Go Back   Bodybuilding.net - Bodybuilding Forum > >

New member here

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-26-2005, 09:35 AM
Darkhorse Darkhorse is offline
Rank: Light Heavyweight
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 4,174
Send a message via Yahoo to Darkhorse

Bloomer RJ & Ives JC 2002. Varying Neural and Hypertrophic Influences in a Strength Program. Strength and Conditioning Journal 22(2): 3035.

Most of these are found in Pubmed

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

I can be found at
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2005, 09:39 AM
Darkhorse Darkhorse is offline
Rank: Light Heavyweight
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 4,174
Send a message via Yahoo to Darkhorse

"It takes two years to meet your genetic potential??"

A link to one at pubmed:

The full text is in the February 2004 issue of the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research as it states. I can post most it if you'd like to see. They reference 63 studies in it.

Of the 39 studies they used, 21 studies showed single sets "Until Failure" as opposed to "just fatigue" or whatever. Even though over half the studies used HIT style principles, multiple sets still won out.

In case anyone is wondering, I'm bored and think this board would benefit more from seeing two completely oposite point of views...

In one corner, hailing from Kentucky, Mr...........1,000 members!! :(

In the other corner, hailing from Boston Massachusetts, 00000hhhh threeeee eeelevennnnn!

Last edited by Darkhorse; 07-26-2005 at 09:47 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2005, 09:51 AM
Darkhorse Darkhorse is offline
Rank: Light Heavyweight
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 4,174
Send a message via Yahoo to Darkhorse

This one everyone will LOVE!!!!

Frederick C. Hatfield, Ph.D., International Sports Sciences Association

To avoid being HIT with a HAMMER, I feel compelled to make these two important disclaimers before I begin writing:

As long as whatever form of training you're using doesn't hurt you, it's "good." Even if it keeps you from achieving your maximum potential, it's better than no training at all. So, on a scale of good, better, best, training according to the tenets of HIT theory is "good."
As long as whatever type of training equipment you're using doesn't hurt you, it's "good." Even if it keeps you from achieving your maximum potential, it's better than no training equipment at all. So, on a scale of good, better, best, training with Hammer equipment is "good."
Now, my tongue-in-cheek inclusion of the good folks at the Hammer equipment welding facility is merely that: Tongue-in-cheek. Actually, Hammer's inventor was none other than Arthur Jones. His son took over the company and made Hammer equipment a success story. So much so, in fact, that Life Fitness bought the company! The point is that Hammer, like Nautilus (Arthur's first foray into the wonderful world of weights), is frequently touted as the equipment of choice for the Hit Men. Me? I like BOTH companies' equipment no more or less than I like the rest of them. In fact, each has some unique merits, as do many others.
Recall the seven laws of weight training from most sport scientists' perspectives. Here they are:

The Law of Individual Differences: We all have different abilities and weaknesses, and we all respond differently (to a degree) to any given system of training. These differences should be taken into consideration when designing your training program.
The Overcompensation Principle: Mother Nature overcompensates for training stress by giving you bigger and stronger muscles.
The Overload Principle: To make Mother Nature overcompensate, you must stress your muscles beyond what they're already used to.
The SAID Principle: The acronym for "Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demands."
The Use/Disuse Principle: "Use it or lose it" means that your muscles hypertrophy with use and atrophy with disuse.
The GAS Principle: The acronym for General Adaptation Syndrome, this law states that there must be a period of low intensity training or complete rest following periods of high intensity training.
The Specificity Principle: You'll get stronger at squats by doing squats as opposed to leg presses, and you'll get greater endurance for the marathon by running long distances than you will by (say) cycling long distances.
Many of the current "systems" of training offer nothing new, and they often violate one or more of the seven "grand daddy" laws. If you are to understand my critique of HIT theory (below), you will have to be familiar with the seven laws. I recommend that you re-read the article on these laws if the synopsis above isn't enough.

HIT History
It all started back in the early seventies with Arthur Jones of Nautilus fame. Arthur's chief mission, of course, was to sell equipment. His marketing plan was brilliant. My interpretation of his plan was that in order to sell his equipment (which for the day was quite expensive) he had to create a religion for the masses. To create a religion he needed 1) churches, 2) disciples, 3) a bible, and 4) clergy.
A scientist (Ellington Darden) inspired by God (Jones) wrote his bible, and (much later) a strength coach named "Moses" Matt Brzycki put the Ten Commandments from that bible into lay language. The Ten Commandments are presented below.
Then he paid a bunch of guys to follow the gospel (their test results were later incorporated into the bible). Later, a chosen few of them became his disciples.
The churches came next (Nautilus gyms sprang up all over the place... most are dead now, their respective flocks having flown the coop upon realizing that they were not making it to the promised land quickly enough -- in my humble opinion).
His clergymen (gym owners) LOVED Arthur because he had really neat looking equipment and a way for them to rustle their clients in the front door and out the back real fast by convincing them that one set to failure was "the way."
To support the notion that HIT is a Pagan religion, let me quote the word as it is written in the HIT page of the internet by one of his high priests, Matt Brzycki:
"To some--including me--Jones was years ahead of his time and full of brilliant, revolutionary ideas about exercise; to others, he was the devil incarnate. One thing that everyone seems to agree upon was that he was abrasive, outspoken and brutally candid."
Old timers like me recall that the most popular movies of the day were 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea and The Time Machine. Arthur got the name "Nautilus" from one movie (his offset cam, copied from German physical therapy equipment of the mid 1800s, looked like a cross-sectioned conch shell), and the design from the other movie (his first machines were curiously reminiscent of the "Time Machine").

Yes. Arthur's business plan was brilliant, and it was carried out even moreso. It's no wonder that the religion has persisted to this day, so stauchly converted were his disciples.

Meet some of the HIT Disciples:
There is a small (but utterly vocal) band of Arthur Jones disciples who have, since the early seventies, clung desperately to the oft discredited notion that one high intensity set to failure is all you need to achieve your maximum potential in growing stronger or bigger. In fact, the contemporary biblical interpretation (below) admits that one may profit from three sets, although one set is just as good as three. I say "desperately" for good reason. These guys (who like to call each other "HIT Jedi") invested their hearts and souls (and, quite often, funds from their respective organizations) in the superiority of both Jones' equipment and his theories on how best to use it. Others have been or are "sponsored" by Arthur. It almost seems as if they are afraid of losing face (if not their jobs) if they were to back away from the tenets of the HIT theory now, despite the huge volume of scientific studies discrediting many of its tenets.
From a social-psychological view, it's utterly fascinating to watch the HIT men scramble. It brings to mind the great movie, "Lord of the Flies," in which a bunch of shipwrecked boys, left to their own devices, created a sort of Pagan society amongst themselves. Some of the Jedi who are more vocal than most, having written many passionate articles or books on their own cute little variants of the old Jones theory, bear mention. How they refer to each other as "Jedi" (which, I'm assured, means "priest") is yet more proof that HIT is a Pagan religion. I must say, however, I admire their zeal for lifting (albeit at a sub-par level)!

Meaning to cast no dispersion on these well-meaning gentlemen by identifying them to the readership of this website, and acknowledging that not all those listed may care to admit to, and in fact vehemently deny their Pagan beliefs (until after the cock crows), here they are in alphabetical order (this is neither an exhaustive listing, nor is it mine -- it came from their web site):

Matt Brzycki (strength coach at Princeton University);
Ellington Darden, Ph.D. (Jones' longtime science advisor);
Ken Leistner, D.C. (New York chiro who runs a gym there);
Ken Mannie (strength coach at Michigan State);
Stuart McRobert (publishes a "Hardgainer" newsletter);
Mike Mentzer (now deceased, former bodybuilder who fabricated his own "Heavy Duty" interpretation of Arthur's disproved tenets);
Dan Riley (strength coach of the Washington Redskins);
Rob Spector (keeper of a HIT web site); and
Wayne Westcott, Ph.D. (a YMCA fitness director)
Kim Wood (strength coach of the Cincinnati Bengals)
The Jedi also claim as disciples, bodybuilding converts such as Dorian Yates, Ray Mentzer and Casey Viator.
Just as Protestants split from Rome, some Jedi have gone their own way to create their own denominations of the HIT religion. The religious wrinkles provided by the various denominations after their split from Rome are quite interesting reading. I mentioned Mike Mentzer's "Heavy Duty" system of training in a previous article in this series -- really no different than HIT with a few funky (read: "mystical") wrinkles added.
There's also the "Superslow" system created by the Protestant HIT Jedi Ken Hutchins, who actually provides a fitness trainer certification in his system (which can be yours for as little as $495.00). His peculiar wrinkle to HIT theory has to do with friction. Says he:

"When you pull a trigger on a rifle or gun, you're supposed to pull with a slow, steady squeeze to the rear - if you jerk the trigger than the shot will be off. Same thing when lifting weights - each repetition should be a slow, steady squeeze of the muscle with no jerking.

"...if an exercise has little friction, it's better to use a longer negative as you don't get the "partial respite" that you would from an exercise with lots of friction."

Utter nonsense, of course...a topic for a future article, I'm afraid (space constraints, you know). Now I'd like to introduce you to the HIT commandments and some pointed comments on each relative to the seven grand daddy laws.

The Ten HIT Commandments according to Jedi Brzycki:
1. Train With A High Level Of Intensity.
"Intensity," according to HIT dogma, "relates to the degree of the "inroads"--or amount of fatigue--you've made into your muscle at any given instant. In the weight room, a high level of intensity is characterized by performing an exercise to the point of concentric muscular failure: when you've exhausted your muscles to the extent that you literally cannot raise the weight for any more repetitions. Failure to reach a desirable level of intensity--or muscular fatigue--will result in little or no gains in functional strength or muscular size. After reaching concentric muscular failure, you can increase the intensity even further by performing 3 to 5 additional post-fatigue repetitions. These post-fatigue reps may be either negatives or regressions and will allow you to overload your muscles in a safe, efficient manner."

There is no question that going to failure can constitute a more "intense" workout. But, in the real world -- in the gym -- intensity is so much more than that. Webster defines intensity as having or showing the characteristic of strength, force, straining, or (relative to a bodybuilder's focal point) other aspects of his or her effort to a maximum degree. The words intense and intent both have the same Latin root, intendere "to stretch out." If one is intent on doing something, he does so, by definition, with strained or eager attention -- with concentration! That intensity of effort is largely a function of the mind is not this writer's opinion. It is true by definition as well as by practical usage of the word! "Intensity" is increased by:

amplification of mental effort -- getting "psyched"
approaching your training with a burning passion, as though it were your LIFE
adding reps
adding weight (this is the common definition of intensity)
decreasing rest between reps
decreasing rest between sets
increasing the number of exercises per body part
increasing the total number of exercises or body parts trained at one session
increasing the number of training sessions per day
increasing the speed of movement
increasing the amount of work done at the anaerobic threshold (maximum pain tolerance)
increasing the amount of eccentric work your muscles are required to perform.
Perhaps most importantly, going to failure is NOT a prerequisite to adaptation!
The SAID Principle is violated by the first commandment of HIT. Their idea is to go to failure all the time, but certain "specific" training objectives mitigate against it (e.g., speed training). And, the GAS Principle, which states that there must be a period of low intensity training or complete rest following periods of high intensity training, is violated. These guys go to failure all the time!

Last edited by Darkhorse; 07-26-2005 at 11:05 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2005, 09:51 AM
Darkhorse Darkhorse is offline
Rank: Light Heavyweight
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 4,174
Send a message via Yahoo to Darkhorse

2. Attempt To Increase The Resistance Used Or The Repetitions Performed Every Workout.
"...every time you work out you should attempt to increase either the weight you use or the repetitions you perform in relation to your previous workout. This can be viewed as a "double progressive" technique (resistance and repetitions). Challenging your muscles in this manner will force them to adapt to the imposed demands (or stress)."

The SAID Principle is violated. Sometimes, lighter weights done rapidly is required. And sometimes heavier weights done for 3 reps is required. (If your training requires that you go to failure with a weight that's so heavy you can only do three reps, you are BEGGING for a MAJOR injury if that takes you to failure!) The GAS Principle is also violated. Alternating periods of high versus low intensity is a better way to go. If you wait until total recovery is accomplished in any given muscle, atrophy place.

3. Perform 1 To 3 Sets Of Each Exercise.
"...numerous research studies -- which I once again am probably viewed as dreaming up--have shown that there are no significant differences when performing either one, two or three sets of an exercise..."

Yep! You're dreaming pal! Dr. Richard Berger (my mentor during my doctoral studies at Temple) years ago showed that there IS a significant improvement in gains with three sets as opposed to one. Other studies have shown the same results. Nowadays, many athletes (bodybuilders included) do as many as 10 or more sets. Even Arthur Jones --the original HIT man --showed that people with white, fast-twitch muscles require fewer reps, sets and workouts per week than people with predominantly red, slow-twitch muscles.

Apparently, all HIT men are white muscle fiber guys? I think not! So, while none of the seven laws are violated here, some (especially the overload principle and the SAID principle) are not being applied to their maximum potential.

4. Reach Concentric Muscular Failure Within A Prescribed Number Of Repetitions.
"Repetition ranges differ from body part to body part and from coach to coach. In the course of training hundreds of collegiate athletes over the past eleven years, these are the ranges I usually assign: 15 to 20 (hip exercises), 10 to 15 (leg exercises) and 6 to 12 (upper body exercises). Other HIT strength coaches are pretty much in that neighborhood, with a few electing slightly lower ranges but not less than six."

Woah! You guys should be blushing on this one! The SAID principle is quite specific in recognizing that not everyone is alike. Not everyone responds in the same way to any given rep/set scheme. Look again at my response to Commandment Three.

5. Perform Each Repetition With Proper Technique.
"A quality rep is performed by raising and lowering the weight in a deliberate, controlled manner. Lifting a weight in a rapid, explosive fashion is ill-advised for two reasons: (1) it exposes your muscles, joint structures and connective tissue to potentially dangerous forces which magnify the likelihood of an injury while strength training, and (2) it introduces momentum into the movement which makes the exercise less productive and less efficient. Lifting a weight in about 1 to 2 seconds will guarantee that you're exercising in a safe, efficient manner. It should take about 3 to 4 seconds to lower the weight back to the starting/stretched position."

First, I grow weary of the HIT business of being "safe." Where in the book does it say that going slow and deliberate with a heavy weight is safer? I think otherwise. And, certainly, these slow, deliberate movements are not as effective as other methods in many instances. SOME reps are well performed in the manner described above. However, this commandment clearly disregards the importance of cheating movements, explosive lifting (e.g., the Olympic lifts), and many other techniques of lifting. Further, slow, deliberate movements are nowhere NEAR as effective for forcing an adaptive response in connective tissues as are more explosive (and yes, often "ballistic") movements. So much for their claim to "safety!" Deinhibition of the Golgi tendon organ's protective feedback loop can be moved back far more effectively with controlled ballistic movements than with slow, deliberate movements. Clearly, this commandment is in violation of the Overcompensation, Specificity and SAID principles.

6. Strength Train For No More Than One Hour Per Workout.
"If you are training with a high level of intensity--and you should--you literally cannot exercise for a long period of time. ...Training with a minimal amount of recovery time between exercises will elicit a metabolic conditioning effect that cannot be approached by traditional multiple set programs. Don't ask me why cause I've been makin' all this stuff up as I go along."

Ol' Jedi Brzycki continues to put his sandalled foot on top of his golden tongue. Here, I think (one can't really tell) he's claiming that doing one set of squats, then one set of benches, then one set of pulldowns, then one set of curls, and one set of 3, 4, 5 or so additional exercises, and you're outta the gym. C'mon!

Clearly, this commandment is in violation of the Overcompensation, Specificity and SAID principles. Re-read my response to Commandment Three. People are DIFFERENT!

7. Emphasize The Major Muscle Groups.
"The focal point for most of your exercises should be your major muscle groups (i.e. your hips, legs and upper torso)."

Oh? Have we lost sight of training weaknesses first? Bodybuilders know this instinctively. Most athletes do as well. Clearly, this commandment is in violation of the Specificity and SAID principles.

8. Whenever Possible, Work Your Muscles From Largest To Smallest.
"Exercise your hips first, then go to your legs (hams, quads and calves or dorsi flexors), upper torso (chest, upper back and shoulders), arms (biceps, triceps and forearms), abs and finally your low back."

Duhhhhh! Am I missing something? In the Eighth Commandment, you told us NOT to focus on smaller muscles! In addition to violating one of your own commandments, this commandment is in violation of the Specificity and SAID principles.

9. Strength Train 2 To 3 Times Per Week On Nonconsecutive Days.
"...a period of about 48 to 72 hours is necessary for muscle tissue to recover sufficiently from a strength workout. A period of at least 48 hours is also required to replenish your depleted carbohydrate stores. ...Performing any more than three sessions a week can gradually become counterproductive due to a catabolic effect. This occurs when the demands you have placed on your muscles have exceeded you recovery ability. Recovery time is adequate if you continue making gains."

Sometimes 48-72 hours is sufficient, and sometimes it's not. Depending upon the muscle involved it may be less or it may be more. Remember:

Big muscles take longer to recover than smaller ones
Fast twitch muscles (your "explosive" muscles) take longer to recover than slow twitch muscle fibers ("endurance" muscles);
Guys recover faster than girls;
You recover faster from slow movements than from fast movements;
You recover faster from low intensity training than from high intensity training.
The older you get, the longer it takes to recover
By carbohydrate stores, do you mean glycogen? Not 48 hours...something closer to 2 or 3 hours!
I, and every athlete I've ever trained, often trained twice a day! The Russian athletes do, the Bulgarian weightlifters train 3-6 times a day! And, even if there were (as Bryzcki put it) a "catabolic" effect, wouldn't that call for a "periodized approach to training?

Grand daddy laws violated with this one are the SAID, GAS and Specificity Principles.

10. Keep Accurate Records Of Your Performance.
"Records are a log of what you've accomplished during each and every strength session. Record keeping can be an extremely valuable tool to monitor progress and make your workouts more meaningful. It can also be used to identify exercises in which a plateau has been reached."

OK. I'll give the HIT men this one.

On the other hand, HIT folk will have to use their logs to refer back more often than other (non-HIT) trainees. They're bound to be hitting plateaus a lot more than others.

Jedi Bryzcki ended his "Sermon On The Web" with these words:

"Don't be misled by the brevity or simplicity of a program that calls for one set of an exercise done with a high level of intensity. Strength Coach Ken Mannie has stated that HIT is "the most productive, most efficient and without a doubt, the most demanding form of strength training known to man [and woman]." Of course, I read that in Nautilus magazine. And Mannie was drunk at the time."

Need I say more?


HIT Jedi Matt Brzycki posted these gems in the HIT Web Site:
"...HIT received a lot of attention--and created quite a controversial maelstrom--in 1970 with the publication of numerous articles written by Nautilus founder Arthur Jones. Although Jones didn't invent HIT, there's no question that he certainly was the one who popularized it and formally suggested guidelines and principles for its use.

"Jones has mellowed with age but I got some laughs a few months ago when I saw him insult a group of unsuspecting sportsmedicine people with his trademark brash comments and demeanor. Anyway .

"...what was seen was rarely a pretty sight. In fact, it was kinda ugly. Rarely were more than two sets of an exercise performed--and never more than three. You really couldn't do much more anyway. The level of intensity suggested by Jones was performing each exercise to the point of muscular failure.

"If you were too exhausted to crawl--which was sometimes the case--you were physically grabbed and dragged to the next exercise. Jones' opinion of an acceptable level of intensity might best be summed up with one of his many colorful quotes: "Have you ever vomited as a result of doing one set of [biceps] curls? If not, then you simply don't know what hard work is. Ahh, those were the days."

Last edited by Darkhorse; 07-26-2005 at 11:08 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2005, 01:31 PM
Darkhorse Darkhorse is offline
Rank: Light Heavyweight
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 4,174
Send a message via Yahoo to Darkhorse

HIT....... or Miss?
By: Louie Simmons

Many readers may not realize that I am involved in the training of pro-football teams and many college football and basketball teams. For example, the Kansas City Jayhawks and Utah Utes are heavily influenced by our training as it relates to speed strength. Two of the pro- football teams are the Green Bay Packers and the New England Patriots. Not a bad group to be associated with, huh? I also talk to a head strength coach that has been affiliated with a winning tradition in the NFL who tells me, although he is ashamed to admit it, that he has linemen coming into the league that can't vertical jump 19 inches or squat 300 pounds. He related to me that these players are from "high-intensity training" (H.I.T.) schools and that this type of weight program is making his job next to impossible.
A pro-lineman told me while I was at their camp that when he was placed on the H. I.T. program in college, his team was the top 5th school his senior year. He thought he was strong until the combines. When he got only 12 repetitions with 225 pounds, he was embarrassed. He was picked by a pro-team that utilized our training and that has an excellent strength coach. In 2 years this lineman did 17 reps with 315 pounds. He made a remark that machines and H.I.T. were useless. This got back to his old college team, who immediately banned him for life from their weight room. Gee, what a pity.
At Westside, we thought we would do some research on H.I.T. So Dave Tate and myself looked into this, I must say, misguided method. What is their viewpoint? Where was their research taken from? Why is it loved by some and despised by others?
First let's look at the concept of intensity. Apparently H.I.T. views it as a feeling, like a pump, a term bodybuilders made popular. Is it a scientific term? No. Is a bodybuilder quick or explosive? No. If you know a converted bodybuilder who powerlifts, he almost always lifts well under what he appears to be able to do. Why? He has trained only the muscle, not the central nervous system. That is why smaller ball players are almost always faster and many times stronger based on percent of bodyweight. Bodybuilders develop no reversal strength or starting or accelerating strength. Any sport coach will tell you that acceleration is paramount in sports.
A. S. Prilepin suggested that to achieve the proper intensity, one should use the rep/set scheme shown in the table, to ensure the greatest development of speed and strength. He discovered that if 7 or more reps were performed at 70%, the bar speed slowed and power decreased. The same holds true when using 80% or 90%; once one goes above the rep range shown, the bar slows, which translates to less power. Doing fewer or more lifts than Prilepin suggests will cause a decrease in training effect.

Number of Reps for Percent Training:
Percent Reps per set Optimal Total Range
55-65 3-6 24 18-30
70-75 3-6 18 12-24
80-85 2-4 15 10-20
90+ 1-2 7 4-10

Along the same parameters are the findings of Dr. Tamas Ajan and Prof. Lazar Baroga. They describe the zones of intensity as follows: 30 to 50% is low intensity; for speed-oriented sports; 50 to 85% is medium intensity; for force-oriented sports such as weightlifting; 85 to 95% is high intensity, for weightlifting and other sports; 1 00% and above is maximum and over-maximum Intensity, for the development of absolute strength.
Most authors who have studied strength as a physical quality examine it in four forms: absolute, speed, explosive, and strength endurance. The latter, strength endurance is basically all the H.I.T. program can possibly build. Strength endurance is characterized by a combination of great strength and significant endurance. It is needed by athletes who must compete for a prolonged period of time (3 to 4 hours) without diminished work capacity.
Well H.I.T. may increase endurance, but it does not promote great strength; in fact, it eliminates it completely by neglecting the other three elements of strength: absolute, speed, and explosive.
Dave Caster showed me an interesting paper, Strength, Power and Speed in Shot Put Training, by Dr. Poprawski, Director of the Sport High Performance Institute in Toronto and former coach of world shot put champion Edward Sarul. First, Poprawski realized the importance of intensity zones as described by Prilepin and the importance of using one weight percentage per workout. For example, weights of 50 to 75% were used for training speed and power. Much like our training, this training is based on a true max of, let's say, 500,600, or 700 pounds. Poprawski realized that a shot put always weighs 16 pounds; therefore he found that it was best to use one weight for a particular workout and to focus on increasing bar velocity rather than heavier weight to increase power. What was the key element for success? Speed, speed, and more speed.
Sarul was tested against other superior throwers, and while some could lift more weight, he was far ahead in tests of bar speed during the snatch and squats of 1 and 3 reps. His advantage in speed and the development of power was directly achieved by increasing bar speed, while the others fell behind from lifting too slowly. What does this tell us? Fast is good; slow is second team.
H.I.T. proponents use a lot of machines. This is truly a mistake. No stability can be developed. Most machines work on the peak contraction theory. Let's look at the pec machine. If you load a pec machine to the max, starting the movement requires a max effort, which is very difficult and dangerous. Yet at the finish, where the most weight can be lifted because of accommodating resistance, machines show their downfall.
More importantly, let's consider the strength curve. Take the case of two 700-pound deadlifters. One may blast the weight off the floor to near lockout and then fight the last 3 to 4 inches. The second may have difficulty starting the bar off the floor, pick up speed, and lockout easily. What does this illustrate? In the real world of strength these two lifters have quite different strength curves. If these same two lifters were to use a machine, only one would receive any benefit from that machine, because the machine has a predetermined strength curve. That's a 50% chance the machine won't work for you. Also, a machine will not build stability. The only good thing about a facility full of machines is that the instructor could be a moron and it won't make any difference.

Last edited by Darkhorse; 07-26-2005 at 03:50 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2005, 05:37 PM
ttwarrior1 ttwarrior1 is offline
Rank: New Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: western kentucky
Posts: 18

most dont even know what mentzer hit is. Like did you know he generally recommends 4 up and 4 down training
Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2005, 06:02 PM
Darkhorse Darkhorse is offline
Rank: Light Heavyweight
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 4,174
Send a message via Yahoo to Darkhorse

Wow, I did all this work and that's my response. That falls in line with an estimated 50% of HIT trainer's not knowing what they are teaching. The dark side of the force is weak in this one.
Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2005, 06:29 PM
WantingMuscle7's Avatar
WantingMuscle7 WantingMuscle7 is offline
Rank: Bantamweight
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: PA
Posts: 686

I think anyone who were to read this would go with the light side.
Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2005, 06:52 PM
verbatimreturned verbatimreturned is offline
Rank: Lightweight
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: new york
Posts: 1,372

the dark side of the force lmfao
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2005, 07:12 AM
joeyboy777 joeyboy777 is offline
Rank: Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 213


Attached Images
File Type: jpg 0311.jpg (37.6 KB, 48 views)

Last edited by joeyboy777; 08-04-2005 at 07:21 AM.
Reply With Quote

  Bodybuilding.net - Bodybuilding Forum > >

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Thread Tools
Display Modes


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:18 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.