I really dont care about you or Roybot. You guys are trolls. The OP asked if anyone has used these methods with success. I told him im using them now, but different and haven’t determined the results yet.[/quote]
You still don’t see anything wrong with recommending a training method even though you don’t have any results to show for it…
[quote]
My opinions were unsubstantiated, not unsolicited. Nice argumentative skills and logic though.[/quote]
This is hilarious! First, Dankid unleashes his army of strawmen in order to evade some very simple and direct questions: instead of discussing what he’s actually doing on a bodybuilding forum, he quibbles over the meaning of unsolicited vs. unsubstantiated.
The best part is that in his panic to get the upper hand, he’s admitted that his opinions are unsubstantiated. Hooray! Progress at last. Nice argumentative skills and logic from our self-proclaimed “genius”.
And yes, your advice is still unsolicited - nobody asked specifically for your opinion. But then whoever does? Maybe we should start a Dankid, How Do You Train? thread - should be fun. While we’re on the subject, argumentative skills and logic don’t actually replace knowing the correct definition of a word. Next time, pick up a dictionary, flick to unsolicited, and read the definition before you start calling people out for being idiots. Trying to figure things out using “science, inferences and hypotheses” clearly isn’t working out all that well for you.
Now that we’ve established that your advice is both unsolicited and unsubstantiated, we can get back on-topic.
I’m the idiot? Keep on truckin’, Dankid. Keep on truckin’.
[quote]MytchBucanan wrote:
I regret every occasion I expirimented with slow reps. I always lost size and strength. Watch the pros train on youtube, you will see plenty of “cheating”.[/quote]
X 2
I like to take a page off JC santana’s book as far as rep speed is concerned. I just lift as fast as I can, and depending on the targeted number of reps, fatigue on the type 2b’s fiber will decide the speed curve by itself.
Most people you see doing slow-reps are probably also not doing it intensely. Like I said, most people conflate speed and intensity because 99% of the time they are the same. No amount of 10 pound dumb-bell curls will get you massive. My guess is also that most people doing it slow (just because they like doing things slow, not because it’s a technique) stop at the top and bottom of each rep and thus loose all intensity and allow that 80-90+% muscle recovery that happens pretty quick. [/quote]
Bodybuilding is about progression. I would go as far as to say that if you aren’t very big, leave the slow shit completely alone. I do SOME sets with slower movements now (especially for biceps) because of the problem there I have mentioned 5,000 times before. That is not how they got to be the size they are now. It is what I am doing to push them to get even bigger after I have hit a very near maximal level of size.
That means, most people are not strong enough to get much of a benefit from slowing down reps like that. Slow reps are also NOT what has built the majority of massive bodies on the planet. Most of the biggest bodybuilders lift with relatively quick reps during the set. It takes more power to move the weight like that in the positive and then let it down slowly.
Worrying about “slow reps” when you can’ even bench 2 plates a side is retarded unless you just like wasting gym time.
[quote]
I would define “slow” as 2-4 seconds positive, and 4 seconds negative. Slow enough that you are not taking advantage of momentum on the way up (cheating), and not letting the bar just drop on the way down (cheating). The negative should be almost as hard as the positive effort IMHO. Also, you get that intensity by not stopping at the “top” or “bottom” of your lift, so you get zero rest during a set. This is just being efficient. Obviously it’s not the only way to get big and strong, but you get the most shock per rep this way.[/quote]
It isn’t even one of the most well known ways to get big. If anything, incorporating minimal use of this n a program may help more advanced lifters…simply because they are strong enough to use a weight that can still promote growth despite the speed of the rep.
I guess CT doesn’t know what he is talking about with pushing weights up as fast as possible on the concentric since slow reps without ‘‘cheating’’ is the way to get huge… All these massive guys all use light weights over and over again and they magically get huge by going slow and forcing more ‘‘tension.’’ What a load of shit. Seems everytime I start growing again is when I start making increases in strength again. Funny how that works out huh?
[quote]dankid wrote:
You guys are trolls. [/quote]
Keep telling yourself that weakkid…
I’m starting feel bad for you. Like I’m going to go to hell for picking on someone who is mentally incapable of distinguishing reality from delusion.
[/quote]
I might not know what I’m talking about but in routines based on those very slow movements like some HIT stuff, is not it the case that basically the brunt of the reps are ‘waste’ that only serve to exhaust the muscle for the final 1-2 really tough reps?
If you can rep out many times with a weight without even trying to lift it with all your speed (all of your muscle ultimately) then how is that going to grow someone? When you don’t even need to activate all of the muscle for it. But then come the inevitable exhaustion and, as some HIT say, the final rep is the most important and that is when the trainee has to put their everything into the rep (slow and fast twitch all activate hard) to make it.
I think that method is good for people who don’t have the mental strength to handle increasingly heavier weights and want to feel good about lifting small by using small weights and half-hearted effort to justify the weights they are using.
Another issue I see is that when using light weight, it is hard to calculate your intensity of effort when you can initially move that weight in the given uneconomical manner of artificially slowing down to make it ‘heavy’. It is simpler to simply progressively move up in heavier heavy weights even if the form is not that great. At least the plates are increasing and nobody improves their ‘cheating’ in deadlift,squats and bench forever so the muscle really is getting worked and one really is getting stronger.
If you’ve got time to fuck around thinking about how long you’re going to hold/push the weight for, or whether I can stop and pause the weight during a lift, you aren’t lifting a heavy enough load to do shit and you should get the fuck out of the gym and the bodybuilding forum.
Should I do a 20-second eccentric? Is it cheating if I don’t control it?
WHO GIVES A SHIT.
Lift the damn weight however you want, but if you can’t get it up again (however you choose to interpret that) ur an idiot.
I’m working with Olympic level lifters at the mo and they DON’T GIVE A SHIT about controlling their descent, just about getting the damn weight up as quick as possible.
TBH, earlier this year i thought id give vince gironda’s 8x8 a try but i modified it to 7x7 just to ease into the work load, the volume was very high 21 sets for larger muscle groups and 14 sets for smaller muscle groups.
it comprised of using a weight about 50-60% of my 1RM for 2-3 exercises for 7 sets of 7 reps with minimum rest between sets, mostly only 15-30 seconds. my rep cadence was controlled on the eccentric and explosive on the concentric.
i used to finish training sessions in under 35 mins (after doing 21 sets for chest & 14 sets for bi’s).
I gained 4kg(8.8lbs - from 85kg-89kg) during the 4 weeks i used this program and i actually lost fat during the phase. I guess you can relate the know how to lactic acid training.
although i wasnt lifting heavy ass weights i still got very nice results.
the only downfall to this was that i never knew anything about deloading and after the 4 weeks i began getting diminishing returns. Im going to be doing this again starting monday, i cant lift heavy anymore i injured my shoulder - again, pretty badly and am in need for a shoulder recon this time around, so in the mean time i gotta do what i gotta do
BTW: the black people being more muscular thing is not racist IF it is based on legitimate academic studies.
Which there are several of, all of which indicate that men who self-identified as “black” have statistically significant higher muscle mass than other self-identified racial/ethnic groups. Of course this doesn’t mean all black dudes are mass monsters, nor does it mean that all non-black dudes are small. It just means that the black bell curve is skewed to be more muscular.
This kind of study has been used to refute the use of BMI in predicting risk for heart attack and diabetes. Since black men have higher muscle mass on the whole than others, it indicates that BMI really needs to be limited in its application as a predictive or diagnostic tool. If a high BMI is present, overall health should be looked at, and not what is done in many instances today, which is to tell the patient to lose weight.
Hell, I’m a white dude at 6’0" 215 ish at the moment, and I’m pretty sure that makes me obese by BMI tables, and while I’m certainly not going to step on stage any time soon, I am faaaaar from obese.
On the other hand, if you are pointing at all black dudes and saying “well dem dere negroids were bred for size and strength, and thats why he’s big and strong, and I’m 170lbs with a 175lb bench”, then you ARE being racist.
[quote]OTS1 wrote:
BTW: the black people being more muscular thing is not racist IF it is based on legitimate academic studies.
Which there are several of, all of which indicate that men who self-identified as “black” have statistically significant higher muscle mass than other self-identified racial/ethnic groups. Of course this doesn’t mean all black dudes are mass monsters, nor does it mean that all non-black dudes are small. It just means that the black bell curve is skewed to be more muscular.
This kind of study has been used to refute the use of BMI in predicting risk for heart attack and diabetes. Since black men have higher muscle mass on the whole than others, it indicates that BMI really needs to be limited in its application as a predictive or diagnostic tool. If a high BMI is present, overall health should be looked at, and not what is done in many instances today, which is to tell the patient to lose weight.
Hell, I’m a white dude at 6’0" 215 ish at the moment, and I’m pretty sure that makes me obese by BMI tables, and while I’m certainly not going to step on stage any time soon, I am faaaaar from obese.[/quote]
I haven’t read that research, but Ive seen just as much pointing out that black people have more fat and body weight as well. Id be interested in knowing if these studies looked at absolute amounts of lean mass, or lean mass relative to total mass.
Also I dont think genetics accounts for much of this. Its more of a socio-economic and culture thing.
