ah ok, well, at least that’s better than the contracted stuff.
Way back in the eighties Arthur Jones and Nautilus developed computerised testing machines for the leg extension. If I recall it took static measurements at seven points in the range of motion and plotted a graph of a subjects strength over the full range of motion. It showed in every single person tested that strength was lowest in the contracted position. This sort of bell shaped curve is a product of muscle physiology and internal moment arms in the joint, not something you can change with training.
This showed that the cams on the older Nautilus leg extension machines were wrong too.
Anecdotally, as someone who has been training for over 40 years the “fully contracted” position is the least productive range to work a muscle in.
3 Likes
incorrect. You’re making this stuff up. Arthur Jones has constantly repeated that the strength curve of a plate loaded leg extension is about perfect because the resistance is greatest at the contracted position which is why the strength is lowest in the contracted position because load is heaviest there. And that is how you want it! the machines you’re talking about are the weird cable leg extensions.
max contraction was never a hype factor, lengthened partials were
if john little was going to sell out on hype factors he would write about lengthened partials and high volume. the stuff you would buy into.
nowhere in that book does he reject maximum contraction. he talks about pyramid contraction and moment arm training is to get more out of less weight training, but it is not to get the best and superior gains. training is passive insufficiency leaves little gains for all of the muscle fibers. that is why even in that book you can read him talking about training various zones of the squat 5 inches apart.
Try decaf.
ok sure thing LOL
no it didn’t.
Who’s rubber and who’s glue?
1 Like
40 years of incorrect training will do that, you’ve only stimulated muscles in their weakest position
My strength curve is just as it was when I started only I’m much stronger now.
Scroll down and look at the graphs.
You really are a troll.
1 Like
That would be a compliment.
Insane Bane is seeking to be a significant voice on T-Nation, but failing miserably.
3 Likes
I read Max Contraction Training when I was in high school and I tried it for a bit but I really didn’t get anything out of it so I switched back to my regular training program I did back then. If Max Contraction were super effective, Little would’ve been able to build himself and his clients into amazing condition and been able to get it to catch on more.
4 Likes
(wildly off topic and I post this having not finished the rest of this thread)
For some reason I thought you worked in the bio-medical community now. Am I wrong there? If not, I’m legitimately interested in how you transitioned from mechanical engineering into that field.
Im unsure of whether max contraction is more or less effective than full range of motion.
But what i am sure of with these other bozos are argueing with me about is lengthened partials and passive insufficient range of the motion being superior to max contractions and even full range of motion which it definitely is not!
If you can complete a zone of a movement where you are weakest why not complete the entire movement through to the zones where you are strongest as well because you won’t fail at the strongest if you didn’t fail at the weakest range. There’for it is ridiculous to only do the weak range of motion.
Where can I find the study you’ve done?
Max contraction was largely based of the physiologist AE Muller in the 50s, thats were Littles recommendation of a 1-6 second max contraction came from. However, what wasnt mentioned in the MCT books was that Mullers research could not be replicated by other researchers, turned out Muller and his associate “overstated” their results.
4 Likes