HIT Digest #54

This digest contains the following messages:

1. Re: HIT Digest, digest #53 GORINSKI, ROBERT <rwg3216@sru.edu>
2. German Volume Training, pinch grip, chins/pullups Brian Bucher <babucher@mtu.edu>
3. HIT DIGEST digest #53 Don Pendergraft <dpendergraft@beckett.com>
4. reaching failure David R. Heffelfinger <heffel@pipeline.com>
5. Re: reaching failure David R. Heffelfinger <heffel@pipeline.com>
6. Re: HIT Digest, digest #53,Re: A good routine Zsiday Viktor <Vzsiday98@archon.gsm.uci.edu>
7. Re: Functional strength James Krieger <jkrieger@eecs.wsu.edu>

-------------------- 1 --------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 1997 09:51:26 -0500
From: "GORINSKI, ROBERT" <rwg3216@sru.edu>
Subject: Re: HIT Digest, digest #53

>Rob emailed me a response to FredII from digest #52. See below.
>
>Iron Mike
>
>FredII wrote:
>
>>>Rob... I know you are busy, and I offer my best in your personal
>>business
>>>(for lack of better words), but I am surprised that you haven't
>>requested copy!
>
>Fred, I stopped being moderator for 2 weeks because I am too busy to do it.
>So...how would I have time to read thru a study? I'm spending 12 hr days at
>a "boot camp" preparing for my final exam to get a certification!
>
>I have one modem line here shared by 10 people. I'm lucky to even get
>online during a day.
>
>But just to put your mind at ease - I already HAVE the study at home. I've
>also already commented on it I believe, either in posts or something on
>Cyberpump!
>
>I'm sure you know what my opinion is about this study. I've read the study,
>and IMHO the data does not support the conclusions of the authors.
>
>However, I would encourage others to read it and decide for themselves.
>
>That's my opinion.
>
>Period.
>
>That's all I have to say on this matter.
>
>Thank-you for the offer to me and the readership.
>
>Rob
>
I would just like to add to this (briefly). Anyone who is interested in this topic (who may have requested the article from Fred II) should also read two articles on Cyberpump! if they haven't done so allready, if you have read them, read them again. Some of the statements made are as close as being THE END-ALL ANSWER to this discussion as we are going to get (please keep in mind that this is not a RANT, because I know and acknowledge that there is no such thing as 1 absolutely correct END-ALL answer): that the keys(as far as training) to bigger/stronger/faster/whatever are training HARD, CHANGING TRAINING VARIABLES from time to time, and PROGRESSION, and it doesn't take a Certified Jargon and Confusion Specialist to tell you and understand that. The writings I am encouraging you to review are found under "Robs Bottom Line" ;Periodization Cycles I and II. Cycle II is especially informative, pay special attention to the quotes given by Dr. C.

Thanks

-------------------- 2 --------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 1997 10:31:55 -0500 (EST)
From: Brian Bucher <babucher@mtu.edu>
Subject: German Volume Training, pinch grip, chins/pullups

*German Volume Training*

(In Digest #49 Lyle wrote about using the 10x10 system with a client.)

Lyle,

Assuming one has a shoulder problem, do you think that the better road to take is using something like the 10x10 system, or to just take it easy until it heals. Let's also assume that a person does not care whether they feel like they've worked hard, and are only interested in long-term results (not only lbm, but safety as well).
That is, would he have been better off taking it easy?

In your response, it _seems_ that the only reason you used the 10x10 system instead of backing off was that it would satisfy him, and not that it was necessarily more productive. Is this what you meant?

*Pinch grip*

In an old digest somewhere, someone asked what they should do now that they can pinch grip 2 10lb plates and don't want to move up to pinching 2 25lb plates. I suggest pinching 1 25lb plate (fingers to the smooth side) then 1 35lb plate, then 1 45lb plate, then try the 2 25lb plates once you can pinch a 45er.

*Shoulder/arm action for chins and pullups*

Did anyone have any thoughts on whether the different paths the upper arm takes between chins and pull-ups makes a _practical_ difference?

If not, I see very little reason to do chins except for a little variety. Should one do pullups the majority of the time?

(see Digest #47 for my description of the arm movement difference)

Brian

-------------------- 3 --------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 1997 09:48:42 -0600
From: dpendergraft@beckett.com (Don Pendergraft)
Subject: Re: HIT Routine

>-------------------- 6 --------------------
>Date: Wed, 3 Dec 1997 18:57:54 -0500
>From: "Scott Garber" <scottg@toad.net>
>Subject: A good routine
>
>I'm a welder by trade and work in the constuction arena. My job is very
demanding >physically. Can the hit principles give results or could i be overtraing by lifting 2 times >aweek, with 3-4 days rest. What would be a good workout to follow and how often to >train? Thanks for the list. >Scott Garber

There are certainly more qualified people than me to comment on this, but I will give you my $.02. If you have a physically demanding job, I am of the opinion that it is even MORE important to utilize HIT principles to keep from overtraining. Your body does not get the recovery that say a desk jockey gets. :) I would also say that 3 days may not be enough recovery time for you. I would either go with the HD2 1st workout routine with 4 days between workouts, or it may be worth considering to go immedietely to the Consolidation routine of HD2. If you are familiar with those two specific routines, I am sure someone could post them for you. Also, it is likely that they can be found somewhere on the Cyberpump! site anyway. Lastly, with your activity level, make sure you are getting adequate protein (about 1 gram per pound of bodyweight) spreadout throughout the day. I drink a gallon of water a day. You may have to drink more. It means going to the john more, but your body will thank you for it. Drink up! That's about it really. There are more details, but those are the fundamentals. Best of luck.

Don P. (who can't believe he responded to a post vs asking a question!)

[please take off the HTML option for your mail...I just deleted the HTML code that was with your email. I think! Remember Brian, this is Beta Software! :) Iron Mike]

ec 1997 18:57:54 -0500 >From: "Scott Garber" <scottg@toad.net> >Subject: A good routine > >I'm a welder by trade and work in the constuction arena. My job is very demanding >physically. Can the hit principles give results or could i be overtraing by lifting 2 times >aweek, with 3-4 days rest. What would be a good workout to follow and how often to >train? Thanks for the list. >Scott Garber There are certainly more qualified people than me to comment on this, but I will give you my $.02. If you have a physically demanding job, I am of the opinion that it is even MORE important to utilize HIT principles to keep from overtraining. Your body does not get the recovery that say a desk jockey gets. :) I would also say that 3 days may not be enough recovery time for you. I would either go with the HD2 1st workout routine with 4 days between workouts, or it may be worth considering to go immedietely to the Consolidation routine of HD2. If you are familiar with those two specific routines, I am sure someone could post them for you. Also, it is likely that they can be found somewhere on the Cyberpump! site anyway. Lastly, with your activity level, make sure you are getting adequate protein (about 1 gram per pound of bodyweight) spreadout throughout the day. I drink a gallon of water a day. You may have to drink more. It means going to the john more, but your body will thank you for it. Drink up! That's about it really. There are more details, but those are the fundamentals. Best of luck. Don P. (who can't believe he responded to a post vs asking a question!) </body></html>

<html><head></head><BODY bgcolor="#FFFFFF">>-------------------- 6 -------------------- >Date: Wed, 3 Dec 1997 18:57:54 -0500 >From: "Scott Garber" <scottg@toad.net> >Subject: A good routine > >I'm a welder by trade and work in the constuction arena. My job is very demanding >physically. Can the hit principles give results or could i be overtraing by lifting 2 times >aweek, with 3-4 days rest. What would be a good workout to follow and how often to >train? Thanks for the list. >Scott Garber There are certainly more qualified people than me to comment on this, but I will give you my $.02. If you have a physically demanding job, I am of the opinion that it is even MORE important to utilize HIT principles to keep from overtraining. Your body does not get the recovery that say a desk jockey gets. :) I would also say that 3 days may not be enough recovery time for you. I would either go with the HD2 1st workout routine with 4 days between workouts, or it may be worth considering to go immedietely to the Consolidation routine of HD2. If you are familiar with those two specific routines, I am sure someone could post them for you. Also, it is likely that they can be found somewhere on the Cyberpump! site anyway. Lastly, with your activity level, make sure you are getting adequate protein (about 1 gram per pound of bodyweight) spreadout throughout the day. I drink a gallon of water a day. You may have to drink more. It means going to the john more, but your body will thank you for it. Drink up! That's about it really. There are more details, but those are the fundamentals. Best of luck. Don P. (who can't believe he responded to a post vs asking a question!) </body></html>

-------------------- 4 --------------------
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 1997 11:37:45 -0500
From: "David R. Heffelfinger" <heffel@pipeline.com>
Subject: reaching failure

Hello,
>
>I believe some on this list will immediately say, "decrease the
>frequency of your workouts." However, since I don't have your workout
>in front of me, I cannot say. This may work, if you are doing full-body
>routines 3x a week, or working-out 4-5x a week/every other day, or are
>working-out with a very high intensity-of-effort.

I doing a full body workout 3 times a week.

>
>Along with the above advice, if it applies, I would suggest you look
>first at your diet. Do you consume adequate calories? Perhaps by
>eating more you may see progress. Adequate macronutrient intake?
>Making adjustments to one's diet often allows them to make substantial
>gains.

This is another issue, I do want to get big, but I want that to be muscle, not fat.

I have actually decreased my caloric intake, in order to get rid of my pot belly (I have lost 11 pounds so far) I believe that if I increase my caloric intake I will gain fat, not muscle, and that's not the volume I want.

I am also running for 15 minutes 3 times a week in order to burn calories.

Thanks forthe advice.
David

-------------------- 5 --------------------
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 1997 11:42:10 -0500
From: "David R. Heffelfinger" <heffel@pipeline.com>
Subject: Re: reaching failure

>
>-------------------- 7 --------------------
>Date: 2 Dec 1997 10:50:30 -0800
>From: "Steve Raymond" <Steve_Raymond@cpqm.mail.saic.com>
>Subject: Re: reaching failure
>
>>I've been noticing that for
>>quite a long time, I reach failure using the same amount of weight at the
>>same number of repetitions, no matter how hard I try I can't perform another
>>repetition in good form.
>
>sounds like you've hit a plateau: some likely reasons:
>
>1. you're over training. how many times per week are you working out? Any
>more than 2 or 3 is too much. the optimal frequnecy varies from person to
>person - some can only gain working out once every ten days.

3 times a wek, full body workout.

>2. you're not eating enough/right. count your calories. your muscles can't
>grow without enough.

I'd like to gain muscle, not fat, I used to have a pot belly (I still do, but it is much smaller now), I have actually reduced my caloric intake to get rid of it, and I'm also running 15 minutes 3 times a week to burn calories (I've *lost* 11 pounds so far).

[please remover your footer...it is wreaking havoc on the SW for some reason when I tried to delete it. Thanks. IM. sorry about this folks]

-------------------- 6 --------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 1997 13:19:05 -0800
From: "Zsiday Viktor" <Vzsiday98@archon.gsm.uci.edu>
Subject: Re: HIT Digest, digest #53,Re: A good routine

I have come to the conclusion that even usual HIT recommendations are overtraining the average trainee. In your case it might be even more serious. I think 3-5 exercises every 7-10 days would be enough. I've seen great gains by doing 3 ex/5 days, and I don't do heavy physical work. I think something like this would help. Squat, Bench, Chin, Sh.press then 7-10 days later Dead, Dips, Row, Calves. I suggest Superslow, and maybe one

static in the end. Thaat's all Good LUCK!!!! WIK

-------------------- 7 --------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 1997 21:24:04 -0800
From: "James Krieger" <jkrieger@eecs.wsu.edu>
Subject: Re: Functional strength

> From: "Brad Collins" <bcollins@hotmail.com>
>
> James Wrote in digest #51
>
> >
> >If grip strength is a limiting factor in an exercise, then this is an
> >indication that grip strength needs to be trained and is all the more
> >reason why one should not use straps during lifting. I'm becoming a
> big
> >believer in what is known as functional strength; i.e. the strength
> you
> >gain in the gym should carry over to real life activities.
>
> Back in another digest (can't remember which) you stated that machines
> (Smith) doesn't give functional strength?

I don't recall stating that machines don't build functional strength. If I did, then I made an incorrect comment. What I was insinuating is that free weights are better suited for building functional strength than machines.

> How can this be?

Real life is not dictated by guide rods and two-dimensional patterns. We are three dimensional beings and daily activities are three dimensional in nature. To build strength that will better apply to real life, then we need to perform activities that are three dimensional in nature, i.e. free weights. I'm not saying that machine strength cannot carry over to real life activities, but I am claiming that free weights are superior for this purpose.

> If you get
> stronger using a machine are you saying the increased strength cannot be
> applied to a sport?

No, this is not what I'm saying.

> There are tons of examples where this is false. I
> believe the "not hitting stabilizers" makes no sense. Here is a
> question for the group. In sports, can you tell which athletes have
> trained on "machines" versus free weights? My answer is a big no.

Of course the answer is no. This question is similar to asking, "In competitive bodybuilding, can you tell which bodybuilders use whey protein and which ones use soy?" Of course you can't.

Also, not hitting the stabilizers makes perfect sense, especially if your goal is injury prevention. For example, when using a Smith machine for bench press, the rotator cuff muscles do not need to do as much work as in a free weight movement. This may create imbalances in the shoulder musculature, which can make one more predisposed for injury.

James Krieger