Always Check the Sources!
I came across an article today by Dinis Antonio, "Static Contraction and Strength Training".
Now, we've all seen these books claiming to be based on original "scientific research" and the latest "knowledge" etc. They're a dime a dozen (or should be!). Someone recently (I think it was Bakkily) mentioned buying a book by John R. Little called Max Contraction Training (I think). This is one such book. Now, here is an excerpt from the article, which talks about a "study". Quote:
That was the original book written by John Little and Peter Sisco. It was their "research". Of COURSE this was the data they got. They were writing a book on static contraction training. The conclusions of the book were based on nothing more than there 'research study" which was most likely done via long distance monitoring of subjects, btw. The only other published data was something from 1953 and was done on forearms and a spring device. There was, conveniantly, no mention that this study produced changes in full-range strength. It was done on forearms, for God's sake. Yes, I have the book, there is a place near my house where you can get free books and donate books. I am able to pick up all sorts of crap like this for free. I'm glad I didn't pay for it. There seems to be no other footnotes in the entire book. But there sure are plenty of charts and photos of huge bodybuilders. I am not posting this, however, to say that you can't get any benefits from satic holds. The point is the article like this one from Antonio which makes such a giant leap based on one book and the so-called results of a study done by it's authors. These kinds of articles are all over the place. Doesn't any one ever tell these writers you need more than one source to support your primary consclusions (yes, the article mentions two or three others, but they are not supporting to the primary consclusions, but supplementary). My point? Check the sources. And don't be easily taken in by articles such as these. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. |
Sounded like a cocktail of Muscle-Tech, with a dash of BSN (for flavoring).. :D
|
Quote:
BTW, I have some less, um....biased info on the subject at hand. It's a pdf that I'm having trouble loading as an attachment. It wasn't really the point of this thread, but in case someone cares, if I can't load it I'll at least summarize it. And keep in mind that I was talking about the issue of strength transfer, not hypertrophic gains. Nothing wrong with a static hold (or isometric hold or whatever) to finish out a set, etc. |
1 Attachment(s)
Here is that study form Journal of Exercise Phsiology online as a Word document:
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:39 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.