My mistake, I thought you would have researched Mike before making blanket statements to discredit him.
What was the date of Jones’ latest peer-reviewed study regarding bodybuilding? I forget
1 Like
Please re-read my post and point out where exactly I made blanket statements to discredit him. I didn’t even bother. It’s enough for me to understand his ideas - I don’t involve in ad hominem disputes. For instance, I don’t care who you are; your ideas matter, although they may not benefit me.
Strength training is not a politics where you need to know the background and ideas of a certain person to understand what to expect of him. The Western world didn’t bother to learn and understand “Who is Mr. Putin”, despite all the information available, and now the world is on the brink of a nuclear war.
Knowing that a person has a M.D., PhD, MBA or whatever doesn’t tell you much - I have been in academia for too long - and the quality has been steadily deteriorating to the state when I know more about my ailments than the doctors I consult with.
Was there anything new in the strength/resistance training field since AJ’s passing? Not much really, aside from BDJ’s works which are strongly based on both AJ’s and Vince Gironda’s works. If I am mistaken, please tell me about it. Chances are that I can look into my extensive strength training library and/or old bodybuilding magazines and find that all that ideas have already been discussed many years ago.
So, you think that anything which is not peer-reviewed is a bullshit?
How can anything new and innovative be peer-reviewed? What if the reviewers are dumb or simply jealous of anything new and worthwhile which is not created by them? You are probably too young to remember 5 steps in reaction to any type of innovation: Ignore, ridicule, attack, copy, steal.
Were Einstein, Tesla, Jobs, Musk and many others peer-reviewed?
How much of Arthur Jones works have you read to understand his views? A couple of articles? Or you prefer to trust every pseudo-scientific study which was either done as a meta-analysis (just review of all literature without any controlled studies at all) or as a poorly structured (and even badly controlled) studies made by people who clearly state that “give us money and we will deliver you any result you want”?
If you wish to have a peer-reviewed study looking at some of the AJ’s concepts, go no further than “Strength training methods and the work of Arthur Jones” by Dave Smith and Stewart Bruce-Low published in Journal of Exercise Physiology online, volume 7 number 6 December 2004 with a lot of references to other studies supporting some of AJ’s claims.
I don’t care if the ideas are peer-reviewed or not - what I care is whether they work for me or not to achieve my goals. I have been long enough in the iron game to try a thing or two, and I speak of myself. I don’t advocate people to blindly follow my ideas; they should decide for themselves. I thought this is the forum which supports difference in opinion (which I have expressed); if not, I don’t care to bother. I have nothing to lose not contributing to this forum.
2 Likes
OHP has done wonders for my physique. I regret skipping it and doing bench only for so many years.
It does to me.
With dead lifts (my go-to big bang for buck exercise) I’ll do sets of 3-5 at fast/explosive tempo and work in the 50-65% rep max loading range.
Then next cycle start stepping the weight up and reps down through the session until working at near max.
I like it. This type of training has helped me to maintain and even gain a little strength through some serious health difficulties.
2 Likes
Einstein was an academic, and yes-absolutely, his work was staunchly peer reviewed and contested.
It was also colaborative, but no need to go there, as it is not germain to the point.
The rest were commercial/private industry, and peer review doesnt actually apply to their work.
3 Likes
So was Arthur Jones. A representative of a commercial / private industry
Then why conflate peer reviewed academics with commercially successful entrepreneurs?
Were you trying to draw an analogy of some sort?
1 Like
Oh my goodness yes.
Especially so when taken from the floor.
The physiques of top pressers tends to be more impressive than those of top benchers, from my perspective.
2 Likes
Are there any nautilus deadlift machines?
Jones seemed flustered when challenged in that video by the comparison or lack thereof of barbells and nautilus machines.
It was not me who said that Arthur Jones’ ideas need to be peer-reviewed to be correct
I think there were some designed and produced long after Jones sold Nautilus.
He was right that low back muscles need an isolated movement, therefore, he designed several low back machines with only MedX lumbar extension being the right one. Nautilus low back machines worked hip muscles more than low back muscles.
1 Like
Yeah. There is just something primal about the ole grip & rip.
Ive also noticed a profound hormonal response to the speed work. Clear 1=1 increase in drive, agression and other anectdotal indicators.
Also on the circa max work, it has great caryover to things I actually do. I literally never find myself lying in a fixed plane pushing or pulling against a levered device.
I do, however, end up picking up large heavy, awkward, usually steel objects and grunting them into place.
3 Likes
@contract_relax @SkyzykS can you guys stop ruining this thread with your sensible, training related discussions and agreements please? This is meant to be an internet shit slinging contest.
3 Likes
Do you want to be put into an airplane and flown into the side of a mountain?
No?
Then 
.
2 Likes
Oh my, it appears I struck a nerve. Welp, lets do this
You don’t find these two statements contradictory?
I don’t want to pop your bubble, but there’s a database known as “PubMed” that has literally 3,700 articles released since 2008 (the year after your boy Jones passed).
I guess this is a good time to bring up the Colorado Experiment… Jones, in his infinite wisdom, was able to train Casey Viator with such rigor that in 28 days, he gained 63.21 pounds of muscle. Yet these results were entirely un-repeatable by the rest of the damn world.
No, but i think the Colorado Experiment was 100% bullshit, and if it were peer-reviewed - it would have been debunked accordingly.
I have no problem with this. If it works for you - do it! Just know that there is literature and alternative methods that can probably do more for you than strictly Arthur Jones’ recommendations.
Jones did exactly the opposite. He had a product and needed people to buy it; Charles Poliquin was quoted saying “[Jones] could have persuaded Saudi sheiks to buy sand from him!”. I agree with Poliquin’s assessment.
Of course I support a difference in opinion! I do not feel that is a one-way street though. Again, you watched a 3 minute video of Mike Israetel, did no research on him, then wrote him off as a “some youtuber”.
2 Likes
Colorado experiment imho was not BS, because it was regaining of muscle, strength and weight that was lost…numerous individuals and even Viator indicated as such, i can be wrong…but i think even Jones indicated this
It was proof that you can build muscle or regain muscle training only 3 full body workouts per week utilizing negative only or negative accentuated training which is what the majority of exercises were
one of the reasons it was never duplicated is because some are not willing to give it a go or just wont deviate from the 6 day a week 2 or 3 hour a day workouts
I would say give it a shot and see uf you gain or lose…its only 28 days…the only problem is the only gym that duplicate is in canada
Blockquote
You really believe this?
People will shoot up Test, Tren, DBol and everything else they can find - all within their first month of lifting. But you think NO ONE has tried this and been unable to repeat it because 63lbs of muscle in a month isn’t appealing enough of a claim?
I’m in the middle of a Fortitude mesocycle, which unlike the Colorado Experiment, has over 600 scientific references to support it’s claims.
This alone has been proven by many, many people. But they are typically genetic outliers; the majority of pro BBers lift 5-6x per week. Conversely, the majority of pro powerlifters train 3x per week.
Yes, i do believe it
So, all the guys that trained 3x full body back before the 60s (start of the split routines), didnt build any muscle
Steve Reeves to name the most famous
Well, I don’t know where to begin in order to answer your accusations… but as Rhett Butler said in Gone With The Wind: “Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn”.
I don’t care if you believe in anything which comes from scientists - that’s your choice. PubMed is just a repository, a database, which content doesn’t need to be taken on faith and every single study and paper should be carefully considered. You probably missed my discussion on this forum of one of the papers which was supposed to determine thigh muscle make-up with squat exercise. And please, please, explore your PubMed and come up with a list of truly revolutionary ideas about strength training/bodybuilding since 2007-2008 or whatever date you choose. I am so tired of the old farts’ stuff, I want something new that will put piles of muscles on my frame.
Arthur Jones passed in 2007.
So, you think that the Colorado Experiment was the only one conducted by Jones? Educate yourself, please.
I understand that you don’t give a fuck about me, but many members of this forum can attest than I am NOT a devoted follower of Jones training methods (or at least what people generally think of his training methods). I have shared extensively on this forum information on my success with Vince Gironda methods, Zone training, High density and other methods advocated by Brian Johnston. Your perception is not my reality.
Again, you made a conclusion about Jones’s research and training methods just watching YT clips and based on what other have said about him. Please go on and enjoy your life of a second-hander. Have you read all of AJ articles and books? May be just “My first half-century in the iron game”? Or reading 280 pages is a way too much for you? On the contrary, I explored what Mike Israetel has been preaching reading a lot of his articles, watching his videos, exploring his website. Irrespective of the debate whether one should train to failure or not, Mike Israetel has shown multiple times that he doesn’t know what is meant to train to failure or, as he calls it, taking a trainee to a 0 RIR.
I also think one size doesn’t fit all. But it doesn’t mean that Jones ideas are truly worthless. By the way, I think you will not be able to write Jones training ideas down correctly. Want to give it a try?
This is a long response for not giving a damn 
agreed. Can you link this discussion?
To list a few:
Resistance training load/effect comparison
Bloodflow Restriction Training
Periodization
Eccentric Overload
Energy Systems Training
Not at all, but I believe it is a shining example of an inventor trying to sell people on his products and methods.
I don’t know what I’ve said to make you think this, or that this is relevant to the discussion at all. The HIT section of this forum is well known for it’s dogmatic ways; all I did was post a video that directly related to the subject of this thread… You responded in a way that effectively poo pooh-ed anyone that says anything related to fitness that isn’t Jones. I understand that may not have been your intent, but that is how it was delivered.
Wouldn’t we all be considered this? unless we are individually conducting these experiments or studies, i think this “second-hander” label would apply as much to me as it does to you.
Not at all, mostly because they are primitive discoveries - many of which have been tested and refined with today’s methods of bodybuilding. I also have not read or watched everything Mike Israetel has put out there, although I am a fan of his (if you couldn’t tell). I can also assure you that 280 pages isn’t too much, it’s simply not interesting enough to spend my time doing while still working and in college.
This may be the case, but you are also providing evidence from someone who virtually trolls Mike as if it were his sole purpose in life. I watched the whole video (not the edited soundbyte one this asshat used) and explained that sometimes 0 RIR means you actually fail, and sometimes means that you certainly won’t have good form on your next rep. He explains this literally right after the soundbyte ends.
I do not stand by everything Mike Israetel says, hell I don’t even follow his programming - I just think he adds a lot of knowledge to the discussion… Something I thought would be appreciated on this forum of nerdy meatheads. Apparently this is not the case.
I never said they were. I believe he brought much needed information to the table when little was available at the time; his contributions to bodybuilding are very extensive. I also think he refused to accept that any training methods not developed by himself were completely worthless. To his credit, his level of hubris was well earned - but that does not detract from his commentary.
“How would you feel if you lived on an island populated, apart from yourself, exclusively by retarded, malicious chimpanzees? Well, that’s how I feel. Don’t laugh, because you’re one of those retarded, malicious chimpanzees.” - Arthur Jones.
“Split routines make about as much sense as sleeping with one eye open. Best results will almost always occur from exercising both your upper body and your lower body in the same workout.” - Arthur Jones
Most of his training ideas are similar with my own honestly, but he uses a fair bit of blanket statements that do NOT work for everyone, a sentiment you seem to agree with.
I can list them out, but to what extent? as you said, he studied this field for 50+ years - I could do as good a job summarizing his concepts as I could summarizing a dictionary.
This whole conversation derailed the thread beyond recognition. All I did was post a damn video with some information about loading and rep-ranges (the subject at hand), you responded with nothing but stuff you didn’t agree with and wrote Mike off entirely as one of “these youtube guys”.
God forbid I post an educational video on a subject that ISN’T created by Jones. This is the dogma that plagues this subforum.
2 Likes