-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. Re: Spot reduction - from Erkki Turunen
Top
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 18:27:17 +0300 From: "Erkki Turunen" <erkki.turunen@kolumbus.fi> Subject: Re: Spot reduction > by: Lyle McDonald <lylemcd@onr.com> >Studies have been done examining spot reduction, working >people up to hundreds of crunches per day with no changes in skinfolds. Are you sure that they were crunches and not situps? Fred Koch (author of Ironman training system) once critisized spot reduction studies in that they had used situps (isometric ab exercise) and not crunches (dynamic ab exercise). Erkki
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. Re: DOY - from Erkki Turunen
Top
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 18:14:25 +0300 From: "Erkki Turunen" <erkki.turunen@kolumbus.fi> Subject: Re: DOY >From: "James Krieger" <jkrieger@wsu.edu> >Subject: Re: DOY! > Let's say I take two subjects with a >1 RM in bench press of 200 lbs, and I put subject A on protocol A, and >subject B on protocol B for 10 weeks. At the end of the 10 weeks, I test 1 >RM again. Subject A's 1 RM is now 210 lbs, and subject B's 1 RM is 225 lbs. >Who made the better strength gains? Subject B, of course. Not only did his >1 RM improve more, but his 3 RM will have improved more, his 5 RM will have >improved more, his 8 RM will have improved more, and his 10 RM will have >improved more than subject A. If you only test the subjects' 1RM:s you cannot extrapolate it to other rep numbers. In the above case the difference in improvement between subjects A and B is too clear to believe otherwise but what if at the end of the experiment A's 1 RM were 210 lbs and B's 1 RM 212 lbs? If A got that improvement by doing eights and B by doing singles would you still claim that B's 8 RM improved more?
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. sorry arms - from Neil Murray
Top
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 17:11:38 -0500 From: Neil Murray <jimm@fbtc.net> Subject: sorry arms I was wondering if there are any exercises that will result in the largest size gains in my arms. I know that overall body mass and genetics are big factors in arm size, but am still willing to HIT the hell out of my arms.
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. Same Bat Time, Same Bat Channel - from James Krieger
Top
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 17:07:12 -0700 From: "James Krieger" <jkrieger@wsu.edu> Subject: Same Bat Time, Same Bat Channel >From: "James Krieger" <jkrieger@wsu.edu> >Speaking of Batman, MR. INTENSITY sounds >like a villian that you find on Batman... > >[I trust this was meant and will be taken as humorous. No personal insults, remember? >--Rob] Wasn't meant as an insult at all. The name Mr. Intensity fits right in with names like the Joker or Mr. Freeze. "Will our dynamic duo survive as Mr. Intensity has them squat to failure and then immediately follow it with 20 reps on the leg press? Stay tuned next time...same Bat time, same Bat channel!" James
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. Testosterone boosters--HIT Digest #163 - from John Mark
Top
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 17:49:04 +0800 From: "John Mark" <john.mark@pobox.com> Subject: Testosterone boosters--HIT Digest #163 Does the stuff work? I think so. This is my opinion, based on my experience. I have no scientific evidence! Here’s why I think the stuff works. Background: 40 something years young; Very hectic work (12+ hour days; travel 35% of the time) and family schedule (4 kids) Current Workout Schedule: No consistent aerobics, except social tennis usually doubles once a week Monday: two alternating sets of bench presses and front pull downs using Telle's drop set protocol as described by Sandeep De on his web site at http://geocities.datacellar.net/HotSprings/4039/journal.htm This is a killer work out. This drop set protocol reminds me of my university and college wrestling and judo days when we “worked the stack” on the universal machine. Wednesday: two alternating sets of squats and leg curls using Telle's drop set protocol Friday: two alternating sets of tri-overhead extensions (Larry Scott style) and cable preacher curls; one set of military presses using Telle's drop set protocol Saturday: two sets (with triple drops) of dead lifts. I cannot do slow dead lifts. All sets and subsets are taken to positive failure. Supplements: An expensive, but worth while experiment Monday through Friday: ProhGH before morning work out or breakfast; I have been using this stuff for 4 weeks. Muscle Media 2K and Ironman have been featuring this stuff. Monday through Friday: Androstene 100mg, Androdiol 100mg and DHEA 100mg 3x a day; before morning work out or breakfast, before lunch and before bed. I have been using this stuff since February—4 weeks on, two off Monday through Friday: “Banana Milk”—Bananas, yogurt, low fat milk, whey protein, creatine and glutimaine, right after work out or for breakfast Except for the Banana Milk, I did not use any supplements before February. Results: 3.5 months Bodyfat down 40%, based on sum of 11 site caliper measurements, but I was very fat waist size down 3 inches body weight down 15 lbs. lots of fat loss and some muscle gain. I don’t know the mix. Bench 1RM: 1.75xbw first time I cracked 300 bench in ten years Squat 1RM: 2.25xbw first time I cracked 400 squat (ass to the floor) in ten years Dead lift 1RM: 2.5xbw first time I cracked 425 dead lift in ten years Before February my workouts were very inconsistent; usually 2-3 sets to failure concentrating on squats, deads and benches with little or no progress Food: Most of the time I eat fairly clean and avoid junk; before February I ate 3-4 Jefthroe Boudine size portions a day, more on the weekends; portions after February have been cut to “normal” size. What portion of my gains is due to ProhGH, Androstene 100mg, Androdiol 100mg and DHEA 100mg? I don’t know, but I believe a fair bit of my gains can be attributable to the stuff.
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. Re: Plyometrics - from James Krieger
Top
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 23:54:54 -0700 From: "James Krieger" <jkrieger@wsu.edu> Subject: Re: Plyometrics >From: "Andrew M. Baye" <drewbaye@gdi.net> > >Yes, plyometrics are "wrong". First, they expose the body to a tremendous >amount of force, and are an inefficient means of loading the muscles. Inefficient means of loading the muscles for what? Maximal strength training? Of course plyometrics are an inefficient means of maximal strength training! That is not their primary purpose. Their primary purpose is to enhance RFD, specifically during eccentric actions; such adaptations are not efficiently incurred through standard resistance training. >Second, the stated purpose of plyometrics, to condition the stretch reflex, >is impossible. You can not condition a reflex. You can become stronger. You >can improve your skill in an activity. You can NOT improve on a reflex by >repeatedly eliciting it. As a matter of fact, you will most likely do the >opposite. If what you are saying is true, then regular plyometric training would actually decrease muscular power. However, all of the scientific evidence out there points out that the opposite is true (1). The reflexive actions that you illustrate in your post bear no resemblance to stretch shortening cycles. SSC's occur constantly in everyday activities, such as walking. If continuous elicitation of SSC's somehow deconditioned such phenomena, then our ability to walk would be severely compromised! The main purpose behind plyometric training is to increase muscle stiffness during explosive force production (movements with high RFD's) (1). Greater stiffness allows for more elastic energy and thus greater power production from the musculature. One can compare this phenomena to rubber bands; thicker rubber bands are "stiffer" and thus have more elastic potential. While the exact adaptations from SSC training that enhance power production require further study, the proposed mechanism is through an enhancement of the influence of the length-feedback component (the stretch reflex that is activated by the muscle spindles) combined with an inhibition of the force-feedback component (activation of the Golgi tendon organs which inhibit force production) (1). Such an adaptation would result in increased muscle stiffness, creating more elastic potential and improving muscular power production. It would also allow the muscle to more efficiently handle stretch loads and also to handle greater stretch loads, decreasing injury potential. The ability to more efficiently handle eccentric loading is supported in research by Wilson et al (2) who found plyometric training to significantly enhance the rate of eccentric lower body force production, which did not occur with standard weight training. An enhancement in the rate of eccentric force production allows for greater ability to absorb impact forces of activities such as jumping, thus decreasing injury potential of these activities. This is supported by Hewett et al (3) who found that a plyometric training program decreased peak landing forces of a volleyball block jump by 22% and also increased knee stability, since the medially and laterally directed torques at the knee decreased by around 50%. This study also found a 10% improvement in vertical jump height and a 44% increase in dominant hamstring muscle power due to plyometric training. So much for plyometric training being an "inefficient means of loading the muscles", at least if you're interested in loading the muscles to obtain an increase in unloaded muscular power! Research by Cornu et al (7) found an increase in passive stiffness, a slight decrease in viscosity, and an invariability in inertia of the ankle joint following a plyometric training program. Such adaptations suggest an increase in ankle stability incurred by plyometrics, which would decrease injury potential. Another adaptation incurred from SSC training is through enhanced motor unit recruitment under high stretch loads and an increase in the rate of the onset of motor unit activation (4). These are adaptations that improve RFD (the improvement in RFD caused by plyometric training is something that Lyle has discussed in previous digests), which is something that is generally not improved by maximal strength training, at least in experienced athletes; the lack of improvement in RFD by maximal strength training and the lack of improvement in maximal strength by high-velocity power training (like plyometrics) is a perfect example of the SAID principle and is supported by scientific research (5). Power performance in activities involving SSC's is not correlated to maximal strength (6). Finally, research on rats has demonstrated an increase in percentage of FT fibers and a decrease in ST fiber percentage as a result of plyometric training, increasing maximal shortening velocity (8). While conversion of FT to ST fibers and vice versa is not an accepted phenomena in humans, ST fibers take on FT characteristics and vice versa depending upon the training protocol (9). I speculate that plyometric training may result in a shift towards FT characteristics in muscle fibers, producing positive improvements in muscular power. I am not sure if research exists to support my hypothesis. The basis of plyometric training goes well beyond "conditioning the stretch reflex." Plyometric training is based on sound principles of muscle physiology and can be an important component of the training program of athletes involved in jump-based activities. For such athletes, plyometrics are right! 1. Komi, P.V. 1992. Stretch-Shortening Cycle. In: Strength and Power in Sport, ed. P.V. Komi., 169-179. London, UK: Blackwell Scientific. 2. Wilson, G.J., A.J. Murphy, and A. Giorgi. Weight and plyometric training: effects on eccentric and concentric force production. Can. J. Appl. Physiol. 21(4):301-315. 1996. 3. Hewett, T.E., A.L. Stroupe, T.A. Nance, and F.R. Noyes. Plyometric training in female athletes. Decreased impact forces and increased hamstring torques. Am. J. Sports Med. 24(6):765-773. 1996. 4. Sale, D.G. Neural Adaptation to Strength Training. In: Strength and Power in Sport, ed. P.V. Komi., 249-265. London, UK: Blackwell Scientific. 5. Moritani, T. Time Course of Adaptations during Strength and Power Training. In: Strength and Power in Sport, ed. P.V. Komi., 266-278. London, UK: Blackwell Scientific. 6. Schmidtbleicher, D. Training for Power Events. In: Strength and Power in Sport, ed. P.V. Komi., 381-395. London, UK: Blackwell Scientific. 7. Cornu, C., Mi.I Almeida Silveira, and F. Goubel. Influence of plyometric training on the mechanical impedance of the human ankle joint. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 76(3):282-288. 1997. 8. Almeida Silveira, M.I., C. Perot, M. Pousson, and F. Goubel. Effects of stretch-shortening cycle training on mechanical properties and fibre type transition in the rat soleus muscle. Pflugers Arch. 427:3-4,289-94. 1994. 9. Fleck, S.J., and W.J. Kraemer. Designing Resistance Training Programs. 2nd ed. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. 1997. James Krieger
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. Re: HIT Digest #163 - from Sandeep De
Top
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 15:33:35 -0400 From: Sandeep De <sde@golden.net> Subject: Re: HIT Digest #163 > Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 16:52:54 -0700 > From: "Brian and Terri Williams" <windsortoyspaniels@ibm.net> > Subject: Set Intervals > > Today as I finished up a round of hang clean presses (I know, I know..I like 'em alright?) I started wonderin' about rest time between sets again. Looking back on the ole training log I see that for the most part I've decreased by as much as half for some movements since dropping the twice a week for each muscle group bit. I used to take 2-3 minutes between bench sets and 4 or so for movements like deadlifts and front squats. At the same time I lowered my training volume I started using creatine for the first time, making it hard to pinpoint either as a cause. > > >From this arises 2 questions.....I've a feeling that the CM might be in part the reason for decreased set to set recovery time, and that doing muscle groups once per week instead of twice is allowing for better recovery between workouts. I've done everything from circuit work where I ran, sparred or rode a stationary bike between lifting sets while doing martial arts to long, leisurely 2 sets in 10 minutes living in the gym workouts. What I'm wondering is if there is an optimal length of rest between sets, and if longer breaks are detrimental to progress. If so, how to determine this time? Generally, sets involving higher velocities, more complex technique, more motor units (which means greater neurological demand) and heavier loads (lower repetitions) will require more rest time. A rule of thumb is that sets ending in 7-12 reps should be given anywhere between 60-180 seconds worth of rest, sets involving less repetitions than this should involve more than 180 seconds worth of rest between sets. The rationale is that the less neurologically demanding a set is (higher reps, lower loads, lower speeds, less motor units, less complex movements), the less time required by the nervous system to recover and innervate motor units for the subsequent set. This is with the understanding that the neuron, not the muscle cell, is the limiting factor in the production of strength (i.e. a nuclear reactor is worthless if the computer operating it is turned off). These are only guidelines and individual considerations (i.e. creatine monohydrate, for one) will determine exactly effect a specific rest time will allow for a given rep range. I suggest gauging your rest time by your performance decrease. For example, I find that for sets involving 4-6RM in the hang clean and press, 3 minute rest intervals mean a 1 rep decrease in performance from set to set. Elongating that rest period to 4-5 minutes between sets means that I can reciprocate the performance in the previous set. -- SD www.geocities.com/hotsprings/4039
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. Re: Testosterone boosters--HIT Digest #163 - from John Mark
Top
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 06:15:52 +0800 From: "John Mark" <john.mark@pobox.com> Subject: Re: Testosterone boosters--HIT Digest #163 Revised in red, bold, italics and underscored since I'm not sure which email software you are using. Big clarification I have not been using Telle's drop set protocol since February! In February through mid March I used the German Volume training protocol; from mid March through late May I used a HIT 3 sets to positive failure protocol. Apologies for being vague and potentially misleading. John