That by no means sounds easy!
1 Like
If your claim is that resistance training is not enough to develop proper cardiovascular conditioning? It was proven beyond any doubt over 45 yrs ago. Project Total Conditioning (The West Point Experiment)
1 Like
Ok, so here we go againā¦ Awakening of the sleeping bear. History (thread) will repeat itself!
That being said, I agree with you.
I see how you do it but why do you do that ? Was getting the weight into position causing you a problem ?
Scott
Thatās too bad. I didnāt realize moderators were moving postsā¦WHY???
Iāll sit this one out. But before you guys go have a long argument about this, perhaps start a thread over in the Conditioning Forum, and come to an agreement on what exactly the phrase āproper cardiovascular conditioningā meansā¦ 
1 Like
Not at all. I just wanted to use the protocol as best as I envisioned it. Moreover, that first negative rep acts as a āwarm upā of sorts for me. I continue to experiment with similar protocols like 15-5-15 and 25-8-25. Since I train somewhat slowly when doing the āpositive/negativeā part of these protocols, I more often than not cannot hit the ātargetā number but focus on the target TUL instead. At my age, Iāve found these kinds of protocols useful and beneficial, and they have had a reduced impact on my recovery ability.
Iām sorry you feel that. I used approx. 2/3 my normal HIT poundages for the 30/10/30. Since 2/3 my working weight is usually what I used for for warm-ups on HIT, it was no worry for me. And believe me, I AM one to worry about joint issues!!
You donāt throw the weight up, but start relatively slow and accelerate to the top (tricky to manage in 1-2 seconds!). Same goes with the 10 reps. I know ācontinuousā was used to describe these, but I still managed to stop for 0.5-1.0 sec at the bottom of each rep. The tension was continuous and that was good enough for me!!
2 Likes
I posted kind of a āmini reviewā in my training log if anyone is interested in seeing what my results from the program were.
2 Likes
āThere is nothing about 30-10-30 that would produce any better results than normal, slow repetitions done for the same duration.ā
I saw this post of another site and Iām wondering what those on here who have done 30 10 30 think of this statement?
Scott
Very interesting question! I had good results with it. I felt the negatives were useful amd helpful. But as you know, iām giving Super Slow a try right now, and seeing good, if not better results. So a very good question.
1 Like
I think itās a close minded opinion
1 Like
How soā¦.
With a statement like thatā¦the individual who made the statement is probably not willing to give it a try to see if it would provide better results or not
1 Like
HIT practitioners often like to describe their approach to exercise as āevidenced basedā. However, not all the beliefs and claims come with lots of objective evidence. Dr. Darden has done a lot of case studies, but the limitation of these studies is that there are no control groups, or alternative protocols against which to compare new methods. So the conclusions drawn about the relative effectiveness of a new protocol versus an old protocol ends up being somewhat subjective and anecdotal, e.g., this group, which I trained in 2018 with 30-30-30, seemed to get somewhat better results than the group I trained in 2014 with some different protocol. From a scientific perspective, that isnāt very satisfying.
A few years back, Luke Carlsson at Discover Strength, and James Steele at Southampton Solent University collaborated on a series of studies to test several workout protocol strategies commonly used in HIT. They did the studies with clients at Discover Strength, so all the workouts were supervised. For the most part, they failed to show any clear advantage for strategies like drop sets, rep duration, pre-exhaust, etc.
Since both guys are HIT advocates, I think they were a little disappointed in their inability to prove out some of those beliefs in a scientifically sound, statistically valid way. Worth keeping in mind when you read comments like that quote.
4 Likes
== Scott==
It seems to be next to impossible to show definitively in studies which method produces better results. I think for me itās more important to hear from people who have been around the block and tried just about everything and to hear what is their opinion.
Iām doing 30 10 30 and so far I like it as well if not better that most methods Iāve tried . I canāt prove itās better or worse , I just like certain aspects of it better than what I was doing before.
Scott
1 Like
Theres some good points thrown out. But i think to take that statement and say its close minded(especially without background) is very naive. Im a big fan of Darden, and 30/10/30. But is it for everyone? No. Do people make good gains on it? Of course! Do people gain other ways? Of course! I just dont see where youāre coming from with that
Sounds like a Brainiac Deduction/Opinion, with no actual experience with the method to back it up!
Agreed. These āstudiesā are never conducted for long enough periods AND they often donāt measure the right things. AND, the things that count (muscle appearance, vascularity) canNOT be objectively measured. I love Pre-Fatigue and Drop Sets and Rest-Pause sets and the extra āUmphā I give my workouts on those days cannot be calibrated.
1 Like
Not when I have conversed with the individual who made the statementā¦his way or no way
1 Like