-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. MA Training - from Andrew M. Baye
Top
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 21:45:21 -0400 From: "Andrew M. Baye" <drewbaye@gdi.net> Subject: MA Training I agree with all of the statements made so far on the digest about MA training, but I thought I should explain a few things. First, I realize that full contact sparring with no pads (just mouthguards and open hand gloves) is dangerous. BUT, depending on your situation, sometimes it's not as dangerous as not having the skills when necessary. Second, I realize that grappling is extremely effective, and that it can be practiced in a safer manner than striking. I am familiar with both Greco-Roman style wrestling and Judo and have an understanding of Chin-Nawrist, elbow, shoulder and leg locks. BUT, as Tino mentioned, grappling'susefulness is limited to one on one situations. When faced with multiple attackers it is suicide to tie up with one person. Especially when they are armed. Again, how you train depends on your situation. Third, I am well aware of the differences between full contact sparring and a real fight, and the limitations in sparring for preparing for such. We also practiced various self-defense drills at either full or half speed (depending on the techniques involved) and learned a lot from each other that way. My favorite target is the throat, but I'd never strike someone there in practice. Maybe all of us who are into MA should find another mailing list or message board, since this is probably not appropriate for the HIT digest. Andrew M. Baye The SuperSlow Exercise Guild, Inc http://www.superslow.com
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. Self-Defense training - from Henry Jung
Top
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 98 11:13:03 +0900 From: Henry Jung <hjung@jp.FCNBD.COM> Subject: Self-Defense training Hello, I'm an assistant at the Brazilain jiujitsu dojo in Tokyo. Grappling does have it's limitations, but concrete is not really one of them. A skilled grappler will use the concrete to proactively cause more abrasions on thenon-grappling exponent and minimize his own injuries. Also in regard to multiple opponents (very valid) I remember what Carlson Gracie said, "Whyworry about many when you can't defeat even one?" Best, Henry
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. Thank you, Fred Hahn - from Juan Castro
Top
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 15:49:32 PDT From: "Juan Castro" <castrojuan@hotmail.com> Subject: Thank you, Fred Hahn Thank you, Fred Hahn, for proving my points all the more. To paraphrase Fred Hahn, HIT Digest #174. > Keep your shirt on Juan, I'll answer your questions -- again. You didn’t answer them before, and here once again you have avoided answering them. > First let me say that if anyone out there has been insulted by > anything I have said, realize that my intentions were not to insult. >My intentions have always been to stimulate thought in this rather > thoughtless medium. (Not the HIT digest Rob, the world of fitness.) > Very often, when reading someone else's words, people allow > themselves to become insulted when no such intention was meant on > the part of the writer. This happens in conversation as well. So if > it at all helps, I'm sorry if there are people out there who chose > to become insulted by some of the things I've said, like you Juan. > My advice to those of you who do become insulted by some of the > writings on this digest is - chill out. In HIT Digest #170 you wrote: > By simply not considering this as a possible reason why one work set> to failure did not work (supposedly), illustrates the lack of logic > and reasoning that floods this digest and in HIT Digest #174 you were quoted as having written: > I was politely mocking Krieger.... Krieger took it to the childish > level and realizing he could not answer the question, responded > with a counter question. Do you really expect us to believe that your intentions are to stimulate thought, and not to insult? Why is it when your logic is challenged (as it was by many in HIT Digests 171-173) it is childish, but when you challenge the logic of others, it is to stimulate thought? > To begin, Juan, you're missing the points. No Mr. Hahn, I’m not. Specific questions were asked. You simply choseto answer something else. > Let's take the aerobic/anaerobic scenario. It's not about the ratio > or the percentage. My original reason for bringing up the issue was > to highlight the role of the skeletal muscles in the usage of both > the aerobic and anaerobic systems. Yes. I use both absolute amounts > and relative amounts to illustrate certain points. So what's wrong > with that? The actual amounts in this particular case, whether > absolute or relative, are not the issue They are the issue. You said that sleeping is more aerobic than running. More implies a quantity. You were asked to explain why a certain way of measuring quantity was appropriate in this case. You still haven’t come close to addressing that question. I will leave the issue of the quads for somebody who understands that better. > As far as neurological adaptations to specific exercises are > concerned, give it a rest already! Here is my opinion for what it is >worth. If a person is taught how to contract his muscles intensively >and is taught how to perform a specific exercise properly, I feel > > that it takes only a few sessions for the motorlearning/neurological >adaptation process to be complete. As I said in HG magazine, it > takes several sessions. On the HIT post I said a few. A few, several > - so kill me. This is a pretty blatant example of you answering a different question. You haven’t been asked whether it was a few or several. You’ve been repeatedly asked why it is so bad to have to go through the process when changing exercises. > About the arm measurements, I'm still right about that. You are very obviously wrong, as was demonstrated in HIT Digests #122 and #124, and repeated in HIT Digest #181. Your response to this really says a lot about you. > Let's move on now, shall we? You have established quite a pattern. You come onto this list, state your opinions, but when questioned or challenged you do one of these: 1) answer a different question 2) insult the questioner or the list in general 3) disappear. As long as you continue your patterns, you can expect these issue to be brought up. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. One set per exercise - from erikm
Top
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 09:03:09 -0700 From: erikm <erikm@gte.net> Subject: One set per exercise Hello, I have been lurking on this digest for months and have pursued hardgainer style training during this time. I was, like many people, never able to get rid of that second set until recently. I had a layoff for a couple months and then returned to lifting at the same time as returning to martial arts training and seemed to have no recovery ability between that and a stressful consulting job. During the interim I worked bizarre hours and lost 15lbs. (at under 10% bodyfat) I backed off the weight I was using to try to get momentum and could not increase in either reps or weight for several weeks. Thinking about it now, I realize that knowing I had to do a second set would make me really hold back and I was gaining nothing. I finally decided to go one set to failure and since I have made improvements in every exercise at least every week if not every workout. I have not weighed myself, but I don't feel so "flat", I feel robust and thick again though I'm sure I have not reached my previous weight. Knowing I have one set to do what needs to get done has really motivated me, shortened my workouts, and made them enjoyable again. If I have further success on this protocol, I'll keep you posted. Thanks for the great discourse, knowledge, and experience HITers. Erik Miller -- PLEASE NOTE: Due to incompatibility problems with the network at my office, I will keep "erikm@gte.net" as my mail account. Sorry for any inconvenience.
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. Bench Press Shirts - from Robert Graup
Top
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 13:49:04 -0700 From: Robert_Graup@mail.gmosf.com (Robert Graup) Subject: Bench Press Shirts I know that powerlifters use bench press shirts to cut down on injuries and allow them to lift higher weights. Are they good or bad for us regular weightlifters? If l use these things to train with higher weights, will I be able to press more when I finally take the shirt off? In other words, do these things have any real effect on physiology or are they are crutch that once used always need to be used? If the former, then how do you use one? What mfg. makes the best (what do you look for in one -- I know some are thicker than others)? How do I figure out my size (I've read that contest shirts should be smaller, but I'm looking for a regulat workout version)? Where can I buy one (any good mail-order houses)? "I'll moider da bum." -- Tony Galento, heavyweight boxer, when asked what he thought of William Shakespeare
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. HIT - from JawDogs@aol.com
Top
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 07:42:15 EDT From: JawDogs@aol.com Subject: HIT Dear Hitters and Lyle McDonald, Well, I thought I'd spare you (and others) the boredom of answering this question. However, if you insist… And if the question was so boring to you, why did you bother to answer it? You asked (and I believe you were referring to a "lat pull down" exercise): "And can I ever expect an answer to MY question about how training a compound movement to failure causes growth in the muscles that DID not fail?" Let me first say that this is all the more reason for training to failure. To not do so would result in even less stimulation to the muscles you claim are not failing. Fact is we don't know what fails exactly. It is not always the biceps. Perhaps, the way in which some people perform this exercise (all that yanking and heaving), causes their biceps and forearms to fail first. If this exercise is performed correctly (I'm not going to get into that now) you will not fail because of your biceps. In fact, I'm not sure exactly what muscles are failing at the point of muscular failure when this exercise is done properly. The point is, Lyle (and I don't yet understand why you and so many otherslike you cannot understand this), is achieving anything less than muscular failure is, well, LESS muscular work. No one is saying that muscles have to experience failure (whatever that is) to grow stronger. Let me repeat. No one is saying that muscles have to experience failure to grow stronger. They have to experience something, however. And there is a certain minimum level of effort that is required to stimulate the growth mechanism. Do you know what thatminimum level is? I don't. Can you provide me with studies that show thattraining to failure impedes the muscle building process? (Don't say yes because you won't find them. I've already tried. But try if you like.) Q: (This is directed at Lyle but anyone can chime in): If you were training me and I was performing a lat pulldown with a resistance that would bring about muscular failure in approx. 70 seconds, when would you stop me from exercising during the set? At 50 seconds? 60? How is it better, Lyle, to be arbitrary? About plyometrics. Lyle, you're missing the point. Bottom line - plyometrics are completely unnecessary. They are, by their very nature, high in forceand therefore dangerous. If they were necessary in order to be able to play sports at any level, then the risks would have to be taken. But they're not. So why risk it? And by the way, Willie Mays isn't dead. And yes. Because the Babe ate hot dogs all day long and drank gallons of booze and was still the Babe, and because The Mick hit towering homeruns unmatched by anyone, even McGuire, while completely hungover, and because George Foreman is still the athlete he is and eats well, whatever he wants, in fact doesprove that nutrition has very little to do with exceptional athletic performance. Believe what you will, but you can't eat your way to exceptional athletic performance. Sincerely, Fred Hahn
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. Recent experience - from heavyduty
Top
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 21:17:51 +0930 From: "heavyduty" <KJDye@newave.net.au> Subject: Recent experience Just thought I'd share something I experienced during a recent workout. Though the underlying point may be lost by some beginners, I'm certain that the advanced, and not so advanced trainee can appreciate this for what it's worth. As soon as I got in the gym I found that I had zero motivation and even my warm-up weights felt heavy. Anyway, I tried to persist and cultivate the right mood to generate the training mode but nothing worked [I even beganyawning]!!! I then started to make mental excuses why I should miss todays workout, though I feared that I'd have to rationally explain to myself "why" so I could accept my rational for 'wimping out'. But to my suprise and delight, when I started to squat I was able to completed 10 picture perfect reps with a new weight!!! Same with the following exercise, seated bb presses. Fourteen gut wrenching reps to failure! Finally, bb rows seemed light despite using heavie r weights and a bigger bar, where 15 reps were reached before failure ceased all further effort! My ten minute workout was one of the best I've EVER done, and goes to show what the mind can achieve in forcing the body to respond. Being advanced I guess my body knew what to do when the time came, but prior I would have rather sat down [or preferably layed down and slept] as training was the last thing I felt like. Two days later and I'm having trouble walking, sitting, and lying down, I'm deeply sore and depleted but satisfied that when need be I can switch on to intensity mode and deliver. This was only 6 days after my previous session of sumo deadlifts, pulldowns, and bench press, so I imagine had I rested my usual 7 days I might have in fact done more!!! How long will I need to rest? I'll let you be the judge. But if you guess under a week I suggest that you reassess your own efforts to see first hand how debilitating 100% effort truly is! Kevin
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. Multifidus and the Quads - from axtomas
Top
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1998 09:23:19 -0400 From: por1axt@por10.med.navy.mil (axtomas) Subject: Multifidus and the Quads Hi everyone, I have just started to follow this list, and let me tell you that it has been most interesting. In Fred Hahn's last message he mentioned: "how come nobody ever talks aboutmultifidus/erctor spinae/quadratus lumborum imbalances?" Some references: Hides, Richardson, Gwendolen "Multifidus muscle recovery is not automatic after resolution of acute, first episode low back pain" Spine 1996;21:2763-2769 Hodges, Richardson "Inefficient musclular stabilization of the lumbar spine associated with low back pain. A motor control evaluation of Transversus abdominus" Spine 1996;21:2640-2650 Sullivan, Twomey, Allison, Sinclair, Miller, Knox "Altered pattern of abdominal muscle activation in patients with chronic low back pain" AJPT 1997;43:91-98 Richard, Shields, Heiss "An electromyographic comparison of abdominal muscle synergies during curl and double straight leg lowering exercises with control of the pelvic position" Spine 1997;22:1873-1879 There was also some talk about the Quads and contraction of various parts of it. I will dig out a reference for that as well in the near future, but before I try and dig through my filing cabinet, let me inform you of what it contains. -the nerve supply to the quads has been disected and shown to contain a separate nerve supply to vastus medialus. -electromyography has shown VM to contract separetly from the rest of thequads. -injection of a small amount of saline into the knee joint inhibits VM contraction, but not the rest of the quads. i.e. don't exercise your quads if your knees are swollen!? And I have seen a several freaks of nature, who are able to contract VM independantly of the rest of the quads. I can only do so with my knee fully locked out. I hope that this adds to the discussion. Cheers, Andrew Tomas
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. post workout meal (long) - from Alessandro.Pirotta@netit.alcatel.it
Top
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 98 17:53:16 +0200 From: Alessandro.Pirotta@netit.alcatel.it Subject: post workout meal (long) I first thought to submit this to Lile McDonald through Nutrimuscle on Cyberpump! but I noticed he is temporarily unable to care of it so I decided to post on the digest in the hope to get some clues from anybody (I see Lile is however online...) here are some questions about optimizing the effect of the post workout meal. I just speculate with the info I gathered here and there that timing the glicemic and aminoacidic peaks in the blood is of great importance. I understood one should first get a glicemic peak as soon as the workout is over and trigger the insulin release in order to replenish the muscles. After that event the body will excrete some quantity of growth hormone that triggers muscle cells to absorb the aminoacids present in the blood; so having a good level of them there is crucial. Is all that right? Personally, training in the evening I would anticipate the post workout drink so to have a normal dinner one hour after the WO. I would go as follows: 30min before WO = proteins+carbs shake (1/2 ratio) WO time including warmup and cooldown = 1hour just finished WO = high glicemic index food/drink. now the questions - perhaps I'm a bit paranoic with them, but I like such kind of details ;-) : - might the digestion of the shake affect negatively the HIT or viceversa? - I guess the best carbs for the pre-WO are low glicemic indexed ones for slow digestion and steady blood level; which kind should I choose? Fructose should be ok but I remember our body cannot synthesize more than some qty (?) (yes, probably I will end buying a commercial powder); - to trigger the insuline release I thought of drinking some of a cost effective popular sweet beverage - but how much is it the minimum quantity? - which kind of protein? complete proteins require a lot of time to get broken down? predigested protein? like whey hydrolizated ones? probably their aminoacids would go in the blood too early. If whey proteins, I mean those pre- digested, are really worth comparing to the classic ones, one may decide to take a shake of them after the WO and only carbs before. This way may also facilitate the digestion while training hard. Sorry for being so long. Hope anybody can give his valuable contribution as usual. Many thanks in advance, --Alex [OK, OK, We all know it's Lyle -- not Lile. Rob O]
-------------------- 10 --------------------
#10. on-line trade of supplements - from Alessandro.Pirotta@netit.alcatel.it
Top
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 98 19:13:10 +0200 From: Alessandro.Pirotta@netit.alcatel.it Subject: on-line trade of supplements Does anybody know of any manufacturer/distributor who electronically trades food supplements inside the European Community? I've surveyed someone overseas (US) but the shipping cost makes the trade loosing attraction, at least for individuals. thanks for any advice --Alex