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
John Little Wrong on Cardio ?
First | Prev | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

Average Al

entsminger wrote:
Personally, I've always liked understanding how things work, why things are the way they are. That is probably why I got a PhD in a technical field (engineering

==Scott==
I hope you aren't hoping to find PHD quality answers to your questions on here, ha ha. I like knowing how things work as much if not more than the next guy but I wouldn't go to the local bar or a muscle head exercise forum to find out those answers especially stuff about the inner workings of muscle tissue etc etc.My rant wasn't directed at you as it is at so many others on here. I just think people on here get to caught up in the muscle minutia when trying to figure out what routine to do, oh will this set of curls work the fast twitch more? There's only so many ways one can curl a weight, fast, slow, few or many reps, etc. I think they need to just stop over analyzing this stuff and as Arnold would say, "Just do it!"


I don't have a PhD in physiology so I really can't hang with those guys. But I do enjoy trading ideas with like minded hobbyists.

As you have pointed out, there is only so much one can say about training methods. Want to have another debate about rep speed or single vs multiple sets? I think I've already seen your reaction to those threads.

At least the science threads occasionally contain new ideas. If you don't want to talk about that, then what do you want to see? More tributes to what a genius Arthur Jones was? More interesting stories about body builders who are now old or dead? More rave reviews about old nautilus machines that will never be seen again in a modern gym?


Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

ATP 4 Vitality wrote:


A reason for differing cardiovascular conditioning results reside in the unique anatomical physiological differences between red (slow) and white (fast) twitch muscle fibers.


Ummm no, cardio conditioning is the 'cardio' systems, not muscular endurance.

It does not take much imagination to realize most day to day activities use slow twitch fibers. The slow twitch fibers burn mostly fat , and the fat located near the fibers. The aerobic energy provides by far the most ATP energy, so feeling good resides here.

No, muscle fibers use 'intra-cellular' stored lipids,and blood supplied fatty acids, not 'fat near the fibers', fat cells themselves release fat into the blood,not directly into any cells. Cells derive lipids/FFA from the blood based FFA levels,then they esterify the lipids, and store them, then use from there as needed.


Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

At least the science threads occasionally contain new ideas. If you don't want to talk about that, then what do you want to see? More tributes to what a genius Arthur Jones was? More interesting stories about body builders who are now old or dead? More rave reviews about old nautilus machines that will never be seen again in a modern gym?
== Scott==
That?s a good question ? I certainly don?t want to hear any more about how great Jones was. I?ve heard enough of that on here for two lifetimes, ha ha, and there?s nothing new to be said that I haven?t heard about Nautilus machines. I guess it would be nice to hear more true stories about what old timers and not so old bodybuilders really did or do and not what they did to sell their book or someone else?s book. I firmly believe what we read about what the big guys really do is baloney. Here?s what Boyer Coe really did vrs the BS stories in the magazines and as for guys on here it would be great to really see videos of members in action doing what they say they do like Turpin does vrs folks like Grant who brag to no end how great their workouts are but show absolutely nothing. The talk of muscle fibers type stuff is very interesting but I don?t think the clunkheads on here( including myself) are educated enough in that stuff to be worth listening to.
Open User Options Menu

ATP 4 Vitality

Nwlifter wrote:
ATP 4 Vitality wrote:


A reason for differing cardiovascular conditioning results reside in the unique anatomical physiological differences between red (slow) and white (fast) twitch muscle fibers.

Ummm no, cardio conditioning is the 'cardio' systems, not muscular endurance.

It does not take much imagination to realize most day to day activities use slow twitch fibers. The slow twitch fibers burn mostly fat , and the fat located near the fibers. The aerobic energy provides by far the most ATP energy, so feeling good resides here.

No, muscle fibers use 'intra-cellular' stored lipids,and blood supplied fatty acids, not 'fat near the fibers', fat cells themselves release fat into the blood,not directly into any cells. Cells derive lipids/FFA from the blood based FFA levels,then they esterify the lipids, and store them, then use from there as needed.




If you understand all this, then you understand cardiovascular conditioning, or you are just foolish.
Open User Options Menu

Average Al

entsminger wrote:
At least the science threads occasionally contain new ideas. If you don't want to talk about that, then what do you want to see? More tributes to what a genius Arthur Jones was? More interesting stories about body builders who are now old or dead? More rave reviews about old nautilus machines that will never be seen again in a modern gym?
== Scott==
That?s a good question ? I certainly don?t want to hear any more about how great Jones was. I?ve heard enough of that on here for two lifetimes, ha ha, and there?s nothing new to be said that I haven?t heard about Nautilus machines. I guess it would be nice to hear more true stories about what old timers and not so old bodybuilders really did or do and not what they did to sell their book or someone else?s book. I firmly believe what we read about what the big guys really do is baloney. Here?s what Boyer Coe really did vrs the BS stories in the magazines and as for guys on here it would be great to really see videos of members in action doing what they say they do like Turpin does vrs folks like Grant who brag to no end how great their workouts are but show absolutely nothing. The talk of muscle fibers type stuff is very interesting but I don?t think the clunkheads on here( including myself) are educated enough in that stuff to be worth listening to.


I suppose it would be interesting to have a factual history of bodybuilding that could stand in contrast to the legend and lore that we all got through the normal channels. But who is going to write that? Who has the credibility to write those stories and be believed? Even when someone posts some inside scoop on what really happened, I am never sure I should believe them.

I guess the Muscle Smoke and Mirrors series of books is supposed to provide that kind of insight, but I've not read it and I don't know if that really tells the unvarnished truth.


It is too late for people like Mentzer and Viator to come clean. And if they were still alive today, I suspect the temptation to capitalize on their legendary past for income would just be too great for them to give a candid retelling of the past.

Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

Average Al wrote:
entsminger wrote:
At least the science threads occasionally contain new ideas. If you don't want to talk about that, then what do you want to see? More tributes to what a genius Arthur Jones was? More interesting stories about body builders who are now old or dead? More rave reviews about old nautilus machines that will never be seen again in a modern gym?
== Scott==
That?s a good question ? I certainly don?t want to hear any more about how great Jones was. I?ve heard enough of that on here for two lifetimes, ha ha, and there?s nothing new to be said that I haven?t heard about Nautilus machines. I guess it would be nice to hear more true stories about what old timers and not so old bodybuilders really did or do and not what they did to sell their book or someone else?s book. I firmly believe what we read about what the big guys really do is baloney. Here?s what Boyer Coe really did vrs the BS stories in the magazines and as for guys on here it would be great to really see videos of members in action doing what they say they do like Turpin does vrs folks like Grant who brag to no end how great their workouts are but show absolutely nothing. The talk of muscle fibers type stuff is very interesting but I don?t think the clunkheads on here( including myself) are educated enough in that stuff to be worth listening to.

I suppose it would be interesting to have a factual history of bodybuilding that could stand in contrast to the legend and lore that we all got through the normal channels. But who is going to write that? Who has the credibility to write those stories and be believed? Even when someone posts some inside scoop on what really happened, I am never sure I should believe them.

I guess the Muscle Smoke and Mirrors series of books is supposed to provide that kind of insight, but I've not read it and I don't know if that really tells the unvarnished truth.


It is too late for people like Mentzer and Viator to come clean. And if they were still alive today, I suspect the temptation to capitalize on their legendary past for income would just be too great for them to give a candid retelling of the past.



== Scott==
And that?s part of the problem with forums like this , you just don?t know what to believe. Some talk of MAX pyramid and out of this world gains BS , others talk about how important cardio is, others talk about fiber types etc etc. With the exception of a few on here we don?t know a thing about most who post on here. There?s no face or background , we don?t know if they?ve ever touched a weight or anything about the person to go with what they are posting so there?s no reason to listen to anything they have to say.
Open User Options Menu

epdavis7

Average Al wrote:
entsminger wrote:
At least the science threads occasionally contain new ideas. If you don't want to talk about that, then what do you want to see? More tributes to what a genius Arthur Jones was? More interesting stories about body builders who are now old or dead? More rave reviews about old nautilus machines that will never be seen again in a modern gym?
== Scott==
That?s a good question ? I certainly don?t want to hear any more about how great Jones was. I?ve heard enough of that on here for two lifetimes, ha ha, and there?s nothing new to be said that I haven?t heard about Nautilus machines. I guess it would be nice to hear more true stories about what old timers and not so old bodybuilders really did or do and not what they did to sell their book or someone else?s book. I firmly believe what we read about what the big guys really do is baloney. Here?s what Boyer Coe really did vrs the BS stories in the magazines and as for guys on here it would be great to really see videos of members in action doing what they say they do like Turpin does vrs folks like Grant who brag to no end how great their workouts are but show absolutely nothing. The talk of muscle fibers type stuff is very interesting but I don?t think the clunkheads on here( including myself) are educated enough in that stuff to be worth listening to.

I suppose it would be interesting to have a factual history of bodybuilding that could stand in contrast to the legend and lore that we all got through the normal channels. But who is going to write that? Who has the credibility to write those stories and be believed? Even when someone posts some inside scoop on what really happened, I am never sure I should believe them.

I guess the Muscle Smoke and Mirrors series of books is supposed to provide that kind of insight, but I've not read it and I don't know if that really tells the unvarnished truth.


It is too late for people like Mentzer and Viator to come clean. And if they were still alive today, I suspect the temptation to capitalize on their legendary past for income would just be too great for them to give a candid retelling of the past.


Muscle, smoke and mirrors is really good if you have not read them.
Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

ATP 4 Vitality wrote:
Nwlifter wrote:
ATP 4 Vitality wrote:


A reason for differing cardiovascular conditioning results reside in the unique anatomical physiological differences between red (slow) and white (fast) twitch muscle fibers.

Ummm no, cardio conditioning is the 'cardio' systems, not muscular endurance.

It does not take much imagination to realize most day to day activities use slow twitch fibers. The slow twitch fibers burn mostly fat , and the fat located near the fibers. The aerobic energy provides by far the most ATP energy, so feeling good resides here.

No, muscle fibers use 'intra-cellular' stored lipids,and blood supplied fatty acids, not 'fat near the fibers', fat cells themselves release fat into the blood,not directly into any cells. Cells derive lipids/FFA from the blood based FFA levels,then they esterify the lipids, and store them, then use from there as needed.




If you understand all this, then you understand cardiovascular conditioning, or you are just foolish.


It's not splitting hairs, if your going to say specifically that muscle fibers directly use fats stored 'close to them', and that's wrong, then it's open for correction.

Yes, 'cardio' (heart) 'vascular' (blood vessels), not mitochondrial density of slow twitch fibers, kind of a big difference.

Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

Muscle, smoke and mirrors is really good if you have not read them.

==Scott==
Yes Muscles smoke and mirrors was very good. Josh Trentine gave me volume one, thanks Joshua, and I haven't seen the others yet.
Open User Options Menu

Average Al

entsminger wrote:
Muscle, smoke and mirrors is really good if you have not read them.

==Scott==
Yes Muscles smoke and mirrors was very good. Josh Trentine gave me volume one, thanks Joshua, and I haven't seen the others yet.


I guess I'm going to have to bust out the credit card.
Open User Options Menu

ATP 4 Vitality

SSE #59: FAT METABOLISM DURING EXERCISE: NEW CONCEPTS
Edward F. Coyle, Ph.D.

INTRAMUSCULAR TRIGLYCERIDE

Triglyceride is also stored in droplets directly within the muscle fibers (intramuscular triglyceride), placing this fuel in close proximity to the site of oxidation in the muscle mitochondria. Intramuscular triglyceride accounts for 2,000-3,000 kcal of stored energy, making it a larger source of potential energy than muscle glycogen, which can contribute only about 1,500 kcal. Unfortunately, because it is technically difficult to measure intramuscular triglyceride from muscle biopsy samples, relatively little is known about the rate at which intramuscular triglyceride can be oxidized during exercise or how this energy store changes in response to acute and chronic training. It is clear, however, that intramuscular triglyceride can provide energy for intense exercise at less than one-third the rate attributed to muscle glycogen. Therefore, during strenuous training or competition energy from intramuscular triglyceride should be considered as supplementary to that supplied by muscle glycogen.
Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

ATP 4 Vitality wrote:
SSE #59: FAT METABOLISM DURING EXERCISE: NEW CONCEPTS
Edward F. Coyle, Ph.D.

INTRAMUSCULAR TRIGLYCERIDE

Triglyceride is also stored in droplets directly within the muscle fibers (intramuscular triglyceride), placing this fuel in close proximity to the site of oxidation in the muscle mitochondria. Intramuscular triglyceride accounts for 2,000-3,000 kcal of stored energy, making it a larger source of potential energy than muscle glycogen, which can contribute only about 1,500 kcal. Unfortunately, because it is technically difficult to measure intramuscular triglyceride from muscle biopsy samples, relatively little is known about the rate at which intramuscular triglyceride can be oxidized during exercise or how this energy store changes in response to acute and chronic training. It is clear, however, that intramuscular triglyceride can provide energy for intense exercise at less than one-third the rate attributed to muscle glycogen. Therefore, during strenuous training or competition energy from intramuscular triglyceride should be considered as supplementary to that supplied by muscle glycogen.


Yes, exactly, just like I said 'intra muscular', intra cellular
"Triglyceride is also stored in droplets directly within the muscle fibers"

Not close to the fibers, inside the fibers. that's different than fat in the muscle (like you see in a steak).
Open User Options Menu

ATP 4 Vitality

Nwlifter wrote:
ATP 4 Vitality wrote:
SSE #59: FAT METABOLISM DURING EXERCISE: NEW CONCEPTS
Edward F. Coyle, Ph.D.

INTRAMUSCULAR TRIGLYCERIDE

Triglyceride is also stored in droplets directly within the muscle fibers (intramuscular triglyceride), placing this fuel in close proximity to the site of oxidation in the muscle mitochondria. Intramuscular triglyceride accounts for 2,000-3,000 kcal of stored energy, making it a larger source of potential energy than muscle glycogen, which can contribute only about 1,500 kcal. Unfortunately, because it is technically difficult to measure intramuscular triglyceride from muscle biopsy samples, relatively little is known about the rate at which intramuscular triglyceride can be oxidized during exercise or how this energy store changes in response to acute and chronic training. It is clear, however, that intramuscular triglyceride can provide energy for intense exercise at less than one-third the rate attributed to muscle glycogen. Therefore, during strenuous training or competition energy from intramuscular triglyceride should be considered as supplementary to that supplied by muscle glycogen.

Yes, exactly, just like I said 'intra muscular', intra cellular
"Triglyceride is also stored in droplets directly within the muscle fibers"

Not close to the fibers, inside the fibers. that's different than fat in the muscle (like you see in a steak).


Good!

Open User Options Menu

spud

My personal theory is that if you looked at all the cases of heart disease related deaths, by the time you removed those with a family history of heart disease (genetics), the smokers and the people that were classified as being either overweight or obese, you'd be left with hardly anybody.

That's right folks. If you're lucky enough to not be genetically predisposed to have heart problems, you're fairly lean and you don't smoke, you're probably fine. Cardio or lack of it isn't an issue.

Next on the list would be general stress levels i.e. work, relationships, financial problems etc. If you don't have any of them, you're another step closer to it not being an issue.

Next on the list would be how much quality sleep you get in the long run, because that is a major factor.

Cardio still doesn?t come in to the equation, even at this point, because it's so far down the list.

Strength training on the other hand addresses a myriad of physical problems that you WILL face as you age that cardio doesn't.
Open User Options Menu

epdavis7

spud wrote:
My personal theory is that if you looked at all the cases of heart disease related deaths, by the time you removed those with a family history of heart disease (genetics), the smokers and the people that were classified as being either overweight or obese, you'd be left with hardly anybody.

That's right folks. If you're lucky enough to not be genetically predisposed to have heart problems, you're fairly lean and you don't smoke, you're probably fine. Cardio or lack of it isn't an issue.

Next on the list would be general stress levels i.e. work, relationships, financial problems etc. If you don't have any of them, you're another step closer to it not being an issue.

Next on the list would be how much quality sleep you get in the long run, because that is a major factor.

Cardio still doesn?t come in to the equation, even at this point, because it's so far down the list.

Strength training on the other hand addresses a myriad of physical problems that you WILL face as you age that cardio doesn't.


Exactly! Plus with some forms of strength training you do get some cardio benefit. Unless you have a performance based goal for a specific activity you don't really need additional cardio. I hate that term. Look, I run races periodically so I go out and run once a week to prepare me for that. If I didn't do that I probably wouldn't run. I'd still do other active things I enjoy. It also sucks for weight loss. I hate to be so blunt, but you know how many fat ass runners I just ran a trail 20k with. Quite a few and I can guarantee most them run a hell of a lot more than I do. They also eat like crap and most of it is high carb junk. Instead of running or pushups, they need to do some push aways...from the feeding trough.
Open User Options Menu

ATP 4 Vitality

Opinions vary!
Open User Options Menu

ATP 4 Vitality

MAXIMIZING AEROBIC POTENTIAL
by Arthur Jones,


If, as usually happens, you perform a set of heavy exercise for strength building purposes, and then sit on your ass or shoot the shit with a friend for five minutes before performing the next exercise, then you probably will increase both your muscular size and strength, will doing little or nothing in the way of improving your cardiovascular condition. But if, instead, you move almost immediately from the end of the first exercise to the start of the second exercise, with almost no rest between the two exercises, then you will increase both strength and cardiovascular condition; in fact, that style of training, properly performed, will lead to a level of cardiovascular condition that is far higher than you could ever produce by any amount of jogging or any other cardiovascular exercise. Such a style of exercise simultaneously provides anaerobic exercise for strength building and aerobic exercise for improving cardiovascular condition.

/////

Years of empirical evidence the world over shows this paradigm is invalid. Anatomy & physiology proves Arthur was mistaken.


Open User Options Menu

Resultsbased

ATP 4 Vitality wrote:
MAXIMIZING AEROBIC POTENTIAL
by Arthur Jones,


If, as usually happens, you perform a set of heavy exercise for strength building purposes, and then sit on your ass or shoot the shit with a friend for five minutes before performing the next exercise, then you probably will increase both your muscular size and strength, will doing little or nothing in the way of improving your cardiovascular condition. But if, instead, you move almost immediately from the end of the first exercise to the start of the second exercise, with almost no rest between the two exercises, then you will increase both strength and cardiovascular condition; in fact, that style of training, properly performed, will lead to a level of cardiovascular condition that is far higher than you could ever produce by any amount of jogging or any other cardiovascular exercise. Such a style of exercise simultaneously provides anaerobic exercise for strength building and aerobic exercise for improving cardiovascular condition.

/////

Years of empirical evidence the world over shows this paradigm is invalid. Anatomy & physiology proves Arthur was mistaken.




And how was he mistaken?

The cardiovascular system will improve due to the demands placed upon it from the method of exercise Jones prescribed.

Open User Options Menu

MDieguez

Arthur was not wrong on this.
Open User Options Menu

Average Al

ATP 4 Vitality wrote:
MAXIMIZING AEROBIC POTENTIAL
by Arthur Jones,

...in fact, that style of training, properly performed, will lead to a level of cardiovascular condition that is far higher than you could ever produce by any amount of jogging or any other cardiovascular exercise.



This is where he goes off the rails, IMO.

Jones seemed inclined to use hyperbole in his arguments. Perhaps this was an example.




Open User Options Menu

epdavis7

ATP 4 Vitality wrote:
MAXIMIZING AEROBIC POTENTIAL
by Arthur Jones,


If, as usually happens, you perform a set of heavy exercise for strength building purposes, and then sit on your ass or shoot the shit with a friend for five minutes before performing the next exercise, then you probably will increase both your muscular size and strength, will doing little or nothing in the way of improving your cardiovascular condition. But if, instead, you move almost immediately from the end of the first exercise to the start of the second exercise, with almost no rest between the two exercises, then you will increase both strength and cardiovascular condition; in fact, that style of training, properly performed, will lead to a level of cardiovascular condition that is far higher than you could ever produce by any amount of jogging or any other cardiovascular exercise. Such a style of exercise simultaneously provides anaerobic exercise for strength building and aerobic exercise for improving cardiovascular condition.

/////

Years of empirical evidence the world over shows this paradigm is invalid. Anatomy & physiology proves Arthur was mistaken.




So is it your belief that training as Arthur describes has no impact on health markers? Rush factor training is not the best method for muscular hypertrophy but it does produce some results. It may be that it is not "better" than running for cardio, but it does produce some results. For your average Joe/Jane Schmoe this may be all thats needed to live a healthy vibrant life. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Not everyone aspires to be Mr Olympia or an endurance athlete.
Open User Options Menu

hit4me

Florida, USA

Arthur was not wrong in the fact that moving from one exercise to another quickly after performing a set to failure when it comes to cardiovascular improvement...I have seen dramatic results in myself by performing his way of training
however, his method of training does not take place of running/jogging or swimming...?.I myself am training for a 5k and I can say that even though my cardio system is good and healthy (per my heart dr), It will take me a few months to be able to run a full 5k without stopping to walk
Open User Options Menu

MDieguez

The carryover of the " rush factor" is much greater than many modes of cardiovascular exercise, especially jogging. Jogging helps improve one thing....jogging.
I also agree that the rush factor is not the best method for getting stronger but one can certainly improve strength that way.
As a mode of cardiovascular exercise, jogging is fine, as is the rush factor in strength training as Arthur intended it ( how could one say otherwise?), as are many other things. If you want to jog for hours on end,go ahead, you will become a better jogger , but the rush factor is better and will carry over to many more life endeavors, especially if you add in a few sprints.
Open User Options Menu

hit4me

Florida, USA

Arthur is not wrong on the improvement of the cardiovascular system when using his training methods, I have seen improvements in my own cardiovascular health as well as my heart dr by using his methods, however, his method of training will not prepare you for running/jogging/swimming or biking....I am training for a 5k, even though my cardiovascular system is healthy, it is not prepared for a 5k...as it will take a few months for me to run a full 5k without stopping to walk some of the way
Open User Options Menu

ATP 4 Vitality

MDieguez wrote:
Arthur was not wrong on this.


Here I go,

Dear clueless,


Please look the world over, as ALL endurance athletes of ANY distances, do NOT use resistance weight bearing exercise circuit training as their training modality.

Ask yourself WHY?
Open User Options Menu
First | Previous | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | Next | Last
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy