HIT Digest #76

This digest contains the following messages:

1. static contraction training
by: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=E6=E4=F8_=E6=EE=E5=F8=E4?= <zoharyz@netvision.net.il>
2. Thanks for the input!
by: Kevin Dye <kevind@picknowl.com.au>
3. list "moderation"
by: Jack Darkes, Ph.D. <darkes@luna.cas.usf.edu>
4. GVT
by: Ken Roberts <SAILOR@webtv.net>
5. Fw: New Routine
by: Chatoor <jakim@trinidad.net>
6. General Training question
by: Robert Spector <rspector@earthlink.net>

-------------------- 1 --------------------
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 04:40:13 +0200
From: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=E6=E4=F8_=E6=EE=E5=F8=E4?=" <zoharyz@netvision.net.il> Subject: static contraction training

Can someone explain the concept "static contraction training" ?

Thanks in advance,
Josh

Reply to: <a href="mailto:=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=E6=E4=F8_=E6=EE=E5=F8=E4?= <zoharyz@netvision.net.il>">=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=E6=E4=F8_=E6=EE=E5=F8=E4?= <zoharyz@netvision.net.il></a> <a href="#Top">Top</a> -------------------- 2 --------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 12:10:21 +1030
From: "Kevin Dye" <kevind@picknowl.com.au>
Subject: Thanks for the input!

Thanks to everyone who responded to my HD questions[s]. Much appreciated. In response to

Kevin Dye [kevind@picknowl.net.au]

Reply to: <a href="mailto:Kevin Dye <kevind@picknowl.com.au>">Kevin Dye <kevind@picknowl.com.au></a> <a href="#Top">Top</a> -------------------- 3 --------------------
Date: Mon, 05 Jan 1998 14:00:01 -0800
From: "Jack Darkes, Ph.D." <darkes@luna.cas.usf.edu>
Subject: list "moderation"

Rob wrote:

> Along the same lines you might have noticed that unlike some other....<ahem> "moderated" digests (can't break my own rules here can I?)....the moderator (me) doesn't post. I do have opinions on things (and pretty strong ones which you know if you've read my stuff on Cyberpump!) BUT I feel that posting here would compromise my impartiality.
>
> Seen it happen(ing) on other digests. And I don't think that's fair.
>
> If you REALLY want to know how I personally feel about a topic, then sure, e-mail me. But that's offline stuff that doesn't come on the digest.

I know, I know, this is way off topic, but since you mentioned it I wanted to commend you for this approach to "moderation.". I have been on other "moderated" lists (although I think the owners failed to read the definition) where this was not the case and the "moderator" took the opportunity to interject quite frequently. It came off as if all the posters were potential foils for the "moderator." And, of course, the interjections were never "moderate" but always asserted the moderator's own slant on the topic in question, frequently coming close to chastising. My suggestion to them was usually that they rename the list honestly, in that it solely reflected their own interests and ideas (e.g., "Joe Blow's ideas on training list" - we'll alk about training or nutrition as long as you agree with me). I felt the little marginal comments were less than appropriate and hardly spoke to the goal of holding an open forum.

Having read your stuff, I know you have a strong opinion re: training (as do I), but I think you have used a very level hand with regard to the moderation of this list. I am pleased to hear it will stay that way.

Thanks,

Jack

Reply to: <a href="mailto:Jack Darkes, Ph.D. <darkes@luna.cas.usf.edu>">Jack Darkes, Ph.D. <darkes@luna.cas.usf.edu></a> <a href="#Top">Top</a> -------------------- 4 --------------------
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 21:54:13 -0800
From: SAILOR@webtv.net (Ken Roberts)
Subject: GVT

Thanks to Lyle for the response to my question r.e. GVT. However, let me assure you that, if I were to train the way you suggest, I would be overtraining after only two cycles! This is a 50 yr. old guy, here, who's been training only about three years now and my recovery is not like that of you young guys. As a matter of fact, Stuart McRobert might have dedicated his book , "Brawn", specifically to me! So, let me ask you; just what is going to happen if I extend my recovery period to 10 days instead of the proscribed 5? Atrophy? I've already (by experimentation) ascertained that some of my body parts(e.g. my lats) will actually regress (using HIT protocols) if trained more frequently than every 10 (despite Sandeep's insistance to the contrary :) ). What do you suggest?
As to Brad Collins' statements; of course, you are correct in your questioning my statement that I am going to failure on each of the10 rep sets for 10 sets. A rediculous statement and one I wouldnot have made had I proofread my post. What I meant was that I am failing befor I finish 10 reps somewhere around my 8th set and finishing up the remaining sets, going to failure with each, but with decreasing reps with each succeeding set. And "failure" means concentric failure with static contraction 'till I can't hold up the weight any longer (intense enough?). As to the tenor of your post, I can only say I wish I had your faith in the system. I have been using HIT exclusively for a year and a half and, as I said in my post, have not been experiencing the gains I would like. I understand that that's possibly due to some lack on my part, but that's just what I'm trying to find out for myself by going high volume. If this doesn't work then it's back to HIT again ( I would probably go back after the end of the cycle just to change things up, anyway).
Ken

Reply to: <a href="mailto:Ken Roberts <SAILOR@webtv.net>">Ken Roberts <SAILOR@webtv.net></a> <a href="#Top">Top</a> -------------------- 5 --------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 07:03:12 -0400
From: "Chatoor" <jakim@trinidad.net>
Subject: Fw: New Routine

A little background first.I am 17 years old , and have been lifting seriously for the last 2 years or so. I weigh around 155# ( give or take 2 #). I am 5'10.Relatively low bf% ( I would guess about 10-12% ).I currently
bench 185 for 7 reps and have 14 1/2 inch arms.My goal is to put on between
5 and 10 pounds in the next 6 weeks or so. I am thinking about switching to
a routein which focuses on large compound movements.... How does the one listed below sound??

Deadlift : body weight * max reps. (2 sets)
weighted dips : max reps (2 or 3 sets)
bent over rows : optimal weight for 8 reps (3 sets)

this routine will be supplemented with calf raises, tricep extensions and dumbbell/barbell presses as needed.
I purposely replaced bench presses with the weighted dips since benching has been at the core of my chest work for my entire lifting life... Just thought I would change it up a bit.

Also, I intend to do this routine maybe every 3 or 4 days, is this better than splitting it up and lifting every other day?? Is it ok to lift the first day the soreness has gone? or is it better to wait maybe a day or so after the soreness has gone to lift?? I find that after an intense workout , it takes my body about 4 or 5 days for the soreness to be gone...

Any opinions or suggestions will be greatly appreciated. Thanks
Jason.

Reply to: <a href="mailto:Chatoor <jakim@trinidad.net>">Chatoor <jakim@trinidad.net></a> <a href="#Top">Top</a> -------------------- 6 --------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 20:32:53 -0500
From: "Robert Spector" <rspector@earthlink.net>
Subject: General Training question

My first post to this digest. Hi to everyone.

I have a question I've been thinking about and will now throw out for discussion to this
group:

Hypothetically, suppose I followed a training regimen as follows. I always use "low" reps (low time actually). Let's say I do only 3-4 reps at a 4/4 speed which equates to 24-32 seconds of tension. Suppose that instead of adding reps, I always add very small amounts of weight, like 1lb so I remain at the same rep range. Let's also assume that this rep (time) range is slightly below what I "should" be doing in terms of being within my "anaerobic threshold".

Will my results suffer? Why? Anything "wrong" with this approach?