-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. Re: HIT Digest #159 - from Sonofsquat@aol.com
Top
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:52:51 EDT From: Sonofsquat@aol.com Subject: Re: HIT Digest #159 In a message dated 98-06-15 21:06:12 EDT, you write: << 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]>> Being of one who doesn't believe HIT is best... I don't believe it is worthless... I don't think Superslow is worthless either. I simply have observed better ways, that's all... Fred II
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. Re: HIT Digest #159 - from JJHBowers@aol.com
Top
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:59:19 EDT From: JJHBowers@aol.com Subject: Re: HIT Digest #159 In a message dated 6/15/98 7:08:57 PM, hitdigest@geocities.com writes: <<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.>> When they finally started to TALK to each other and made a strong attempt at peace?? No. It was when one side, the USA, proved their point, and spent the other side, the misguided, evil, and WRONG USSR into oblivion, (Thank you, Ronald Reagan), that the cold war finally disappeared. Some things are right, some wrong. Plyometrics are wrong, Superslow is right. Things are not all grey; many things are black and white. But it's oftentimes not "correct" to see them as such.
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. Spot Reduction - from Beber0190@aol.com
Top
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 23:01:30 EDT From: Beber0190@aol.com Subject: Spot Reduction I know that the general feeling is that spot reduction is not possible, but I thought I'd share a personal observation with you. At one point, I decided my abs were looking too flat, so I added a couple hundred crunches a day at night to my routine. After two weeks, my abs were looking better, but here's the strange part. I had lost about a pound, and had reduced skinfold measures on my abs, but on other parts of my body they were the same. Is this empirical evidence in favor of spot reduction being possible, or is there another way to explain it? Thanks, R'Josh Katz
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. Spot reduction - from Lyle McDonald
Top
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 21:16:30 -0500 (CDT) From: lylemcd@onr.com (Lyle McDonald) Subject: Spot reduction >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? Weight train + a slight caloric reduction. Spot reducing won't work for a simple reason: tehre is no direct connection between a msucle (your abs) and the bodyfat which sits on top of it (your ab fat). When bodyfat is mobilized, it is done so in a systemic manner due to change in hormone levels (primarily insuli, which must go down, and the catecholamines adrenaline/noradrenaline, which go up. Other hormones like growth hormone, cortisol, etc may play minor roles). So working a specific muscle can't have any impact on the fat sitting on top of it. The only way to lose bodyfat is to create a caloric deficit which means you must burn more calories than you consume (eat). Three appraoches: 1. Eat less 2. Exercise more 3. Eat less and exercise more Try cutting your daily caloric intake slightly (by maybe 250-300 cal/day) and keep your weight training intense. While cardio is highly overrated for it's caloric/fat burning effects, it can make a small improvement in the rate of fat loss but only in that you don' have to restrict calories as much. But try just cuttinf your calories a little bit (and more si NOT better in this case) first and see what happens. Lyle McDonald, CSCS "GOTTA LOVE ME!" Baby Sinclair
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. Re: SS Rep Speed Modification - from Andrew M. Baye
Top
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 07:39:18 -0400 From: "Andrew M. Baye" <drewbaye@gdi.net> Subject: Re: SS Rep Speed Modification Ben asks, "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)" As long as you do not encounter any problems with friction in the equipment you're using, there is no reason to change it. Andrew M. Baye The SuperSlow Exercise Guild, Inc http://www.superslow.com
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. Reply: Hit Digest # 159 - from Eric Deaton
Top
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 06:51:50 -0600 From: Eric Deaton <Eric.Deaton@lmco.com> Subject: Reply: Hit Digest # 159 Hey, HITters! This is to Ben(Kdragon@aol.com). Come on, let's get the sideshow started, dude! Who sez that working out SS don't pay bucks! With our own NSCA sideshow, we can get PAID to take a beating every week! Yah, buddy! It don't get any better than that, eh? [Since I have no idea what you just said...well, I hope that wasn't an insult to anyone. Like I said, I have no clue what you said. Working 14hr days does things to my brain...not good things... --Rob] On a much saner(?) note, glad to see that I am not the only one with that problem! Here's to definitive failure! Never thought that I would celebrate *failure*. Keep the faith! Hangin' tough! Eric Deaton Eric.Deaton@lmco.com
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. Re: HIT Digest #159 - from MacThai@aol.com
Top
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 11:01:01 EDT From: MacThai@aol.com Subject: Re: HIT Digest #159 along kdragon's line of thought. Why would anyone who knows "HIT" is worthless bother to check out HIT digest? Also why would they continue to ENDLESSLY debate basic HIT principles?
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. RE: HIT Digest #160 - from Kirk, Malcolm
Top
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 09:07:59 -0600 From: "Kirk, Malcolm" <mskirk@uswest.com> Subject: RE: HIT Digest #160 Thanks for your newsletter and answering my last letter. One more question. What is TUL? Thanks. -Malcolm
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. Navy Seals/Video Review - from Somerset Fitness Center
Top
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 16:49:07 -0400 From: Somerset Fitness Center <hfc290@hrmail.ims.att.com> Subject: Navy Seals/Video Review Hey all. = ) Here's an FYI for other strength professionals out there: If you've never taken a look at the physical requirements and training schedule for the Navy Seals you may find it interesting. Talk about VOLUME! The training is obviously designed for muscle endurance but is interesting nonetheless. The web address for the info is: http://webix.nosc.mil/seals/html/requirements.html A related note: I just reviewed the fitness video, "Navy Seal Total Body Workout With Scott Helvenston." I have some middle-aged female clients trying the program. Keeping in mind that Scott is a world champion athlete and that this IS based on the Seal workout, it's definitely not for beginners - maybe not even intermediate athletes. It's a "calisthenic" workout with sets upon sets upon sets of push-ups, abs, and pull-ups. They market the video to "beginning, intermediate, and advanced levels," but don't let that fool you. There are not nearly enough safety modifications to differentiate between levels or to provide info for those with special conditions. I also don't agree with what Scott says - at least not in a video that is being marketed to the average population: "You hafta feel a little pain to get some benefit. That's just the way of the world when it comes to strength and conditioning.........pain is good - extreme pain is extremely good." Yeah - maybe if you are a Seal inflicting the pain on someone else! Go USA - World Cup 98!! Rachael Picone