they make a great finishing-off set."

Game Over.
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Portugal

People,


or rather Bob Peoples and his student Paul Anderson.......

No drugs.....world class strength....to this day.


Low reps, heavy weight, multiple sets, few exercises........

No one can dispute this.

Forget about mass.....this is fools gold....strength is much more important.
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Portugal

Joshua Trentine wrote:
focusing on a 'speed'...bad idea for anyone beyond introductory phases



So....you are admitting superslow is for introductory phases....if so...better check with your boss...Ken
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Portugal

summaHIT wrote:
All my sporting accomplishments would have been improved by getting stronger.


Everyone's day to day activities would be improved by just getting stronger...ever thought about that???


Even though the books told me that focussing on slow reps, too failure sets, and 8-12 total reps per set was the way to get stronger, this was actually counter productive to my end goal.

False reasoning. R-U-N from any author or book that states failure training is necessary for performance or strength.....it is just false reasoning...Sorry....but you...me...and a lot of others have been misled.

What I should have focussed on was adding weight to the bar and pushing as hard as I could using low reps.

Es verdad!

Focussing on whether the turn around was ideal or if the set lasted between 40 and 70 seconds was all bs.


Worse....deliberate false reasoning. The truth is we have known about the anaerobic use of ATP for the anaerobic muscles fibers for many...many years...but still authorities on the subject insisted on 8-12 reps....even though ATP and the fast twitch fibers have long since run out of ATP for proper contraction energy.



A heavy low rep set is performed slowly anyhow.



You can't super-speed 85-100 % of your maximum weight.

Open User Options Menu

douglis

summaHIT wrote:
douglis wrote:
Why don't you post directly the studies and instead you post two links from a blog with an unknown author?

I don't take requests but there are 3 references you can look up yourself at the end of this article.

http://doctorpg.org/...eps-better.html



Request?You mentioned some studies and I thought it would be interesting to see them directly and not from articles.

I don't ask because I don't trust you but because at the 99% of the articles the studies are either misunderstood or mispresented.

Take a look for example your last link.
The author is either confused or he's totally clueless.
All the three studies he's referring are about isokinetic training....totally irrelevant with weight training.
Same with the abstract you posted.

But I agree with you that the rep speed is the last factor that one should be concerned in his training.
Open User Options Menu

Tomislav

New York, USA

marcrph wrote:
Joshua Trentine wrote:
focusing on a 'speed'...bad idea for anyone beyond introductory phases



So....you are admitting superslow is for introductory phases....if so...better check with your boss...Ken


marc,
you mean you don't believe superslow athletes can keep a set going for over two minutes without focusing on rep speed? Seems aerobic to me but Josh claims they just make more ATP as they need it instead of running out.
Open User Options Menu

summaHIT

Ontario, CAN

douglis wrote:
summaHIT wrote:
douglis wrote:
Why don't you post directly the studies and instead you post two links from a blog with an unknown author?

I don't take requests but there are 3 references you can look up yourself at the end of this article.

http://doctorpg.org/...eps-better.html



Request?You mentioned some studies and I thought it would be interesting to see them directly and not from articles.

I don't ask because I don't trust you but because at the 99% of the articles the studies are either misunderstood or mispresented.

Take a look for example your last link.
The author is either confused or he's totally clueless.
All the three studies he's referring are about isokinetic training....totally irrelevant with weight training.
Same with the abstract you posted.

But I agree with you that the rep speed is the last factor that one should be concerned in his training.


Most of the studies seem somewhat flawed in that they use negative only reps, isokinetic, way too different rep schemes, etc. We are just trying to piece it all together.

The doctor whom has the website where the first two links were taken from seems very legit. Surf around that site and you'll find a lot of interesting articles.
Open User Options Menu

summaHIT

Ontario, CAN

sgb2112 wrote:
http://www.charlespoliquin.com/..._Revisited.aspx

The most relevant parts..

"My interest in manipulating the speed of contraction of exercises was heightened in the early ?80s after I spent a day with German strength experts Rolf Feser and Lothar Spitz. During our discussions, they explained how athletes not only need to perform explosive ballistic contractions to create central nervous adaptations but also need to use other types of training protocols to create muscular adaptations. Also at that time Pierre Roy, a national weightlifting coach in Canada, told me he was using five-second eccentric contractions for sets of six when he wanted one of his lifters to gain size in preparatory training periods.


There were also the writings of Soviet lifting coach Michael Rudolf Plugfelder, who had trained Olympic weightlifting champions Vasily Alexeev and David Rigert. Alexeev was the first man to clean and jerk 500 pounds, and he broke 80 world records. Rigert started training with Plugfelder in 1969, set his first world record in 1971 and went on to break 68 world records and win Olympic gold. Plugfelder was also a proponent of varying the tempo for strength enhancement, and his ideas were supported by Professor Alexei Medvedev, head coach of the Russian weightlifting team.

As I evolved as a strength coach, I came across many weightlifting coaches from the Eastern Bloc who all believed in varying the speed of contraction, whether they were Hungarian, Polish, East German or Romanian.

When designing tempo prescriptions, there are some general guidelines you can follow that are backed by sport science. Slow-speed lifting brings about more metabolic adaptations than high-speed lifting. High-intensity, slow-speed training using isokinetic loading is also associated with increases in muscle glycogen, CP, ATP, ADP, creatine, phosphorylase, PFK, and Krebs cycle enzyme activity. Training at faster speeds does not induce these changes. Also, slow reps build the connection between the mind and the muscle, and they make a great finishing-off set."

Game Over.


Poliquin believes in varying the tempo of non Olympic lifts and trains all the various energy systems.
He uses chains, bands, plyometrics, Olympic lifts, German Volume Training, fast lifting, etc.. It seems you are trying to paint him into a corner of 1 protocol which he is very much away from.

Anyhow, Poliquin is worth listening to. He has great articles on his site.
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

marcrph wrote:
summaHIT wrote:
Yes! Here is another post about rep speed since it seems people are constantly looking for that ultimate speed to boost their muscle gains. Is it 2/4 or 5/5 or maybe 10/10.

I believe, as the following links show, that the proper speed is a where you push as hard and fast as you can throughout the set but as you drop motor units your ability to perform will naturally decrease. This is the way most muscled bodies have been made for centuries. Looking for a better way is a step in the wrong direction.
Manipulating rep ranges, exercises, nutrition, volume, and recovery is where it at.

One of the following studies shows that low load but fast speed exercises will actually shift type one fibers to type 2. Wow!

The other study shows how faster speeds increase EMG activity in muscles worked. This is what most people have believed for ever but was taken off course by fake scientists and the uninformed "logic" crowd.

http://suppversity.blogspot.co...

http://suppversity.blogspot.co...




Rep speed should be dictated by a goal.

Since the goal of weight training is
M-O-R-E strength, and not...more mass, (which is a bodybuilding goal which has been shown to lead to perverted personalities and unapproved drug usage), why not logically let rep speed be dictated by that which increases strength the most. HINT: It ain't superslow.

85-100 % of one's maximum weight will ensure a slow rep speed. The fast twitch muscles fibers have a maximum ATP capacity of around 10 seconds in exercise duration. This is no secret.

Train heavy with multiple sets which consist of a few reps....has been shown to dramatically increase strength.....and is the METHOD of choice of ALL weight lifting champions.

RIP....superslow protocol


Since the goal of weight training is
M-O-R-E strength, and not...more mass, (which is a bodybuilding goal which has been shown to lead to perverted personalities and unapproved drug usage)

==Scott==
I'm glad you've concluded this for the rest of us. I always thought that Dr. Darden was all about strength and not at all about bodybuilding with his Paul Anderson type build and all.I have noticed how my personality has gotten more "perverted" the more muscle I built. Now I know why, hah hah...
Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Next | Last
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy