![]() ![]() Hackenschmidt- Matysek-Liederman Collage made by Bob Whelan |
![]() |
|
| Rules of this Board | NaturalStrength.com | Contact | This is a Label Free Zone | Store | Facebook |
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
drumstrong |
slow training |
Lead | |
|
Posts: 47 ( 4-Mar-09 15:00:54) |
anybody every use slow training w/free weights? I know Drew Israel did this a while back but I believe w/Hammer plate loaded. Dick Connor is a slow speeder.
Was curious about the barbell squat and trap bar deadlift at slow speeds and the load on the lower back.
|
||
grffn |
|||
|
Posts: 608 ( 4-Mar-09 16:32:00) Moderator |
I tried super slow for a few weeks and didn't like it. Probably shoulda stuck with it longer for a better test run. It just wasn't enjoyable to me,I
know training isn't supposed to be all fun and games but you gotta somewhat enjoy what your doing, in my opinion. I suppose you can do slow with
squats,deadlift varieties but it will be technically difficult. I also don't like the idea of pausing/moving superslow in the bottom or "hole"
position of squatting. more chance of rounding/hurting lower back. I don't blast thru the lower positions but I don't hang around either. The deadlift
is also a lift I wouldn't want to linger around at the bottom,alotta stress for the lower back. All that being said,like you said, there are some
impressive people using SS so there must be something to it!
|
||
J Duggan |
|||
|
Posts: 535 (10-Mar-09 13:06:27) Moderator |
Drew tried the super-slow thing for a while. His Med-X Leg Press was made for super slow training. I never cared for the whole idea of super slow. What really
irked me was the attitudes of some of the super-slow advocates, basically saying unequivocally that their method was the ONLY effective way to train, and
anything in conflict with their philosophy was wrong.
|
||
grffn |
|||
|
Posts: 608 (10-Mar-09 15:23:07) Moderator |
I agree, alot of the HIT ers get mad at anyone suggesting an alternative. Alot of great lifters advocate superslow,but alot don't. you gotta somewhat enjoy
your training.
|
||
J Duggan |
|||
|
Posts: 535 (10-Mar-09 16:25:23) Moderator |
One of the things that I will always remember is having a conversation with a super slow guy ( he was friends with Drew) and he couldn't believe that I
actually ENJOYED training! He was dumbfounded. I also remember that Bob once wrote an article debunking some of their theories. This was at a time when the
super-slows were coming into prominence. They also used to have a dress code- I don't know if they still do- but they would travel in a group and attend
trade shows looking like a bunch of Alex P. Keaton young republicans from Family Ties ( necktie included.) I also think that they had a rule about making any
noise while training--no grunting, or noises of any nature. Maybe things have changed. It just seems that the impression I got was that many were kind of
arrogant, smug types who talked down to others, and who had the physical appearance of being unable punch their way out of a paper bag. I could be wrong, but I
don't see how moving a twenty pound weight ten seconds up/ten seconds down in the seated press was going to build any appreciable strength.
|
||
grffn |
|||
|
Posts: 608 (10-Mar-09 20:01:20) Moderator |
sounds a little like scientology LOL. i remember one of the Nautilus creedos was to not make any faces of any kind because that would take force away from the
muscles. I also very much enjoy training,every gut wrenching minute of it!I'll say I have questioned my own sanity at the end of a few squat sessions, but
enjoyed it nonetheless! I agree with the Nautilus- HIT crew but they can be a bit overbearing also.As far as SS training, I suppose when you get to a point
where your having trouble moving a weight at whatever rep speed your working at, but fight thru it, your working hard and gaining. It just took all the
enjoyment out of training for me
|
||
J Duggan |
|||
|
Posts: 535 (11-Mar-09 13:46:56) Moderator |
They also used to have a philosophy of being against any type of cardio work. That is just plain silly. Any exercise program that does not include some form of
aerobic/cardio- especially for trainees in the 30s, 40s and beyond, can only be described as misguided at best. At least that's my opinion.
|
||
drumstrong |
|||
|
Posts: 47 (15-Mar-09 22:54:53) |
That's ridiculous about not enjoying training, what's the point otherwise?! I've heard about all those characteristics from the super slow crowd,
some of the clips on you tube do indeed have the trainers in dress clothes and a tie. :10 for the positive is a bit tedious, you have to reduce the poundage
too much, for negative slowing down alot is really a bear. I've slowed down my rep speed recently for change of pace, usually do a 2/4 thereabout. Trying
to do between :02 and :05 on the positive and :10 or more on the negative side. The turnaround on squats and trap bar DLs feels good so far. You almost never
hear of slow training (not necessarily super slow) with free weights, only machines. By coincidence I noticed Doug McGuff has a new book out, while skimming
thru it at the store, it appears not as dogmatic as the traditional super slow but does however state there is no need for cardio training or stretching.
|
||
grffn |
|||
|
Posts: 608 (16-Mar-09 15:11:17) Moderator |
what is his reasoning behind no cardio or stretching
|
||
drumstrong |
|||
|
Posts: 47 (17-Mar-09 17:16:15) |
There are a multitude of studies cited in the book from what I saw. If I remember correctly, it states basically cardio is achieved best w/high intensity
resistance training in a more efficient way than steady state aerobic activity. The heart and lungs dont' know the difference between a treadmill, barbell,
etc. Same benefit w/less time. He calls it global metabolic conditioning. As far as stretching, I believe they say it puts the muscle in a unecessarily
vunerable position or something to that effect, actually weakening the muscle. Its called Body by Science.
|
||
grffn |
|||
|
Posts: 608 (17-Mar-09 18:43:37) Moderator |
most superslow advocates want you to do 4-5 reps taking a total of 15-20 secs per rep (that maybe on the low side but most that I've seen give this
guideline). so thats a total of one minute to one and a half or so.your heart rate probably doesn't get raised too high until the third rep or so. How can
that be effective cardio training? nevermind the fact that your performing anaerobic exercise? As for stretching I never stretched much until the last few
years and my injury rate is way,way down since getting serious with it. I'm amazed that stretching isn't a GIVEN in anyones program.
|
||
drumstrong |
|||
|
Posts: 47 (17-Mar-09 22:36:50) |
yes, I agree about stretching. I don't do nearly enough, used to neglect it totally. I suspect its the most overlooked aspect of fitness. I saw an NSPA
trainer recently perform some PNF stretching w/a client, pretty cool stuff.
|
||
grffn |
|||
|
Posts: 608 (17-Mar-09 22:52:03) Moderator |
I hate every second of it. but it without doubt has helped my junky lower back
|
||
drumstrong |
|||
|
Posts: 47 (18-Mar-09 16:02:50) |
grffn, I found a video of McGuff explaining his thoughts on cardio http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiHhc7eLpQY
|
||
traininvain |
|||
|
Posts: 68 (21-Mar-09 15:51:13) |
Please don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking the general concept of Super Slow training, just the people who sell it
as a be all, end all and expect others to drink their brand of kool aide.
I don't know how they can, in all good conscience, advise trainees not to stretch and to avoid any additional cardiovascular conditioning! I'm no expert but I think it's all some sort of marketing ploy designed to sell the masses on their type of training: ie; You only need 30 minutes of exercise thrice per week to improve Strength, Flexibility and Cardiovascular condition. In their minds eye it makes it more appealing and less intimidating to someone who's never touched a weight before to be able to go into a storefront filled with %&@#^* machines and be guided through a workout by a nice, clean, well mannered gentleman in a necktie for a half and hour, three times a week then it would be to join a typical gym.
Last Edited By: traininvain
21-Mar-09 15:54:11.
Edited 1 times.
|
||
drumstrong |
|||
|
Posts: 47 (21-Mar-09 16:25:35) |
good point. there is no "intimidation factor". Brief, hard, progressive training definitely works; moderation on both ends is the ideal---not too
much (5xs a week body parts) and not too little (12 minutes per week, w/no cardio or stretching). Max Bob's protocol is the best=whole body, compound,
balanced, hard, 2x every 7-10 days. Every 5th day seems about the most layoff time you'd want between workouts. One set to true failure is without question
effective.
|
||
traininvain |
|||
|
Posts: 68 (21-Mar-09 16:35:20) |
Sometimes if there is too much focus on training to absolute failure, progression gets forgotten about.
If there is a be all end all as far as weight training goes it's progression. |
||
grffn |
|||
|
Posts: 608 (22-Mar-09 14:19:28) Moderator |
I was a die hard "don't tell me otherwise" one set to failure guy for a long time. Until I started reading Max Bob,McRobert,Christy (Hardgainer
material). Still believe in the one set to failure method, but there are a few ways to make good gains,and I have found one set to failure isn't the
absolute best way for me.
|
||
J Duggan |
|||
|
Posts: 535 (22-Mar-09 17:24:16) Moderator |
Like you said, Jgriff, there is more than one way to make gains. As long as one works hard, makes progress, and trains consistently then whatever
"system" using is successful. Even if you are making progress doing super slow, and if you still enjoy going to the gym and training then there's
nothing wrong. What was annoying about the super slows ( or the slow pokes or whatever you want to call them) was the fact that they made no bones about the
fact that their method or system was "the best and only way to train, and anyone who disagreed with them was wrong." Probably the most point about
training is finding what works for you, and going out and doing it, even on the days when you might not feel like it. When I first trained with Drew, I was in
my late 20s, and I had never trained to failure before. It was an eye-opener to say the least. The way Drew practiced high-intensity training was adopted from
Dr. Ken, but not exactly the same. They both developed their own sytem, and the results speak for themselves. And Max Bob's method of training is different
from Dr Ken's and Drew's. The wonderful thing about training ( actually there are many wonderful things about training) is that all three men use a
method that is similar though not identical, but the results are the same. And none of them have ever stood on a soap box and proclaimed their method is
"the best." And, not coincidentally, I can't think of three people who have had more success training others. And most, if not all, of the super
slows would not last more than a minute training with one of the above three men.
|
||
drumstrong |
|||
|
Posts: 47 (23-Mar-09 16:33:54) |
great post JDuggan!!! bingo. I remember when I first heard of HIT, and used to do only one set to "failure", when in reality I should've done one
or two more sets. One set has the best results under the supervision of a coach/trainer. Everybody has 2 or 3 more reps in them during a set. Multi sets are
more ideal for solo training (within reason of course).
|
||
J Duggan |
|||
|
Posts: 535 (24-Mar-09 16:38:56) Moderator |
You're right. One set to failure is best used when you have a spotter/coach--it's just too easy to give up on a difficult set when you're training
alone. You never know how many more reps you have inside until someone is standing next to you screaming at you to give it "just a little more."
|
||
![]() Hoffman |
![]() Rader |
![]() LaLanne |
![]() Grimek |
![]() Eder |
![]() Kono |
![]() Saxon |
![]() Jowett |
![]() Sandow |
![]() Attila |
![]() Calvert |
![]() Atlas |
![]() Klein |
![]() Cyr |
![]() MacFadden |
![]() Apollon |
![]() Anderson |
![]() Stanko |
![]() Davis |
![]() Reeves |
![]() Massimo |
![]() Goerner |



