[quote]uahc wrote:
I think what Haney meant was that he cheats himself in such a way to utilize as much muscle usage as possible. It’s not a matter of going past failure, but more like a limited ROM in order to hit the targeted muscles more. Yates had the same mentality and even stated (one of his training vids) that he could lift more than he did when training, but didn’t because his goals while working out wasn’t to push the biggest weight, but to stimulate the muscles throughout the ROM- basically what Rainjack/Prof-X has said[/quote]
But Yates also only did his one “all out” set where he did forced reps, partials, negatives and what not in the same set. But I do agree that what RJ and X said holds truest.
But thnx to the more experienced guys for clearing the air b/c I dont think this is something that get talked bout to much(not that I have seen) and Im always trying to get ahead of the curve.
I often wondered about this myself. I was never really sure if loosening up my form was worth it to squeeze out a little extra work.
I think I’ll try a little of this at the end of some of my sets today and see how it feels.
In regards to #9 on your post derek, I cannot see that method getting your heart rate up to 180, unless he’s purposefully being hyperbolic. Reading that kinda makes me wanna do curls now.
[quote]PF_88 wrote:
In regards to #9 on your post derek, I cannot see that method getting your heart rate up to 180, unless he’s purposefully being hyperbolic. Reading that kinda makes me wanna do curls now.[/quote]
You may be right about that but he also said this…
�??IF YOU’VE NEVER vomited from doing a set of barbell curls,�?? Arthur Jones once said to me, �??then you’ve never experienced outright hard work.�?? Outright hard work was one of his descriptions of intensity, and to this day it’s as good a definition as I’ve ever heard.
[quote]derek wrote:
PF_88 wrote:
In regards to #9 on your post derek, I cannot see that method getting your heart rate up to 180, unless he’s purposefully being hyperbolic. Reading that kinda makes me wanna do curls now.
You may be right about that but he also said this…
�??IF YOU’VE NEVER vomited from doing a set of barbell curls,�?? Arthur Jones once said to me, �??then you’ve never experienced outright hard work.�?? Outright hard work was one of his descriptions of intensity, and to this day it’s as good a definition as I’ve ever heard.
[/quote]
I think that’s retarded. I can see feeling like that after training legs, but if training arms leaves you ready to vomit, my guess is you are doing more damage than good.
There is no doubt my arms are trashed after training biceps. I have trouble scratching my head at times or putting my motorcycle helmet on. However, vomit was not a part of the equation.
Your arms are too small a muscle group to cause that feeling.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
derek wrote:
PF_88 wrote:
In regards to #9 on your post derek, I cannot see that method getting your heart rate up to 180, unless he’s purposefully being hyperbolic. Reading that kinda makes me wanna do curls now.
You may be right about that but he also said this…
�??IF YOU’VE NEVER vomited from doing a set of barbell curls,�?? Arthur Jones once said to me, �??then you’ve never experienced outright hard work.�?? Outright hard work was one of his descriptions of intensity, and to this day it’s as good a definition as I’ve ever heard.
I think that’s retarded. I can see feeling like that after training legs, but if training arms leaves you ready to vomit, my guess is you are doing more damage than good.
[/quote]
Yeah, I know it is, that’s why I wrote it. It was regarding the whole “purposely being hyperbolic” thing that was mentioned back a post or two.
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
<<< I’ve seen experienced guys ‘cheat’ the positive portion of a movement so that they can milk the negative, >>>
[/quote]
This can be very useful as long as you don’t compromise your form to the point of hurting yourself.
QFT (always wanted to say that)
You can build muscle nicely by lifting a bit heavier by flaking a bit on the form, but you raise the risk of injury.
I feel progressive ROM is a lost technique in building size and strength.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
The Mighty Stu wrote:
<<< I’ve seen experienced guys ‘cheat’ the positive portion of a movement so that they can milk the negative, >>>
This can be very useful as long as you don’t compromise your form to the point of hurting yourself.[/quote]
Funny how all the biggest and strongest guys I have ever trained with or watched train seem to have a lot of partials and body English in their training. I am also shocked to often see them using machines loaded with huge weights too.
Just imagine how big and strong they would be if they actually spent more time on correcting their form and the latest kettle bell circuit.
[quote]Heliotrope wrote:
Funny how all the biggest and strongest guys I have ever trained with or watched train seem to have a lot of partials and body English in their training. I am also shocked to often see them using machines loaded with huge weights too.
Just imagine how big and strong they would be if they actually spent more time on correcting their form and the latest kettle bell circuit.[/quote]
There is a difference between bad form and a sloppy action that works for you.
That is all he means i think… Just using momentum in all exercises will build you like a twig, using the most perfect TUT form will not be much better, as when you hit your first plateau, how will you increase the weight?! There is room for body english, even when isolating a muscle - any muscle.
Just using your knees to get past the last sticking point on curls is not cheating in the true sense, it is assisting - like a forced rep. A valid and effective method. As are partials at the end of sets which i employ regularly too.
As someone who trains alone i do it often, for most groups, without even thinking usually, just to fatigue myself a little more. I cheat with control, reason and deliberation.
i think lee haney has a very raw philosophy. i mean, people really arent meant to barbell curl in a stiff ass position with their knees slightly bent. id train a complete beginner that way but for someone like lee haney himself, he already knows the foundation. keep that back straight, tense the right muscles, elbows tight and tucked, etc etc.
i wouldnt cheat on squats though…
watch lee haney lift, along with ronnie jackson.
[quote]Heliotrope wrote:
Funny how all the biggest and strongest guys I have ever trained with or watched train seem to have a lot of partials and body English in their training. I am also shocked to often see them using machines loaded with huge weights too.
Just imagine how big and strong they would be if they actually spent more time on correcting their form and the latest kettle bell circuit.[/quote]
you can get big as hell using anything, machines, cables, freeweights. the time it takes to get there, versatility, and number of injuries are the difference.
Just imagine how big and strong they would be if they actually spent more time on correcting their form and the latest kettle bell circuit.
you can get big as hell using anything, machines, cables, freeweights. the time it takes to get there, versatility, and number of injuries are the difference.
i wouldn’t use kettle bells to get big…
[/quote]
Pretty sure he was being sarcastic about the k-bells!
I think taking any one comment and picking it to death is just getting you way off base. Haney was probably one of the smarter trainers of his time, and while sometimes ‘cheating’ can be used as a positive tool, other times it can be a negative to your training. When any of you have had Haney’s years of experience with what works for you, then you can preach such bodybuilding wisdom. Arnold said a lot of smart things as well as a lot of stupid things. I’ve heard many many arguments that if Arnold hadn’t been on such boatloads of anabolics since he was 13, that there’s no way he would have developed the way he did. Does that mean he had no training knowledge? Of course not, BUT his situation was different from yours, from mine… it’s all a unique thing, and you can’t always see the big picture when you’re at the beginning of a journey.
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
I think taking any one comment and picking it to death is just getting you way off base. Haney was probably one of the smarter trainers of his time, and while sometimes ‘cheating’ can be used as a positive tool, other times it can be a negative to your training. When any of you have had Haney’s years of experience with what works for you, then you can preach such bodybuilding wisdom. Arnold said a lot of smart things as well as a lot of stupid things. I’ve heard many many arguments that if Arnold hadn’t been on such boatloads of anabolics since he was 13, that there’s no way he would have developed the way he did. Does that mean he had no training knowledge? Of course not, BUT his situation was different from yours, from mine… it’s all a unique thing, and you can’t always see the big picture when you’re at the beginning of a journey.
S
[/quote]
If you have to ask whether cheating is useful or not, you are probably not at the stage to be worried about it. It has not been a “negative” in my training at all. The only way it could be labeled as such is if it made you prone to injury or did not stimulate muscle growth in the desired muscle group.
It is a safe bet that if you are bigger than most and your technique is NOT causing injury, you are training “RIGHT”…no matter what anyone else calls it.
There are people on this site who claim to be training with “perfect form” who have had several injuries and shoulder surgery. Obviously, they don’t know what they are doing, even if it is “textbook form”.
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
I think taking any one comment and picking it to death is just getting you way off base. Haney was probably one of the smarter trainers of his time, and while sometimes ‘cheating’ can be used as a positive tool, other times it can be a negative to your training. When any of you have had Haney’s years of experience with what works for you, then you can preach such bodybuilding wisdom. Arnold said a lot of smart things as well as a lot of stupid things. I’ve heard many many arguments that if Arnold hadn’t been on such boatloads of anabolics since he was 13, that there’s no way he would have developed the way he did. Does that mean he had no training knowledge? Of course not, BUT his situation was different from yours, from mine… it’s all a unique thing, and you can’t always see the big picture when you’re at the beginning of a journey.
S
[/quote]
well said stu. i wanna add that when people use the term, “cheat” you do get a negative connotation. my idea of “cheating”
is using your legs for momentum on your 20th pull up, a kip up. i dont think haney was talking about stacking 4 plates on leg press and moving it 2 inches and calling yourself strong… damn bad example but u get the idea.
the exercise i “cheat” most on is the seated row. that cheating helped me get real strong though lol