This digest contains the following messages:

Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 00:06:04 -0500 (EST)
From: Brian Bucher 
Subject: For James Krieger, volume, Type I fibers (Re:#30)


'Lo all.  Back again with more food for thought.  Oh, the "For James.."
in the header is just to let him know I'm requoting and discussing
some of his material.  I don't mean to convey an "only James should
reply to this" message.

In Digest 30, MSG 13, James Krieger wrote:

> Since Type IIA fibers have greater
> endurance capacity than Type IIB's, then this also indicates that higher
> volumes of training would be necessary to adequately stimulate these
> fibers.  Also, higher volumes of training are necessary to adequately
> stimulate Type I fibers, which are not adequately stimulated by low volume,
> high intensity training.

Krieger, J., "Re: Volume, studies, endurance training, etc.", HIT Digest #30,
MSG13, Sat, 1 Nov 1997


What type of "volume" do you mean?  From the context it appears that you
claim higher volume in terms of total number of work sets is needed to
stimulate IIA and I fibers.  I don't see this as necessarily being the
case.  Since they have a higher endurance capacity, one could train using
higher reps (thus a higher time-under-tension) and train the endurance
capacity.  I don't see why one would need to use more sets if they just
use higher reps.

Agree?  Disagree?  Other?  :)

I do like the idea of training an exercise with 3 distinct rep ranges
in the same workout, every so often.  For example, maybe once every 4-8
weeks you could perform the bench press as follows, and then go back to
a "normal" routine.
 
Warmup sets
Work set 1:  to failure at 6 reps
Work set 2:  to failure at 12 reps
Work set 3:  to failure at 25 reps
3 min rest between sets
 
I believe this has been referred to as "holistic" training.

Thanks,
Brian
Top

Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 00:08:16 -0800
From: "James Krieger" 
Subject: My final words on aerobics

Boy, my post on aerobics sure stirred up quite a ruckus!  To avoid any
circular arguments, I am only responding to certain comments made by
certain individuals, and making sure I am saying something that has not
been said before.  Some people, though, obviously completely misunderstood
some of my comments or took them out of context and therefore I need to
clarify what my stance is on aerobic exercise.

1.  P. Zappola mentioned how aerobics are inferior to weight training for
modifying body composition
2.  A. Baye asked, "Why not just address the muscles more safely and
efficiently with HIT?"
3.  A. Baye mentioned a running quote from Arthur Jones and Stephen Turner
asked why brief, infrequent training would not be good for cardiovascular
conditioning.
4.  A. Baye mentioned slight cardiovascular conditioning and insignificant
# of calories burned by running, and how strength training was better.
5.  A. Baye mentioned injuries to joints and spine and the appearance of
marathon runners
6.  A. Baye comments:  "By convincing a person that all they need to do is
go to
step aerobics, or use their "cardioglide" or some other piece of garbage,
and
that they do not need to strength train, is doing them a great disservice."

My responses (1-6), and a final word:

1.  Nowhere in my post did I ever mention anything about body composition. 
I
agree with the Superslow advocates that strength training is a superior
method of making significant positive alterations in body composition.  If
anyone were to read some old posts of mine on the old Training-Nutrition
list or the Weights list, they would find that I engaged in some debates
advocating the benefits of strength training over endurance training for
modification of body composition.  My post did not support the use of
aerobics over strength training for achieving positive alterations in body
composition.

However, not everyone engaging in an aerobic exercise program is looking
for modifications of body composition (if they are, then they're not going
about it in the most efficient manner).  
Some are looking to improve cardiovascular conditioning (more on this
later), and strength training is an inferior method for
making significant improvements (notice I said significant.  I'm not saying
that improvements cannot occur) in cardiovascular and endurance
conditioning.

2.  Strength training and endurance training effect muscles in a completely
different manner.  First, we must define strength and endurance.

Strength:  The maximal force production capability of a muscle

Endurance:  The ability of a muscle to sustain a submaximal force for an
extended period of time.

Now, it is true that if we increase strength, we will increase endurance to
an extent.  For example, if we improve our 1 RM in a lift, our ability to
do repetitions with 80% of that 1 RM will also improve.  However, the more
submaximal of a force we need, and the longer we need to sustain this
submaximal force, the less benefit that we derive from strength training. 
Improving our 1 RM will greatly improve our # of reps at 80% 1 RM, but will
not nearly have the same effect on our ability to do reps with 20% of 1 RM;
 there actually might be little or no change in our reps with 20% of 1 RM. 
This is the SAID principle at work.  Endurance and strength operate on the
following continuum:

Endurance<------------------------------------------------------>Strength

The further we get towards one side or the other, the less of an effect one
has on the other.

When we look at the adaptations physiologically, we would find that
strength training results in adaptations conducive to maximum force
generation, and endurance training results in adaptations conducive to
submaximal force sustainment:

Strength training reduces or does not change mitochondrial densities in
muscle tissue, while endurance training increases these densities.  The
demand for oxidative metabolism on muscles is much, much greater for
endurance training, which is why mitochondrial density must increase to
better handle this oxidative stress.  The mitochondria are the locations of
aerobic energy production within a cell.  An increase in mitochondria in
the cell increases the cell's ability to produce aerobic energy.  Strength
training can decrease mitochondrial density, and therefore is a vastly
inferior method for increasing the endurance capabilities of a muscle.

Strength training can reduce myoglobin content in a muscle, which decreases
a muscle's ability to extract oxygen.  Endurance training increases
myoglobin content, increasing a muscle's ability to extract oxygen. 
Sustained aerobic exercise requires much more oxygen than resistance
training, and therefore, to make a muscle more efficient at performing
sustained aerobic exercise, we must perform aerobic exercise to induce an
increase in myoglobin content so that our muscles can more efficiently
handle oxygen.  Strength training is an inferior method for accomplishing
this task since it can reduce myglobin content.

Low volume strength training reduces capillary density within muscle
tissue, while endurance training increases capillary density.  More
capillaries means more oxygen delivered to muscles to help sustain aerobic
exercise.  Since low volume strength training cannot increase capillary
density, it is a vastly inferior method for inducing adaptations to
increase the oxygen supply to muscle tissue, which is very necessary for
sustained aerobic exercise.

Endurance training results in an increase in the number and activity of
enzymes responsible for the aerobic metabolism of glucose.  Since strength
training is an anaerobic activity, it does not result in this adaptation
and cannot enhance endurance in this manner.

These completely different physiologic adaptations that occur within muscle
tissue due to the different types of training necessitates that if someone
is interested in both strength and endurance, that person must engage in
both types of activities to achieve the necessary adaptations.  Strength
training is as much of an inferior method for maximizing endurance as
endurance training is an inferior method for maximizing strength.

3.  My response begins with a personal story.  Throughout highschool, I was
a
competitive swimmer.  Whenever I would run for P.E., play basketball with
my friends, or take a break from swimming to run distance during track
season, I found that I would perform very well compared to an individual
who did not participate in regular cardiovascular exercise.  I could
perform these sustained activities without becoming excessively winded or
exhausted;  I could run a great 1600 m time despite no running at all. 
This was due to the superior cardiovascular conditioning afforded to me by
swimming.

When I went to college, I stopped swimming and engaged in strength
training.  Strength training has been my sole activity for the past 6 years
now.  While my strength has vastly improved over from when I started (for
example, 8-10 RM dips with my bodyweight to 3 RM with 125 lbs strapped to
my waist at a bodyweight approximately 30-35 lbs heavier), my
cardiovascular conditioning is now vastly inferior.  For example, I easily
become winded after walking a long, long flight of steps.  I will now
outline a story of a bet that I made which demonstrates the inferior
cardiovascular conditioning afforded to me from strength training:

When I was in school at the University of Washington, I placed a $25 bet
with my roommate that I could beat him in a game of one-on-one basketball. 
I had better basketball skills than him (this was why I made the bet,
feeling I could beat him), although both of us were poor compared to
regular basketball players.  Again, strength training was my only activity,
while he was an endurance athlete, engaging in mountain biking.  I was
significantly stronger than this individual.  However, when we played the
game, he simply wore me down by constantly running back and forth around
the basket.  I became extremely winded and exhausted, and reached a point
where I could not keep up with him.  He beat me and I lost the bet. 
Compared to me, he was not working nearly as hard.  Why?  His
cardiovascular conditioning was superior to mine since he regularly engaged
in endurance training.  I never became so exhausted playing basketball when
I was a competitive swimmer.

Now, let's look at physiological adaptations on the cardiovascular system
to endurance exercise:

As far as the issue of VO2 max is concerned, if VO2 max was completely
genetically determined, then we would never see any improvement in it due
to endurance training.  However, numerous scientific studies have
demonstrated increases in VO2 max due to endurance training.  Even the
notion that it can be improved by only 20% is still a significant
improvement.

As far as the reliability of VO2 max is concerned, if VO2 max was truly an
unreliable test, then we would not see consistent results across the wealth
of scientific studies that demonstrate increases in VO2 max due to
endurance training and little to no changes due to strength training.

Endurance training requires the body to pump a large amount of blood at a
low pressure, while strength training requires the body to pump a small
amount of blood at a very high pressure.  These different stimuli cause
different physiologic adaptations within the body.  At rest, the body pumps
a large amount of blood at a low pressure.  Therefore, to make the body
more efficient at doing this, we must perform endurance training.

Endurance training increases plasma volume and total blood hemoglobin,
enhancing the ability of the body to deliver oxygen to working muscles. 
Strength training does not result in such an adaptation, since it is an
anaerobic activity.  Therefore, it is absolutely necessary to perform
endurance training to achieve this type of adaptation.

Endurance training can result in a significant increase in resting cardiac
stroke volume, which generally does not result from low volume strength
training.  So, if you want to get your heart to pump significantly more
blood per beat, the most efficient way to do this is through endurance
training.

All of these physiologic adaptations to endurance exercise support the SAID
principle:  to significantly increase the abilities of your cardiovascular
system to handle endurance activities, then you must perform those
activities.

4.  I have already addressed the cardiovascular conditioning issue earlier
in
this post that you are reading.  It is much more than "slight".

Insignificant # of calories burned?
 
Average energy cost of jogging:  7-9 cal/min
Average energy cost of weight training:  9-10 cal/min
Average daily energy expenditure for a marathon runner:  50-80 cal/kg
bodyweight
Average daily energy expenditure for a weightlifter:  56-75 cal/kg
bodyweight

Not a huge difference.

5.  There is a significant difference between marathon runners and someone
who
jogs 3 times a week for 20 minutes.  On a side note, Dr. Michael Colgan is
one of the youngest looking 50-odd aged men that I have ever seen, looking
like he is in his 30's, and he runs
marathons.  I'm not advocating marathon running here, I am just using him
as an example to indicate that if running was as bad as you claim, he
should be looking like a frail old man in his 70's.

6.  Nowhere in my post did I claim that a person does not need to strength
train.  I advocate strength training just as much as you do for every
individual engaging in an exercise program.  The difference between you and
I is that I do not claim that strength training can provide all of the
benefits of every other form of exercise, because it cannot.

My final words:  Judging from the contents of some posts, some people
seemed to think that I
advocate running.  I do not advocate running;  however, I do not condemn it
either.  The proper structuring of a fitness program depends upon the goal
of an individual.  If an individual approached me and asked me whether they
should start jogging, I would first ask what that person's goals are.  If
the person was looking for significant alterations in body composition,
then I would direct them to a different activity.  If the person was
looking for general cardiovascular improvements, then I would outline the
cardiovascular and other health improvements that jogging can provide, and
also outline the potential injuries that can occur due to jogging.  Now,
jogging carries a higher injury potential than other aerobic activities
such as swimming or riding the stationary bike, so if injuries were a
concern to the individual, then I would direct them to one of these other
activities.

I made a mistake in using running as my example, since it does have a
higher injury risk than other forms of aerobic activity.  The injury
potential of running cannot be extrapolated to other forms of aerobic
activity.  My stance is that the Guild overblows the injury potential of
all forms of aerobic activity.  For example, the "injuries to joint and
spine" and "degenerative joint conditions" are a very rare occurence in
aerobic activities such as swimming or biking.
Such conditions are more a result of overtraining rather than due to the
activity itself.

Hopefully, everyone is now clear where I stand on this issue.  For the
Superslow advocates to convince me otherwise, they will need to provide me
with the following:

On the injury potential of aerobics:

a.  National statistical data demonstrating that aerobic exercise carries a
very high injury potential.  Running is an unfair example because there are
many other forms of aerobic exercise other than running.
b.  The physiological mechanisms explaining why aerobic exercise is
dangerous (provided that overtraining is not occuring.  Strength training
can be just as injury-provoking if overtraining is at work)

On the idea that strength training provides all of the benefits of
endurance exercise:

a.  The physiological adaptations (both muscular and cardiovascular) of
strength training and how they equal or exceed that of endurance training
and how these adaptations benefit endurance exercise more than endurance
training itself.  
b.  Peer-reviewed scientific studies demonstrating this.  Don't give me
evidence that strength training can benefit endurance activities, which is
well known in the scienfitic community;  I'm talking about significant
evidence that strength training can replace endurance activities.

The following cannot convince me:  philosophy, 1970's quotes from Arthur
Jones, blanket statements about exercise science or scientists, or research
from Nautilus that I cannot go look up at my University library.

James Krieger

Top

Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 16:28:34 -0800
From: "James Krieger" 
Subject: Re: Exercise Physiology vs. REAL Scientific Research

> From: "reptile" 
> 
> p.s. I was never a "husky football player" or a "track man" or even
a"jock" (jock-ette?) 
> for that matter. Would it be possible to go back and
> update your ' two' stereotypes - uh, I meant "personalities," of fitness
> professionals for the 90's to include something along the lines of
"former
> rock-band woman Generation X'er turned fitness pro?" 

I also was never a "husky football player" or "track man."  I am a former
computer nerd, with knowledge of programming in C, BASIC, 80x86 assembly,
MIPS assembly, Ada, and ML.  I have written my own floating point routines
in assembly language.  I have helped create 30 second computer animations
using Alias/Wavefront, complete with my own music that I recorded and
software to generate motion curves.  I received a 5 on the AP Calculus test
 (something not many people do) when I graduated from highschool.  So much
for my "dumb jock" mentality.

So I guess I'm a "former computer nerd math musician turned fitness freak."

James Krieger



Top

Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 23:52:03 -0800
From: Jarlo Ilano 
Subject: ACL injury

In addition to Lyle's comments about the inappropriateness of leg extensions
for those who had an ACL injury and those who have undergone surgery to
repair their ACL... Anterior translation of the tibia on the femur is a
movement that the ACL protects against (along with providing rotary
stability).  Leg extensions are harmful also because of the shear stress
that it applies to the patella (kneecap), and in those who have undergone a
patellar tendon-bone graft to repair their ACL, the middle third of the
patellar tendon is used and thus must be protected from stress after
surgery.. stress placed in doing leg extensions.  The reasonn that closed
chain activities, such as 1/4 squats, are used is because these activities
have co-contraction of hamstrings along with quads thus keeping the knee
more stable... Important both for those who chose not to have surgery and
those rehabing from one.
I hope this information was useful rather than pedantic.

Jarlo Ilano
Student
University of Puget Sound
Grad School of Physical Therapy
Tacoma, Washington

Top

Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 00:40:22 -0800
From: Jarlo Ilano 
Subject: ACL and such

---
>Date: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 11:41:34 EST
>From: DrewBaye@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Knee Rehab, Leg Extensions, and Shear Forces
>
Andrew,
I found this post very interesting and definitely brings other things into
consideration, I am glad that you take the time to post what you think is
relevant to this list.  And though I may not agree with some of your
assertions, I am always glad that you take the effort to voice your opinions.

Jarlo

>Date: 30 Jan 1998 14:58:26 -0800
>From: "Steve Raymond" 
>Subject: knee problems
 I will be having
>surgery monday.  FYI they will be putting a piece of tendon from my hamstring
>where my ACL used to be.

Steve, 
I believe you will find some differences in recovering from your surgery,
than others whose physicians have opted for the patellar tendon graft
surgery.  In taking a portion of your semimembranosis tendon (one of the
hamstrings often utilized in this surgery) you will perhaps find the
swelling easier to subside than your counterparts with the patellar tendon
graft, also as your patella tendon is intact knee pain may actually be less
as well.  The choice of surgery technique is up to your orthopod, and there
are of course pros and cons for each method.  I find it interesting to see
which patients tolerate better, though the rehab does tend to be equally
tough going.  And as with all things in life, how well you get and how fast
is determininant upon your adherence to the proper techniques in rehab..
(both performing the exercises/stretching you are supposed to and not doing
the things you are not supposed to)... By the way, though return to full
activities is dependent upon your particular physical therapist, it takes
around 6 months (or more conservatively) to be fully able to do such
activities as cutting sports (basketball and the like).
Good luck in your surgery and recovery.

Jarlo Ilano
Student
University of Puget Sound
Grad School of Physical Therapy
Tacoma, Washington

Top

Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 19:13:40 EST
From: DrewBaye@aol.com
Subject: Re: Physiological adaptations to resistance training

<< strength training has generally been  shown to cause a decrease in
mitochondrial density and a decrease in  capillary density >>

Actually, strength training has been shown to increase the number of
mitochondria and significant degrees of neovascularization (new capillary
growth) has also been associated with strength training. Of course, if growth
of other tissues in the muscle (myofibrils, connective tissue, etc.) outpaces
increases in these other factors, then it is certainly possible to improve
these two factors while simultaneously decreasing their density. And it has
been demonstrated that concentrations of aerobic and anaerobic enzymes and LA
buffers are increased with strength training.

Andrew M. Baye
www.superslow.com
Top

Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 13:40:55 +0100

From: Leo.van.Buren@rivm.nl

Subject: high protein intake to lose fat





In my opinion it is impossible to lose bodyfat without losing muscle, but

it would be nice for me if it was possible to lose a few pounds of bodyfat

(not much ) with a minimum loss in muscles and strength.  I am not planning

to do more aerobics, do more sets or longer reps, the only thing I want to

change in my workout at this point  in time is my diet. So for march, april

and may I am planning to decrease my carbohydrate intake and increase my

protein intake from about 1.1 grams/pound BW to 2-3 grams/pound BW. This

increase of protein was a suggestion from someone at my gym who claims that

a increase in protein like this will give higherlevels of growth hormone

which could possibly allow for increased fat burning and muscle building,

even on a calorically restricted diet.



Well I am pretty sure that this muscle building part is impossible, but

will someone on a  high protein diet possibly adapt to using fat as fuel to

spare muscle glycogen stores and keep muscle tissue breakdown after

exercise very low ?



In my opinion muscle glycogen stores will be used anyway because this is

the easiest way for a muscle to get it's energy, but on the other hand I

was thinking that I could at least try this.



But what do you people think: can a high protein diet (2-3 g/pound BW) on a

calorically restricted diet increase fat burning and avoid muscle loss?



Leo




Top

Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 14:07:43 -0500

From: "Michael F. Allen"

Subject: Leg Exercises



I'm asking this question mostly for my teenage son who is just beginning

working out with weights, but I am curious for myself as well.  Are leg

presses and/or squats alone enough of a workout for legs, or should we be

incorporating leg extensions and leg curls? By the way, I just bought Matt

Brzycki's book "Strength Training for Youth" and in it he recommends that

younger teenagers or less mature teenagers (bodywise) should do leg presses

rather than squats. His explaination made good sense to me, so I've changed

my son's workout from squats to leg presses. Now I am wondering if leg

presses alone are enough. Basically my son wants to get stronger for soccer

and basketball. Obviously leg strength is very important in both sports. It

seems that the leg press or squats work  all of the leg muscles at the same

time, while the extensions and curls isolate the quads and hamstrings. I

don't want to make his workouts too long, or it might become too much of a

chore for him and he won't continue. Right now he is basically doing two

exercises per body part, and most of the exercises work multiple areas such

as dips, pulldowns, and bench presses. If he does leg extensions I think he

should also do leg curls to balance the development of quads and

hamstrings. Should we stick to just doing leg presses or should we add the

leg extensions and curls?



Thanks,



Mike Allen





.








Top

Date: Sat, 07 Feb 1998 11:15:40 -0800
From: YVRWFC@netcom.ca
Subject: Warm up..how much is enough?

Hi..

Q1. I am a beginner.. My personl trainer suggests me to do 36mins of
warm up (treadmill, stairs, bike each of 12mins, with no stop in
between) to begin with every workout..
i do wt (APEX machine) 3x a week , and another 2 or 3 times a week i do
all aerobics/cardio only... 

Now my question is.. sometimes i feel exhausted after the 36mins warm
up.. and find myself short of energy to do the wts...

I hv tried to lower the level of difficulty when doing the 36min warm up
or sometimes i reduce the total time.. am i cheating? or i just lack of
energy or strength? 

Q2. As a beginner, my trainer suggests me to use machine only.. Should I
also consider using free weights? or combination of both? I was reading
the Men's Health mag (Jan/Feb issue), and they have a wt training
pullout program.. i look at it, my current program is prettymuch the
same as the magazine one.. except mine is exclusively on machine while
the magazine uses free wts...   Any advice? 

Thks for yr info.

A beginner- William
Top

Date: Sun, 1 Feb 1998 23:25:15 -0600 (CST)
From: lylemcd@onr.com (Lyle McDonald)
Subject: Re: Strength and CV conditioning

>Date: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 12:12:38 EST
>From: DrewBaye@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Strength Training and Cardiovascular Conditioning
>
>During the Nautilus Project: Total Conditioning at West Point Military
>Academy, research subjects, who were already highly conditioned football
>players, had their heart rates monitored during HIT workouts. They wore heart
>rate monitors which transmitted a signal to an EKG which had been modified to
>give a readout on a spedometer type gauge, of their heart rate. These already
>highly conditioned athletes maintained HR's of around 220 BPM for durations of
>40 minutes during these workouts. When their HR's approached 230, they eased
>off on them, when they began to drop close to 210, they pushed them harder.

Considering that Physiological maximum correlates generally well with
220-age I find this a bit hard to believe.  Unless EVERY subject in this
study was a genetic oddity, falling outside whatever confidence interval
that 220-age provides.  I ahve known the very occasional person who has a
genetically high HR like this but EVERY subject?




Lyle McDonald, CSCS


Top

Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 03:11:01 EST
From: SFarrin261@aol.com
Subject: Re: ABCDE Diet

I saw a post on an earlier digest asking about experience with the Anabolic
Burst Diet. Sorry this is so late but I've been catching up on back digests. 

I started using the ABCDE diet 21 Nov. 97. My body weight was 206, I was
struggling to get above 210 to no avail. I would stab upwards to about 208 and
then fall back comfortably to round 206.  For 2 weeks prior to starting the
diet I was sick and did no work out. I consumed approx. 1800 Cal../ day. so I
just jumped into the High Calorie portion at approx. 4265 Cal./day. Results:
for the first week and 2 days I moved up to around 209 then on day 8, I began
taking on some serious weight. I gained approx. 2 lbs./day and blew past a
long standing plateau of 3 months right to 215 with no gains the last day. My
training consisted of a HIT style, double split routine, all upper body one
day then 4 -5 days later all lower body; no more than 7 exercises per session;
1 set to failure.

I have been thru 3 cycles since (on low Cal. phase now). I have gone as low as
204 and gone up to 217 as of last Friday. I was disappointed at not reaching
220 but when I measured that same day I had gained an inch and a quarter on my
chest/lats and lost a half an inch on my gut, along with assorted other gains.

I had no noticeable benefits to the protein cycling that is detailed on the
MM2k home page so I dropped it. I believe this next high Cal. cycle I am going
to drastically increase my Cal./day above the recommended  additional100
calories/ cycle. I'm toying with the idea of adding 300+ because I believe the
"Shock" of that many calories after practically starving for 2 weeks, is what
sent my body weight skyrocketing the first time. 

My Opinion of the ABCDE diet. I like it. Reason # 1 I'm cheap so cycling my
nutritional needs up and down generally costs less money than constantly
trying to forge ahead with ever increasing caloric intakes, which don't seem
to yield big results anyway. Reason #2 it's easy. I can stay well diciplined
for 2 weeks at a time knowing that the next phase (high or low calorie, take
your pick) is just around the corner.

Just a side note. I am very interested in getting any feedback regarding this
diet and/or my training. I keep excellent records of almost everything. I am
always striving to improve. I think more discourse involving the specific
details (ie. poundages, calories...) of peoples training or nutrition could
help us all to find some pattern for success. I can be reached at SFarrin261 @
aol.com. 

God Bless - Sean
Top

Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 09:03:45 -0500
From: "Gary Moulds" 
Subject: Good Warmup?

I've been making really good progress with HIT (one set to failure), and am
now starting to use some bigger poundages.  The problem is that I don't
feel completely warmed up when I begin each training session.  Are there
any good warmups that warm up the whole body without wearing it out before
the workout?

Thanks
Top

Date: Mon, 02 Feb 1998 10:42:52 -0500
From: Stephen Turner 
Subject: Jeffrey Hall's Deadlift questions

Jeffrey, I do deadlift specifically to work my lower back.  I do what I
call 'almost stiff leg deadlift'.  I use dumbells about at my feet, less
than body weight, and use the lower back as a lever, bringing the weights
slowly up to mid thigh only, to keep tension on.  I don't think I could
even do regular deadlifts, the weights would have to go right through my
shins or something because of my body proportions.

Regards, Steve

PS I was also wondering what BFS meant
Top

Date: Mon, 02 Feb 1998 11:43:59 -0500
From: Stephen Turner 
Subject: Leg extensions

I read the article on leg extensions at Superslow.  I can't figure out if
it said ok or not ok to do them.  Drew, can you translate a bit for me.

Steve
Top

Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 14:39:19 EST
From: FlexWriter@aol.com
Subject: Re: Deadlift


Jeffrey Hall wrote

<>

The deadlift targets your whole body, especially the entire back, legs, and
hips.  It may be the single best size/strength movement you can do.

<>

An intelligent move on your part.  Get that form down before you start pulling
the heavy weights.

<<  So,
yesterday I was using just the bar (a mere 45 lbs.) and I was surprised to
find that I felt the strain not in my legs OR upper back, but in my lower
back.  Since I had never heard that the deadlift works your lower back, I
figured that either: I have weak lower back muscles that I need to
strengthen, or I am doing the deadlift incorrectly.  Did anybody else feel
the deadlift in their lower back when they started?>>

The deadlift STRONGLY works the lower back.  You're normal.



<>

Jeff, the day after doing deadlifts my shins and knees are bruised and scabbed
from being scraped by the bar.  You DON'T want to lean too far forward as this
places an inordinate amount of stress on the lower back.  Keep your lower back
flat, not rounded, and initiate the pull by trying to push your heels through
the floor.  The bar should rub against your leg throughout the ascent and
descent.

AT your height, you may be better off doing sumo-style deadlifts.  This
involves taking a wide-legged stance and grabbing the bar with your hands
inside your knees instead of outside your knees.

There's a very informative article, with photos, on the deadlift in the
February issue of Muscle Media.
Top