View Single Post
 
Old 08-17-2006, 11:21 AM
EricT EricT is offline
Rank: Heavyweight
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,314
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardgain
the problem I had with the complexes was that it didnt allow for use of optimal wieghts. From what i remember some of the movements were full range. So I would have to drop the wieghts inorder to complete the move. This would be the same problem I had with doing high reps.
Oh, absolutely. That's why I said "In complexes you use one weight for an entire complex. So maybe not so good for maximal strength endurance." What I'm thinking from all this is maybe a cycling that combines ME strength with the type of strength endurance training and the type of body conditioning that complexes achieve would be great.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardgain
To be honest I dont see the logic. It will keep strength up, and then you get some endurance work. What I want is to be able to hit as hard as possible, for as long as possible. For that reason I will look more toward the RP variant I was talking about earlier on his forum.
I agree. Something always has to give. Now what Dave said about being the strongest is certainly a big advantage. But strength endurance and overall conditioning has got to be SO important for when that superior power is not able to come into play. Makes me think of someone like Royce Gracie. You saw him with guys with big knockout power or with guys with just more strength who were able to resist for a certain time just with overall brute force. But that superior strength endurance is like a steam locomotive; slow but unstoppable. Either you knock it clean off the tracks or it keeps moving forward.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardgain
Eric, As for the sample movements in Wiggins article, I dont think that is even near the workout I will be doing. Give me some time to post up what I am thinking of doing, then critique me. I have a feeling its gonna look a lot diff then wiggins.
I look forward to it. And I wasn't making ANY assumptions about what you plan to do! Just putting it out there. I didn't think you were planning on following his examples verbatim or anything. Heck, I wasn't even talking about wiggins specifically, just the type of things in general I see, and no reflection on you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave
I love this. We agree it's just we come at it from different views. That's why I love this board.
Yup!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave
And with the bench press example you give, I guess what I meant to say was if you build overall S-E or just strength, you can apply it when you train MA...'m the strongest guy there
No doubt of that! And I certainly wasn't trying to say that you must not be able to apply any of your strength! Another thing is there is only so much training you can do. Of course I recognize that. But as to my point about specificity I'll try to give a specific example. Say you want to as much strength as possible to throw your opponent. What, in the end, is going to be the best? A clean and jerk or a deadlift, whether DE, ME or both....OR, a movement utilizing heavy weight that more closely mimics throwing, including the twisting and things like that? I vote the latter. I'm not saying that it's possible to mimic every single movement, etc. and so on, but it serves to illustrate the point.

And thinking about your point about supplementals. I've seen some weird results in studies that show JUST how specific the body can be. There was one utilizing EMG and MV something (mecancal vibration something or other) on trained and untrained subject doing olympic squats and weighted leg (knee) extensions. What was interesting is that while the subjects doing squats AND leg extensions got stronger in the squats, there was no increase in the leg extension. AND the quads got bigger. It's just that the CNS didn't become more effecient in the leg extension excercise. The bigger quads were just useless slabs of meat when it came to increasing strength in the extensions...as if the body pulled all it's resources into improving effeciency in the more demanding squat movement. You see what I'm saying? Stronger quads from squats did not seem to transfer to leg extensions at all, even though the same muscle group was utilized (yes, olympic squats are not all quads but it's in there).

I think what I'm saying comes down to a statement by James Smith: "Fighters are best served by thinking in terms of training movements, as opposed to training muscles."
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
or
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


If you act sanctimonious I will just list out your logical fallacies until you get pissed off and spew blasphemous remarks.

Last edited by EricT; 08-17-2006 at 11:36 AM.
Reply With Quote