|
Post by al on Mar 6, 2008 11:16:11 GMT -5
Yea, Petey, it was added grip work I was thinking about when considering what you might be doing with your free hands. ;D
|
|
|
Post by hoboken on Mar 6, 2008 12:50:34 GMT -5
Theoretically you could do pullups I suppose. I'd have to check that out for practicality though! Then there's the stabilization (FunknWagnall) aspect of being able to brace yourself while doing calf raises or any other exercises while wearing the dreaded "Skirt o' Pain"!! Should we be discussing these "secrets" in the clear like this? Can we scramble this communique?! Heh-heh-heh!! ;>)
|
|
|
Post by al on Mar 7, 2008 13:57:00 GMT -5
No need to scramble anything, Pete. We let it all hang out here. If it takes iron skirts to get the job done, then iron skirts we'll wear. In fact, I think you, Jason, and I should choreograph a synchronized dance routine with them on, then tour the local Marine bases.
|
|
|
Post by hoboken on Mar 7, 2008 14:22:46 GMT -5
Hyuk!! I already have the music Al, wanna hear it? Here it goes: "Boom-chaka-laka-laka, Boom chaka-laka-laka, Boom-A-Boom!!" Now as far as footwear goes, hmmm. letz see, flats or heels? Flats or heels? No...., wait, ! got it, "Iron Boots!" And then we sing "These boots are made fer walkin' and thatz just what they'll do! Dese boots are made fer walkin' and they'll walk all over yoouuuuuuu!!!!" Why stay local? I'm suuure they'll love us everywhere!!!! Wonder if we can get a Tony or a Grammy out of it?!! Probly not , "heavy metal" never takes that kind of stuff!! I go now to Klump around to da tunes in my 'Lair"! ;>)
|
|
|
Post by koneill on Mar 18, 2008 8:52:54 GMT -5
I don't subscribe to the artificial distinction between volume vs HIT, nor genetically gifted vs hard gainers: perhaps that's because both distinctions violate the principles of statistical distribution! Not to mention decades of exercise physiology research and evolution of coaching practices seemingly ignored by bodybuilding.
Since last fall I've been doing 5 Day MET training and love it. After 48 years of training, as I approach 64, I've discovered a method of training that's regularly making me stronger, more muscle, and leaner all at one and the same time.
MET's kind of hard to explain in a few words. In fact, I just submitted a lengthy article to one of the muscle mags about it. Took more than a month of rewrites to get it to a point I was satisfied with. MET is an integration of innervation and hybrid training, done largely in complexes of 2-4 movements with no rest and incomplete recovery between complexes. Each body part is worked twice weekly, once as a strength training type session, the second as deloading, plyo, and proprioceptive movements. Exhausting? Yes. But the outcome has been rapidly increasing levels of intensity and training density, resulting in becoming far more fit than ever before.
best regards - and what a great new forum for us "matured" trainers!
|
|
|
Post by al on Mar 18, 2008 17:06:09 GMT -5
I just read some of your insightful posts on Dave Draper's sight. Based on your response to my input, I can see your approach differs greatly from mine; however, anyone who knows me will attest to the fact that I'm not a slave to any particular method. In fact, I'm a big proponent of "Eveything works. Nothing works forever."
From first glance, it appears the MET approach uses undulating periodization, which we all know is well proven. From your comments, above, it also appears to be a great way to get into the shape I need to be in when I switch from powerlifting/bodybuilding to endurance training/bodybuilding, as the summer hiking/climbing season approaches.
Not too sure what you mean by the artificial distinctions between HIT and volume training violating the principles of statistical distribution. Care to explain?
|
|
|
Post by koneill on Mar 18, 2008 20:50:33 GMT -5
Statistical distribution, so aptly represented in the Bell shaped curve, doesn't admit of a black versus white world. In my opinion, the hard gainer versus genetically gifted distinction is an example of a black and white view of the world devoid of any shades of grey. In normal terms of statistical distribution we'd expect 16% of a population to be at either extreme end, the remaining 62% somewhere in between.
that seems to apply to volume vs HIT as well. It certainly does in Darden's The New HIT and a later publication - both reviewed by me in the November 2007 issue of Iron Man. Darden adds all sorts of set extending techniques along with two and three way split routines resulting in four to six days of weekly training.
Steve Holman of Iron Man has recently creditted a seemingly otherwise overlooked passage in one of the two early strata of Jones' Nautilus training books concerning use of partial reps, what steve calls x-reps. Those inform his new routine called 3D HIT. And it, too, is somewhere between HIT and volume - in that gray area.
Darden's latest book makes the bold statement that volume and "intensity" are not opposites but neighbors.
For me, intensity is the bottom line - regardless of how many sets or reps. Scott Abel's insight really got to me: progressive intensity training. He backs that up with considerable research pertaining to strength and hypertrophy from an area we muscleheads rarely seem to pay attention to: neuroscience that studies strength and hypertrophy from the perspective of the nervous system AND conscious intentionality.
That's how I see it - at least for today!!!
best
|
|
|
Post by koneill on Mar 18, 2008 21:09:00 GMT -5
The Renaissance Man wrote: "From first glance, it appears the MET approach uses undulating periodization, which we all know is well proven. From your comments, above, it also appears to be a great way to get into the shape I need to be in when I switch from powerlifting/bodybuilding to endurance training/bodybuilding, as the summer hiking/climbing season approaches. "
First, thanks for the term "undulating periodization" - although I think it might be more accurate to think of it as something akin to "undulating conjugate training" - assuming I've ever quite managed to figure out Louie Simmons approach for transcription to bodybuilding application!
Add to that innervation training's emphasis on deliberate conscious joint angles and flexion of target muscle through ROM, variation of positions to stimulate maximal development of neural pathways. adding up to what looks like an expanded significance of application of the term "intensity" as Progressive Intensity Training. Next element is multiplanar training - getting out of sagital plane dominance, also known in some quarters as Hybrid Training. Last but not least, training in complexes of varying moves (looks like giant sets but is different) to induce deep oxygen debt, then go on to next round with incomplete recovery.
MET is not easy to explain - at least not for me at this time. That's due to the elements mentioned above being developed over the years, forming a hierarchy of components now integrated into MET practices. Abel's forthcoming training manual has more than 700 discrete movements catalogued for use! Astonishing - and calls for an imaginative reading.
Not easy to explain? I just submitted an article to one of the mags a week ago. Not since my thesis has anything taken so much work - and my thesis included work with both Sanskrit and Chinese texts, not a 268 page book in English! On the face of things, Abel's approach "looks LIKE" other approaches in a way ensuring appearances being deceptive. More likely, however, the underlying research materials he's assembled over three decades form a paradigm rather different than what most of us are even familiar with.
Now, I should quickly clarify: having been around the Irongame for nearly 49 years, I'm not easily impressed and admit to a somewhat jaded outlook on fantastic claims and hyperbole toting news of new breakthrough methods. What's more, Abel is not a folk guru, etc. What got my interest perked was reading articles on T-Nation that were over my head - even after several readings. At first I dismissed my confusion on what I thought were idiosyncratic uses of words; in fact, my ignorance was spell binding my learning. All of which is to say that instead of being some starry eyed, fawning devotee I was more akin to David Hume admitting to having been shaken awake from his "dogmatic slumber." It was from there that this ignorant old man was launched into a life-changing round of education. And admission of having such institutional tunnel vision that I'd missed some major developments occuring all around me in other sports for more than a decade. That's pretty humbling!
best. And thanks for the good response. It's nice to joint a matured community of discussion in an era of internet forums chiefly airing the opinions of rude people seemingly incapable of civil, fun discussion and exchange of ideas.
|
|
|
Post by jasony on Mar 19, 2008 9:08:28 GMT -5
When I was young, I would take a routine and try to follow it to the letter. As I grew and became involved in organized sports, routines were prescribed for me and were followed. Now that I've matured (physically) I have learned to take a program and adjust it to my needs.
|
|
|
Post by al on Mar 19, 2008 19:11:55 GMT -5
Jason - That's exactly what I'm trying to do with Louie Simmon's brand of conjugate periodization. We all know it's a great method for powerlifting. I'm trying to develop a bodybuilding/powerlifting combo, using Westside's dynamic effort / max effort approach. As you know, I've been frying my CNS every third week; however, hope springs eternal.
Ken - I wonder how many of the guys on Dave Draper's sight would have argued with you if they knew who you are or at least realized you had such a good grasp of HIT. I think what threw everybody off was your having to talk around MET. At the start, it did appear that you were either an Abel plant trying to soft sell his method or someone who fell for his "fantastic claims and hyperbole". Perhaps you could post some exerpts from your article for clarification? Better yet, why not post your workouts in our Daily Routines section?
Holman may have given Jones the credit for turning him onto what became x-reps, but we were doing those things in the '60s. They were called "burns"....Wait a minute! You've got me by two years. You knew that right? LOL
|
|
|
Post by al on Mar 20, 2008 9:23:42 GMT -5
Jason - That's exactly what I'm trying to do with Louie Simmon's brand of conjugate periodization. We all know it's a great method for powerlifting. I'm trying to develop a bodybuilding/powerlifting combo, using Westside's dynamic effort / max effort approach. As you know, I've been frying my CNS every third week; however, hope springs eternal. Ken - I wonder how many of the guys on Dave Draper's sight would have argued with you if they knew who you are or at least realized you had such a good grasp of HIT. I think what threw everybody off was your having to talk around MET. At the start, it did appear that you were either an Abel plant trying to soft sell his method or someone who fell for his "fantastic claims and hyperbole". Perhaps you could post some exerpts from your article for clarification? By the way, we'd love it if you'd post your workouts in our Daily Routines section. I'm sure we'd all learn a lot. Holman may have given Jones the credit for turning him onto what became x-reps, but we were doing those things in the '60s. They were called "burns"....Wait a minute! You've got me by two years. You knew that right? LOL
|
|
|
Post by koneill on Mar 20, 2008 16:16:18 GMT -5
Holman may have given Jones the credit for turning him onto what became x-reps, but we were doing those things in the '60s. They were called "burns"....Wait a minute! You've got me by two years. You knew that right? LOL Yep, we learned about them in the articles about Larry Scott, maybe Vince Gironda. Credit should be given to Holman for accute observation. His DX0 - double x-s, originate from watching closely what Jay Cutler actually does in training. Instead of burns at the end of a set he does a fairly full short of lockout rep, then one or two "hitches" or short burns. A set of those are brutal - that is, d**ned good!
|
|
|
Post by koneill on Apr 20, 2008 20:09:59 GMT -5
It occurs to me there's another dimension to the HIT v Volume discussion. One from The Iron Guru himself, Vince Gironda (wish I'd not let his publications out of sight years ago). What he called intensity is rather different from Arthur Jones - and they were using the same dang word and writing at the same time. These days it's called density instead of intensity. Christian Thibaudeau has written some about it on T-Nation, while Abel has a lot to say about it as a training goal.
As an aside, I suspect density is used somewhere in athletic conditioning publications - somewhere I haven't found yet. It has to be since it's of utmost importance to high performance sport.
Density, at first glance, looks like endurance. They sort of overlap. Discussions of endurance that I'm familiar with don't, however, talk about it in terms of progressive intensity of a sort that instead of pyramid rep ranges one instead stays with an optimal working weight for 4, 6, even 8 sets at the same rep range - each set pretty much equally hard. With pyramiding, we might hit 12 with a first set, 10-11 with a second, and so on down the hill or even dropping weight for later sets. Not with density. Density also works with increasing O2 debt - thereby enhancing post-workout elevated metabolic rate for upwards of 12-24 hours. High speed and strength sports like sprinting, gymnastics, speed skating train this way. Gironda had his stable of world champions training like this in the 60s - at that time we chalked their ripped appearance to Blair's Milk & Egg protein blend with the recommended unpasturized thick dairy cream; now it seems the metabolic effect came from density training. The great thing is max output is enhanced.
tell you the truth, when I first read about density training last year my investment in traditional ideas led me to dismiss it as a gimmick - and impossible. Now five months later and due to that many month's doing progressive intensity/density training, I am amazed to know it's a truth. And there's no way I fit into the genetically gifted category. And as I approach turning 64 in July, I'm sure glad i met up with density training. it's akin to interval training in other sports.
best regards,
|
|
|
Post by al on Apr 21, 2008 16:22:22 GMT -5
Thanks, Ken. I did a Gironda 6x6 routine for a few weeks late last summer, and it really kicked my butt. Keeping to twenty seconds between sets makes each exercise more like 36 reps a rest/pause after every sixth rep.
|
|
|
Post by Ken ONeill on May 22, 2008 13:40:57 GMT -5
Some time ago I was asked about Scott Abel training. the July 2008 issue of Iron Man Magazine just hit the news racks, including part 1 of a two part article on Scott's training.
|
|