I cycle 3 routines in 10 days: Dr Darden’s 30-10-30, normal cadence and 30-30-30 since 3-4 months back. I have made great weight increases (strength) in all these cadences - even using the full weight stack on some excercises.
The main driver into strength increases into this cycle, for me, is the 30-30-30 routine - which is - very slow eccentrics. It always is ahead of the other two, more demanding routines. Nevertheless, 30-30-30 makes weight improvements possible, which I later add to the other cadences when strict form allows.
This means you can’t just decide for yourself that 30 sec eccentrics must incorporate lighter weights. Simply not true. I recommend you try to keep an open mind to not only science - but also to proven experience. It works - because it works…
Regarding Jones routines. I believe earlier on he trained 3X per week, fullbody 12 exercises 4 sets ( 48 set workout). He was about 170 lbs but could not further increase his weight. If I recall correctly, he dropped his exercise to 8 and did 2 sets (fullbody 16 sets). I assume 3x per week. His weight increased to about 205 lb. He then stated he would have done one set, once or twice (at most) per week. My question is, did Jones ever workout himself using that reduced volume/frequency.
== Scott==
I’m thinking it’s a lot easier to lower an eccentric in one second than 30 especially if it’s a weight you could do ten reps with in the 10 portion of 30 10 30. I’m guessing if you lowered the concentric for only one second the weight of the eccentric would have to be increased if you wanted it to compare it to the stress the muscle feels when lowering something for 30 seconds?
“If a 1 second concentric is safe, surely a 1 second eccentric is safe since…” I don’t see how this is “safe” in many, if not, most exercises. How can this be safe in a movement like a machine pullover with an axis rotation of some 240 degrees for example? In this particular movement, that’s how many degrees of rotation per second? Safe from what perspective? Compare to doing such in a barbell wrist curl with an axis rotation much less than 240 degrees. What’s the ideal axis rotation per second, if any?
== Scott==
But could exaggerating or slowing down the eccentric of a lighter weight ( 30 seconds) compare closely with a heavier weight used at a much faster pace of one second?
Dr. Darden believes there is an advantage to exaggerated eccentrics, based on his coaching experience and case studies. I haven’t coached people using the technique, and haven’t tried the method enough on myself to have an opinion. The article by Ogborn attempts to address the question scientifically, and you can see from that article that there are not a lot of studies that have looked at extended eccentrics as an alternative to eccentric overload, while using conventional equipment.
As for very fast eccentrics with a lot of resistance: Maybe you can infer something from the isokinetic studies. But there is a difference between executing a fast, maximally loaded eccentric on an isokinetic machine and trying to do the same thing on a nautilus machine or with a barbell. It has to do with momentum, and how you generate velocity during the movement.
Consider a bench press, starting from a lock out position. To initiate the movement, you slightly relax your arms and let gravity accelerate the bar toward your chest. Let’s say the bar weighs 200 lbs. If you resist the bar with 190 pounds, then the net force for acceleration of the bar is only 10 lbs, and it will move pretty slowly. If you resist the bar with 100 pounds, the net force for acceleration is 100 lbs, and it will move much faster. To get the fastest eccentric possible, you would just relax your arms completely (zero force) and let the full weight of the bar accelerate toward your chest.
Now this creates 2 problems:
To get the shortest and fastest eccentric, you need to reduce the force you are applying to the bar. But that doesn’t duplicate the isokinetic case, where you are able to apply full force over the full range of motion while the machinery forces rapid movement. Instead, you are forced to use less resistance, at least during the initial part of the movement, in order to generate the speed that you need. How does that compromise the exercise value?
You have to be able to stop the movement at the end. So there you are lying on the bench, this heavy bar accelerating toward your chest. Do you let it slam into your chest at full velocity? Do you use safety pins and let the bar slam into those? That would make a hell of a lot of noise and not be good for the equipment. More likely you will, during the second half of the movement, apply more force than the bar weight to deaccelerate the bar. So if you applied 100 lbs of force initially to allow gravity to accelerate the bar quickly, you will have to apply 300 lbs of resistance during the latter part of the rep in order to bring the bar to a complete stop. So at the bottom half, you can achieve high loads at high velocity. But can you do it with enough control to avoid injury? At best, you experience a highly variable load: low during the first half, high during the second half of the movement.
I should note that there is an academic paper written years ago to look at the kinematics and dynamics of bench pressing. They happened to be conducting a series of measurements at a power lifting competition, and recorded data on a bench press attempt when Larry Pacifico torn his pec. The data shows exactly the scenario I outlined above: he let the bar drop too fast on the eccentric, and the force that he had to exert during the bottom half of the movement significantly exceeded the bar weight and caused him to tear his pec.
The main reason you need to control eccentric speed in most barbell movements is safety: you need to avoid creating an overloaded condition at the lower turnaround, where you have to deaccelerate a moving weight and execute a reversal of direction.
For the record, not comparing myself to bodybuilders, but average 62 year old shopping at WalMart, so that means I ROCK! lol
autilus Duo Leg Press… experiment with akinetic with weight stack low to keep aggressive negative cam at bay. Worth trying again, but I would bring seat in closer
Nautilus Pullover 30 “10” 30 a la latest Darden neg accent
Nautilus Leg Curls Jreps as per Brian Johnston/Andrew Shortt followed by rest pause after just holding tension in machine for 30 sec as per Doug(s) McGuff/Holland
Nautilus 40 degree chest 10-5 SS (probably faster on negative) as this machine has excessive friction.
Nautilus Torso Arm with MAG narrow grip with OMNI holds as per Darden
This resembles law-abiding behaviour, which I have professionally encountered. For your information I don’t put as much prestige into this matter as you seem to do. Go on HIT-ting me - but more important - Go your own way.
On a lighter note, it would be more interesting to hear more about your personal routine. Then we would have something serious to talk about. How do you apply your scientific findings into your routine? Have you noticed any progress (compared to your previous experiences)?
I Everyone that I have ever seen with my own eyeballs that was muscular lifted heavier weights than average trainees.
== Scott ==
Wow what a bold statement. Muscular guys lifted heavier weight than Average trainees ? An average trainee is generally some clod who can barely lift anything. Next you’ll be telling us guys in the Olympia are benching more than the average guy on this forum!
I see no issue with fast eccentrics. Fast eccentrics are not plyometrics
== Scott ==
Please show us how you use fast eccentrics in a workout set . Are your sets like the fellow earlier in this thread who has benching roughly 400 lbs 15 times?
Having read the well-written scientific article by Osborn, I am wondering what the research in this field has come up with since 2013? Any consensus?
Personally, am surprised to find criticism against slow eccentrics, since I have found them superior to any other form of cadence I have tried over the years. There must be multiple answers to this question, as well as unproven mechanisms at work?
It’s a bit sad that atp_4_me made this a personal agenda, since I had looked forward to more neutral analysis from his point of view. Even more interesting to hear his own layout of excercise.
It’s a bit sad that atp_4_me made this a personal agenda, since I had looked forward to more neutral analysis from his point of view. Even more interesting to hear his own layout of excercise.
=== Scott===
I didn’t see that you had insulted him in any way ? I think he’s over sensitive . I’ve found even when I agree with him he sometimes comes back at me in a negative way. He’s not the easiest person to deal with.
to 
will muddy the waters.