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
Cognitive Dissonance
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

From Jesse Ventura's page...

Open User Options Menu

Hitit

Yes, but this is where/when and how we learn when we keep an open mind and stay motivated to understand.

If not, then you turn into Mr. W(st)rong, TomSlob, SkinnyBeach and a few others.

;)
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

An Active Mind (as per Objectivist philosophy... just to stir the pot a bit more, lol).
Open User Options Menu

Mr. Strong

You are mistaken, I haven't stated any beliefs or assumptions, only truth.

You guys bored? The board is dead when my posts don't make it through. :)
Open User Options Menu

Hitit

Mr. Strong wrote:
You are mistaken, I haven't stated any beliefs or assumptions, only truth.

You guys bored? The board is dead when my posts don't make it through. :)


We've survived the likes of SkinnyBeach and W(ayn)einer since there disappearance.

I think we will be just fine without you.

:)

I will say that the diversity can be very entertaining however.
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

You guys? I never mentioned your name... I thought the post was interesting. The lady doth protest too much, methinks.
Open User Options Menu

Hitit

Brian Johnston wrote:
You guys? I never mentioned your name... I thought the post was interesting. The lady doth protest too much, methinks.


guilty conscious....
Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

Mr. Strong wrote:
You are mistaken, I haven't stated any beliefs or assumptions, only truth.

You guys bored? The board is dead when my posts don't make it through. :)


That must be some definition of truth. Just because you believe what you are saying doesn't make it 'the truth'. Making claims to the truth is silly.
Open User Options Menu

jitterbug

Brian Johnston wrote:
From Jesse Ventura's page...



Mr.Johnston,

Do you believe you suffer from cognitive dissonance?

Deja vu when I asked about your explanation for the need of Zone training and the similarities to the need for cammed exercise machines.

Will human psychology be part of your lecture at the HIT conference?

Ed
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

Obviously you suffer from the condition since I have vast experience with those types of machines (I own several and have trained on several others) and I have vast experience with Zone Training. But you don't, but you like to talk.... don't you Ed? Even with cammed machines I can make the exercises far more effective with Zone Training (and in private emails a well known 'doctor' was surprised at the effect... but does not write about it because it conflict or cannot be promoted with what he's doing... likely over the heads of many, like you Ed, and he may not understand the effect arising from such training in order to explain it).

Ed, did you know that as you exercise from point of stretch to contraction that there are different groups of fibers activated based on where you are positioned in the exercise and even the angle of the exercise? (I'll be addressing this again, soon). Ed, did you know that to obtain full muscular development you need a multi-angle approach because of this (which is why those who do implement a multi-angle approach look more developed and detailed)? Ed, did you know that the body adapts to the stimulus involved (basic GAS, evolution theory and SAID), and that using the same equipment over and over may get you really strong on that equipment (neuromuscular adaptation/muscular coordination improvement), but hypertrophy becomes shunted... do you know why, Ed? He, Ed, did you know that based on different groups of fibers working relative to angle and position that Zone Training is more effective than full ROM training because you create greater fatigue per section of ROM overall? Ed, did you know that a contributing factor to hypertrophy involves the 'density' of training, including that of volume?... but as you may know, Ed, you can only perform so many sets per workout (particularly if you are 'natural'); therefore, the much higher number of contractions per unit of time resulting from Zone Training is more effective than any type of super slow protocol, even if you knock yourself silly on statics at the end of the set in the 'hopes' of stimulating something that your traditional slow sets didn't quite stimulate.

Ed, did you know that you don't really know a heck of a lot about practical exercise application except what you're buying into currently (sounds darn logical, doesn't it?), yet you're trying to knock me down a few pegs in light of me actually have made the biggest changes in the shortest amount of time based on my applications that are different from your applications? Ed, show up at the conference and I'll bury your ass and then you can report that to your 'friends,' snitchy boy.
Open User Options Menu

jitterbug

Brian Johnston wrote:
Obviously you suffer from the condition since I have vast experience with those types of machines (I own several and have trained on several others) and I have vast experience with Zone Training. But you don't, but you like to talk.... don't you Ed? Even with cammed machines I can make the exercises far more effective with Zone Training (and in private emails a well known 'doctor' was surprised at the effect... but does not write about it because it conflict or cannot be promoted with what he's doing... likely over the heads of many, like you Ed, and he may not understand the effect arising from such training in order to explain it).

Ed, did you know that as you exercise from point of stretch to contraction that there are different groups of fibers activated based on where you are positioned in the exercise and even the angle of the exercise? (I'll be addressing this again, soon). Ed, did you know that to obtain full muscular development you need a multi-angle approach because of this (which is why those who do implement a multi-angle approach look more developed and detailed)? Ed, did you know that the body adapts to the stimulus involved (basic GAS, evolution theory and SAID), and that using the same equipment over and over may get you really strong on that equipment (neuromuscular adaptation/muscular coordination improvement), but hypertrophy becomes shunted... do you know why, Ed? He, Ed, did you know that based on different groups of fibers working relative to angle and position that Zone Training is more effective than full ROM training because you create greater fatigue per section of ROM overall? Ed, did you know that a contributing factor to hypertrophy involves the 'density' of training, including that of volume?... but as you may know, Ed, you can only perform so many sets per workout (particularly if you are 'natural'); therefore, the much higher number of contractions per unit of time resulting from Zone Training is more effective than any type of super slow protocol, even if you knock yourself silly on statics at the end of the set in the 'hopes' of stimulating something that your traditional slow sets didn't quite stimulate.

Ed, did you know that you don't really know a heck of a lot about practical exercise application except what you're buying into currently (sounds darn logical, doesn't it?), yet you're trying to knock me down a few pegs in light of me actually have made the biggest changes in the shortest amount of time based on my applications that are different from your applications? Ed, show up at the conference and I'll bury your ass and then you can report that to your 'friends,' snitchy boy.



Mr.Johnston,

Don't worry I will not be going I would not pay money to listen to someone who acts like you.

If the cam matches the need of the user already how can you make the exercises far more effective? How do you support this claim? How do you support the claim that Zone Training is better than conventional methods? Besides you who uses Zone Training exclusively?

Ed
Open User Options Menu

Acerimmer1

Brian Johnston wrote:
From Jesse Ventura's page...



It happens all the time that we make errors in judgement. You made a cognitive error when you thought there was something to be gained by posting this jpeg and I made one when I thought it was worthwhile posting a response.

And yes sometimes an error is used as foundation for something else.
Open User Options Menu

Acerimmer1

Brian I'm gonna take a wild guess here and say you're bored of J-Reps. If so take a break from it and spend a little time doing something else.

It really doesn't matter if it's scientifically better or not if you're bored try out something new.
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

Arse-rimmer, I am not bored... how could I be when there are so many combniations, and particularly being able to freestyle the combinations. You must be bored posting jibberish.

Speaking of which, Jibberish Ed, you would not show up regardless. You made up your mind, which is why you keep throwing those moronic 'challenge' questions to me, as though you have the answer and the rest of us just don't get it. Your mind is so closed, in fact, that I clearly indicated how working in Zones is better for increasing lean mass... spelled it out for you in the above post... yet you then repeat the same question about the superiority of 'ideal' cams. Duh! Do understand, Mr. Ed (the talking mule), I speak the way I do to certain people, and not everyone... I speak in this tone to those who FIRST address me with a tone of superiority and that I'm the idiot... sorry, but that's not the case. Anyone who knows me personally know that 'this' attitude is reserved for 'special' people.

In fact, Mr. Ed, I'll go on record as saying this: I can produce better results with cables and free weights than I can with machines (although cables are machines, but you know what I'm talking about)... I always could and I continue to do so. It's typically those with the inability to control and use weights properly that require machines with 'perfect' cams.

I am not saying machines don't have value, and some are incredible in what they do (the MedX spine machines are examples)... and for beginners they are indispensible... and for the advanced trainee they offer another tool source to challenge the muscles. But if I were limited to using cables and free weights vs. cammed machines... and I could only pick one group... I would drop the machines. And I have several machines at my disposal, and I love using them, but when it comes to developing (and keeping and slowing the loss of) muscle mass, machines do not work as well. Of course, I'm talking as a veteran weight trainee, and not an older person who does not have decades of training application.

Seriously, I wish machines did work as well... and I wish Mentzer's Consolidation worked the way it was supposed to have worked... and I wish I found a pot of gold.
Open User Options Menu

Acerimmer1

Brian Johnston wrote:
Arse-rimmer, I am not bored... how could I be when there are so many combniations, and particularly being able to freestyle the combinations. You must be bored posting jibberish.



Actually no it's just that the only explantation I could come up with for you posting about cognitive dissonance and then explaining in detail the house of cards that is your rationale for J-Reps is IMO you wanted to be shot down. Why would you want that? You subconciously wanted a change was my best guess.

Now it's clear you were just trolling which is fine. Carry on.
Open User Options Menu

Acerimmer1

Brian Johnston wrote:
Arse-rimmer, I am not bored... how could I be when there are so many combniations, and particularly being able to freestyle the combinations. You must be bored posting jibberish.


Oh and yes I am bored posting even in the few minutes a week I currently spend doing it. But I'm not going to waste time worrying about 5 or 6 lost minutes a week.
Open User Options Menu

NewYorker

New York, USA

Brian Johnston wrote:

In fact, Mr. Ed, I'll go on record as saying this: I can produce better results with cables and free weights than I can with machines


Let's see those results! Dr. Darden posted his. Go ahead now, Brian, the floor is yours, show us. Show us all your studies...
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

See, there's an idiotic response... how is the Zone Training method a 'house of cards'? Would love to hear that explanation, particularly since you know nothing of the method or own any of the books. Remember, an actual logical, scientific explanation, arse-rimmer.
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

I'm still waiting for your arm shot that will dwarf mine, NewYorker. And what does my comment of long-term preference of free weights and cables over machines have to do with showing results and having studies? Let's see your studies... what you have done or written... what you have accomplished in this field? Once you do that, then you can open your mouth and challenge ideas rather than trying to demean a person with weak, moronic comments. As it stands, you are a private individual hiding behind your keyboard spouting pointless comments at others; no one knows who you are or what you look like... which makes it safe to say anything you want, right? Coward.
Open User Options Menu

gmlongo

Connecticut, USA

Acerimmer1 wrote:
Actually no it's just that the only explantation I could come up with for you posting about cognitive dissonance and then explaining in detail the house of cards that is your rationale for J-Reps is IMO you wanted to be shot down. Why would you want that? You subconciously wanted a change was my best guess.

Now it's clear you were just trolling which is fine. Carry on.


This is the most ridiculous post I have read in a LONG time...and with the monumental nonsense being spewed by NewYorker, that's saying a lot.
Open User Options Menu

NewYorker

New York, USA

Brian Johnston wrote:
I'm still waiting for your arm shot that will dwarf mine, NewYorker. And what does my comment of long-term preference of free weights and cables over machines have to do with showing results and having studies? Let's see your studies... what you have done or written... what you have accomplished in this field? Once you do that, then you can open your mouth and challenge ideas rather than trying to demean a person with weak, moronic comments. As it stands, you are a private individual hiding behind your keyboard spouting pointless comments at others; no one knows who you are or what you look like... which makes it safe to say anything you want, right? Coward.


I guess the answer is "no".

Open User Options Menu

NewYorker

New York, USA

Did the unquestionable expert none as Brian Johnson finish high school?
Open User Options Menu

NewYorker

New York, USA

gmlongo wrote:
Acerimmer1 wrote:
Actually no it's just that the only explantation I could come up with for you posting about cognitive dissonance and then explaining in detail the house of cards that is your rationale for J-Reps is IMO you wanted to be shot down. Why would you want that? You subconciously wanted a change was my best guess.

Now it's clear you were just trolling which is fine. Carry on.

This is the most ridiculous post I have read in a LONG time...and with the monumental nonsense being spewed by NewYorker, that's saying a lot.


So what nonsense did I "spew"???
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

High school and college, if it's any of your business, which it is not... another brilliant comment by NewYorker while avoiding my statements and HIS claim that he was going to post a photo of his arm. If he ever does, he will be searching the net for a photo that looks good, but believable... leaving his face out of it... with no proof to support that it's his arm. That's just how this type of person works.
Open User Options Menu

Tomislav

New York, USA

NewYorker wrote:
Let's see those results! Dr. Darden posted his. Go ahead now, Brian, the floor is yours, show us. Show us all your studies...


Good point New Yorker; new training theories are interesting but difficult to gauge without training studies.

The pub-med article I shared on the other thread points to the importance of the load over ROM and foot positioning for building muscle with squats - I would like to see the research that supports the idea that the zone positions are a bigger factor than load.

Ace,
good point also; advanced muscle building routines that under emphasise the load tend to be a house of cards.

X-Force emphasises the load and consequently the studies show impressive results; without any studies showing results for athletes deliberately hoisting lighter weights slowly and frictionlessly or in zones we are left with a cognitive disconnect where we are expected to just believe.
Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Next | Last
Administrators Online: Mod Phoenix
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy