-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. Re: Joe Venier's BLAH BLAH BLAH - from Joe Venier
Top
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 19:46:23 -0700 From: "Joe Venier" <jvenier@zdnetmail.com> Subject: Re: Joe Venier's BLAH BLAH BLAH James Wrote: >Why? 1 RM is a test of maximal strength. I conduct a study that compares a protocol of 3 x 8 RM to a >protocol that implements a gradual increase in >intensity (let's say, 10 RM down to 1 RM) over 12 >weeks. I test 1 RM before the protocol begins and then after it is done. If the second group makes a >better improvement in 1 RM over the first group, then the second group had better strength gains, period. >I don't see what is so "bull" >about that. Comparing someone doing 8's to someone who PRACTICES the performance of lower reps before a 1-RM TEST is like comparing apples to oranges and IS BULL. No, they don't necessarily have better strength gains. They are better prepared to demonstrate strength FOR THE TEST. How about this... Have two 8 week periods. The first 8 weeks have one group go 8 to 1. Have the other do 1-2 sets of 8 HIT style with double progression. Then, immediately after another 8 week period is performed. The first group does the same protocol, and the second group also does the same protocol (8 reps to a 1-RM over 8 weeks). Then compare the results after the 16 weeks. By your reasoning, the group that stuck with 8-1 should have better strength as tested by the 1-RM at the end of 16 weeks? Comparing 3 sets of 8 versus a group going from 10 to 1 is like having a group practice free throws from three feet beyond the free throw line and another group practice AT the free throw line. And, then comparing results. DOY! That's all I have to say on this subject...since I think it is OBVIOUS. It's about as ludicrous as a football coach using 1-RM's as a gauge for the effectiveness of a strength training program. DOUBLE DOY! JV
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. SuperSlow rep speed modification? - from Kdragon9@aol.com
Top
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 00:35:56 EDT From: Kdragon9@aol.com Subject: SuperSlow rep speed modification? I just started using a Superslow rep speed (10/5) during my workouts and wondered if I should modify the rep speed given the equipment I have access to? (primarily free weights, a Smith Machine, 45 degree leg press, and seated calf raise) I guess Eric Deaton and myself should be in put in an NSCA sideshow because I too have noticed that my biceps burn like hell while performing the incline press with a SS rep speed. Ben
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. A simple question from a HITer - from Kdragon9@aol.com
Top
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 01:16:49 EDT From: Kdragon9@aol.com Subject: A simple question from a HITer Can somebody please tell me why someone who "KNOWS" HIT is worthless would bother conducting a study/lecture on it? Personal agenda maybe? [Be VERY careful with this line of questioning. --Rob]
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. Spot Reduction - from MSdfense51@aol.com
Top
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 19:14:29 EDT From: MSdfense51@aol.com Subject: Spot Reduction I was wondering about spot reducing my abdominal area. I know that the general consesus is that spot reduction is impossible, but what if i did some sort of circuit training workout for my abs, would that help me get ripped in my midsection? Does anyone have any other suggestions? Thanks, Mark
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. Vanadyl - from MSdfense51@aol.com
Top
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 19:21:09 EDT From: MSdfense51@aol.com Subject: Vanadyl Ok we all know that creatine works, but what else have you all tried? Does vanadyl sulfate work? Amino acid supplementation, such as glutamine? I am trying to pack on some mass before football starts and any help would be much appreciated. Thanks, Mark
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. Liftin' and losin' your lunch - from James Krieger
Top
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 13:05:39 -0700 From: "James Krieger" <jkrieger@wsu.edu> Subject: Liftin' and losin' your lunch I think every dude and dudette on this list, whether they like periodization, SS, HIT, POF, UFO, NATO, NASA, MADD, [....and if you think that's bad, you should see the company I'm doing work for now. They have over *3,000* acronyms. Blech. --Rob] or other training philosophy, will agree on one thing: results require effort. Nobody got anywhere with easy training. It takes damn hard work to reach your goals! However, what gets me are the people that claim that you have to feel sick, nauseated, dizzy, etc., to get results from training. The more intense the exercise feels, the better your results. If you ain't pukin', you ain't growin'. If you ain't dizzy, your muscles ain't busy (growin', that is). If you lost your lunch, your muscles will grow a bunch. If you lost your dinner, your muscles won't be gettin' thinner. If you're feelin' sick, your muscles will get thick. If you pass out, you will mass out. Well, you get my point. Hmmm. I smell bologna (how the hell is that word pronounced "B-A-L-O-N-E-E" anyway?). And I don't like bologna, either the taste or the smell! Let's compare two HIT programs: Program 1: Squats, bench press, chins, military press, barbell curls, stiff-legged deadlifts. Each exercise: 1-set to failure. No rest between exercises. Program 2: Same as Program 1 except 3 minutes rest between exercises. Time for T&A, err, I mean Q&A with Jimbo (Jimbo: "Webmaster, can I have a Q&A on Cyberpump?" Webmaster: "Yeah, and monkeys might fly out of my butt!"). Shoot, Joey. Joey: Which program is going to result in better strength gains??? Jimbo: NEITHER!!! Joey: Hey, but Program 1 definitely is a lot more intense than program 2! It'll probably make me sick and dizzy and vice versa! Shouldn't I get better strength gains because it's more intense? Jimbo: Hey, you might get better cardiovascular conditioning from Program 1, but as far as strength gains go, there ain't gonna be a difference between the 2 programs. Joey: Well, how come I feel so nauseated during Program 1 and not Program 2? Jimbo: Intense anaerobic exercise, like strength training, causes lactic acid to increase in muscle tissue. This lactic acid seeps out of the muscle and finds its way into the bloodstream. In the blood, this lactic acid ionizes, releasing positively charged hydrogen ions. This results in a drop in blood pH. Now, your body doesn't like changes in blood pH. It likes it to stay happily at a pH of 7.4. It has buffer systems to help resist this change in pH. However, intense exercise tends to overwhelm this buffer system. Intense exercise carried on for a few minutes can result in a drop in blood pH from 7.4 to 7.0. The lowest recorded value is 6.8; this level actually can be life-threatening if continued for more than a few minutes. When you take rests between exercises, blood pH is given a chance to be restored during the rest period. When you don't take rest between exercises, blood pH is not given a chance to be restored. As you progress from one exercise to the next, blood pH continues to fall to intolerable levels. This condition, known as acidosis, is what causes the sickness and nausea that is felt with such a program. However, blood acidosis has nothing to do with gains in muscular strength! Joey: Well, an article by Lazarus... Jimbo: What does the Bible have to do with strength training? Joey: Very funny. Anyway, Lazarus and Sutton say that a drop in blood pH causes growth hormone to be released! Hey, I've even got the reference. Sutton, J., and L. Lazarus. Growth hormone in exercise: comparison of physiological and pharmacological stimuli. J. Appl. Physiol. 41:523-527. 1976. Jimbo: Very good, Joey. Obi Wan has taught you well. Joey: Yeah, and Dr. Kraemer and his buddy Et Al have done a lot of research on post-training hormonal responses, and they think that exercise-induced acidosis is responsible for the large increase in growth hormone after a workout! So, Program 1 will give me better size gains because I get a larger growth hormone response after the workout than Program 2, since Program 1 creates a much greater drop in blood pH! Jimbo: Hold on, there, little camper. Joey, have you ever tried holding your breath or hyperventilating? Joey: Yep! I do it all the time! Jimbo: Uhhh, sure. I think you need to stop because you obviously don't get enough oxygen to your brain. Anyway, did you know that holding your breath or hyperventilating will cause acidosis? Joey: They do? Jimbo: Yep, and thus will cause a release in growth hormone. But Joey, did anyone every get big by holding their breath or hyperventilating? Joey: Ummmm, no. Jimbo: That's right, Joey. Just because you get an increase in growth hormone in the blood doesn't mean you'll get bigger or stronger. And that holds true with Dr. Kraemer's research as well. While his research is interesting, no one has established any link between the post-training growth hormone response and muscle hypertrophy, so his research doesn't mean too much as far as designing a strength training program goes. Joey: Hey! You know what that means? That means that any of these supplements that are supposed to increase blood levels of testosterone (like androstendione) or growth hormone are might be useless, since an increase in levels of anabolic hormones in the blood doesn't necessarily correlate with gains in size or strength! Jimbo: Hey, you're thinking, Joey! There's hope for you after all! Anyway, Joey, here's your take-home lesson. Anyone that tells you that you need to feel sick and dizzy to get a productive strength workout is either a masochist or trying to sell you something. They're blowing smoke up your butt. Joey: Hey, I had smoke in my butt once and I didn't like it! Jimbo: Ummm, yeah........ James Krieger
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. What ever happened to.... - from James Krieger
Top
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 13:30:33 -0700 From: "James Krieger" <jkrieger@wsu.edu> Subject: What ever happened to.... You know, there are some people that used to post to this list frequently that we haven't heard from in a while. Sandeep, you still out there somewhere? How about Dave Staplin? It seems like there's only a select bunch of people that contributes posts and everyone else lurks. That's not a bad thing; it's just an observation. How many people are lurking on this list, anyway, Rob? [Funny you should ask that question, as we just reached a new milestone. There are now over 1,000 people subscribed. --Rob] Now, I KNOW that Matt Brzycki is hanging around. He'll make an occassional post, and then go off into hiding somewhere, and then suddenly reappear again. Kind of like the Sasquatch. Doesn't appear often, but when he does, boy does it stir a ruckus! Hey, wait a second. I think Matt Brzcyki is the Sasquatch. That's right; he's walking around in that monkey suit in that ever-famous 10 second fuzzy video of Bigfoot filmed by Roger Patterson. And you know what else that means? Rob Spector is the Sasquatch! Man, you had us fooled for a long time. Now, I know HIT can make you big, but does it really make your feet that big? Jim Krieger [Are you feeling okay today James? You sure you had enough chromium? --Rob]
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. A clarification of my stance - from James Krieger
Top
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 14:25:46 -0700 From: "James Krieger" <jkrieger@wsu.edu> Subject: A clarification of my stance Just an update for everyone on the list so they know where I stand on certain issues: HIT: Contrary to popular belief, I am not anti-HIT. I used to be a full-fledged HITer. Although I am not anymore, I still incorporate it into cycles of my training; I just started a 5-week HIT cyle this week. However, what leads me to criticize it sometimes is when people make dogmatic, sweeping claims about it. Then, just like Lyle stated in another post, I will play devil's advocate. HIT does work; however, it won't work for everyone and it may not work forever. Also, sometimes I will criticize the ideas that HIT is based on; when I do this, I'm not trying to say that HIT won't work. What I am doing is pointing out that sometimes the rationale explaining why it works is somewhat weak. Again, just being devil's advocate, which I do often on this list. So, if I criticize someone's post on any topic, be it HIT, SS, or whatever, don't take it as a personal attack, or as a sign that I'm anti-this or anti-that or pro-this or pro-that. I'm simply trying to encourage critical thought and debate. I expect people to do the same with my posts. SS: My attitude towards SS is the same. I don't think it is somehow a bad or inferior method of training. However, I completely disagree with it being the "Ultimate" protocol and somehow superior to all other methods of training, and this leads me to criticize the protocol. Safest, yes. But most effective? That's where I completely disagree. I believe the most effective training program depends upon the individual and the individual's goals. I think people that try to pass off a training protocol as more effective than any other in all situations are simply trying to sell something. Power cleans, medicine balls, and other explosive training: I advocate the use of such methods in limited situations. I do not advocate them for everyone. I disagree that they are completely useless and extremely dangerous, and no one has been able to convince me otherwise. Are they as safe as controlled, slow lifting? No. But are they insanely dangerous and useless? No. On a side note, I have been reviewing the post-season evaluations of the strength and conditioning program here at WSU, where the coach of each individual sport evaluates the results of the strength and conditioning program, including injuries and injury prevention. Explosive training is done regularly here at WSU, and explosive training played no role in any of the injuries that were reported in athletes. Plyometrics: I only advocate the use of plyometrics in athletes that are involved in sports where jumping is a critical component, such as volleyball, basketball, triple and long jump, etc. Some research has demonstrated that they can actually help prevent injuries in these activities, by increasing the body's ability to handle landing forces. NSCA: I think the purpose of this organization is great, but I think it falls short of this purpose at times. I feel that a few members have an outright, unfounded bias against HIT. You know, if these members could accept that HIT does work, and if some HITers could accept that explosive training, plyometrics, and periodization are useful concepts in some situations, then maybe we would get somewhere. Why can't we take the best of both worlds and combine them, rather than being so extremist about things? That's what I do with my own training. The constant dogmatism, overgeneralizations, and barrage of attacks from one side to the other only divides both camps more and more. It's like the USA and USSR. For the longest time, they badmouthed eachother and refused to come to terms, and a cold war continued to escalate. However, when they finally started to talk to eachother and make a strong attempt at peace, then the cold war finally disappeared. Scientific studies: Studies are the basis of all science. They are absolutely necessary in our advancement of knowledge of the human body and how it responds to physical exercise (and SS is not the only form of exercise). I will use studies to back my arguments, but that doesn't mean I agree with every study that I read, or that I side with every scientist that is involved in studies that I reference. For example, Dr. William Kraemer has done some good research, but I don't agree with everything that he says. Studies can have flaws. Researchers can be biased. You can't trust all research, but you can't be paranoid about all research, either. You have to find that middle ground and view it with an eye towards critical thought. Studies never represent proof of anything. They simply provide important evidence pointing one way or another. Logic: Logic is extremely important to our understanding of the world. However, sometimes people take it too far, so far that they end up completely ignoring real-world facts and get caught up in a philosophical merry-go-round that has no basis in reality. Extremism: Don't like it in anything, including religion, politics, and training. That's all, folks! James Krieger