I discovered something re hypertrophy yesterday and today.

[pellius]

Of course, Vince, "your discovery" is nothing new. What remains to be determines is what is the most consistently productive form of training. Maybe that is the reason for so much confusion. Because of the body's adaptive response to stress nothing is "consistently" productive. Nothing works forever or even for very long for an experienced trainee.

Along with full range movement, Jones also advocated not only the negative portion of an exercise but the stretch portion as well. In fact, the stretch portion is impossible without negative resistance which he believed is one of the values of eccentric training and necessary for advancement. He considered the stretch portion so valuable that he advocated doing a "pre-stretch" while performing a movement. That as you lower the weight into the stretch position you actually "bounce" a bit which he believed generated a more powerful contraction similar, if not exactly, to the golgi stretch reflex.

This belief in focusing on the stretch position has been around for a while. In Larry Scott's day they called it burns. When Weider started his "lab" it was called partials. Those fellows at Ironman who site that bird wing experiment built a career on X-reps (their name for burns). I believed they were primarily responsible for putting on 3 inches on my calves.

One thing a person notices is that the way they are taught to train: strict and deliberate form, bares very little resemblance to how the pros train which seems to be just throwing weights around. When you watch Ronnie perform, say T-bar rows, you will notice that as he lowers the weight when he reaches the bottom he just throws it back up. This magnifies the resistance in the stretch portion as momentum more than muscle contraction takes it up the rest of the way.

Jason Huh seems to have instinctively or deliberately notice this relationship and just discards full range movements altogether and just concentrates on the stretch portion essentially performing partials on all his movements.

[mr.turbo]

unfortunately `soreness` cannot be measured

it may be interesting to talk about but

basing a protocol or theory on it is not possible

[FitnessFrenzy]

Basile, ignore the flotsam.

I am proud that you are willing to share your newly found hypertrophy discoveries with us.

[FitnessFrenzy]

[hench]

I feel the burn more in partials the stress feels greater if done slowly and really tensing. But if not on drugs etc would the reps Huh is doing here actually be productive? There's hardly any range of motion there, no squeeze at the top, no stretch at the bottom, no real stress appears to be happening. I'm sure slashing the weight so he could slow down and  really grind and concentrate on each rep would be more beneficial

Of course, Vince, "your discovery" is nothing new. What remains to be determines is what is the most consistently productive form of training. Maybe that is the reason for so much confusion. Because of the body's adaptive response to stress nothing is "consistently" productive. Nothing works forever or even for very long for an experienced trainee.

Along with full range movement, Jones also advocated not only the negative portion of an exercise but the stretch portion as well. In fact, the stretch portion is impossible without negative resistance which he believed is one of the values of eccentric training and necessary for advancement. He considered the stretch portion so valuable that he advocated doing a "pre-stretch" while performing a movement. That as you lower the weight into the stretch position you actually "bounce" a bit which he believed generated a more powerful contraction similar, if not exactly, to the golgi stretch reflex.

This belief in focusing on the stretch position has been around for a while. In Larry Scott's day they called it burns. When Weider started his "lab" it was called partials. Those fellows at Ironman who site that bird wing experiment built a career on X-reps (their name for burns). I believed they were primarily responsible for putting on 3 inches on my calves.

One thing a person notices is that the way they are taught to train: strict and deliberate form, bares very little resemblance to how the pros train which seems to be just throwing weights around. When you watch Ronnie perform, say T-bar rows, you will notice that as he lowers the weight when he reaches the bottom he just throws it back up. This magnifies the resistance in the stretch portion as momentum more than muscle contraction takes it up the rest of the way.

Jason Huh seems to have instinctively or deliberately notice this relationship and just discards full range movements altogether and just concentrates on the stretch portion essentially performing partials on all his movements.

[Vince B]

I feel the burn more in partials the stress feels greater if done slowly and really tensing. But if not on drugs etc would the reps Huh is doing here actually be productive? There's hardly any range of motion there, no squeeze at the top, no stretch at the bottom, no real stress appears to be happening. I'm sure slashing the weight so he could slow down and  really grind and concentrate on each rep would be more beneficial

You see, an analysis like this is Bro Science. Please use terminology relevant to hypertrophy. Intensity of effort and time under tension.

What trainees need to attempt is isolating the target muscles so that the mechanical tension is felt there. It matters not is one does

complete reps. Just complete sufficient time under tension with adequate intensity.

I remember a huge guy at McGill University back in 1961-2. He did only partials and had all manner of stretch marks

from his size. He knew what to do. Most of us fail to make rapid gains so keep reading and asking to find something that works.

It is possible to measure DOMS. You can do that in several ways. By how long it takes to disappear, by felt pain, and location of pain.

If you can keep your biceps sore for a month your arms will be an inch larger. Well, as long as you gain weight.

[Teutonic Knight]

You see, an analysis like this is Bro Science. Please use terminology relevant to hypertrophy. Intensity of effort and time under tension.

What trainees need to attempt is isolating the target muscles so that the mechanical tension is felt there. It matters not is one does

complete reps. Just complete sufficient time under tension with adequate intensity.

I remember a huge guy at McGill University back in 1961-2. He did only partials and had all manner of stretch marks

from his size. He knew what to do. Most of us fail to make rapid gains so keep reading and asking to find something that works.

It is possible to measure DOMS. You can do that in several ways. By how long it takes to disappear, by felt pain, and location of pain.

If you can keep your biceps sore for a month your arms will be an inch larger. Well, as long as you gain weight.

Basile remember everything from 1961 , but nothing from 2014  Vinces DEMENTIA is progressing   

[SF1900]

Of course, Vince, "your discovery" is nothing new. What remains to be determines is what is the most consistently productive form of training. Maybe that is the reason for so much confusion. Because of the body's adaptive response to stress nothing is "consistently" productive. Nothing works forever or even for very long for an experienced trainee.

Along with full range movement, Jones also advocated not only the negative portion of an exercise but the stretch portion as well. In fact, the stretch portion is impossible without negative resistance which he believed is one of the values of eccentric training and necessary for advancement. He considered the stretch portion so valuable that he advocated doing a "pre-stretch" while performing a movement. That as you lower the weight into the stretch position you actually "bounce" a bit which he believed generated a more powerful contraction similar, if not exactly, to the golgi stretch reflex.

This belief in focusing on the stretch position has been around for a while. In Larry Scott's day they called it burns. When Weider started his "lab" it was called partials. Those fellows at Ironman who site that bird wing experiment built a career on X-reps (their name for burns). I believed they were primarily responsible for putting on 3 inches on my calves.

One thing a person notices is that the way they are taught to train: strict and deliberate form, bares very little resemblance to how the pros train which seems to be just throwing weights around. When you watch Ronnie perform, say T-bar rows, you will notice that as he lowers the weight when he reaches the bottom he just throws it back up. This magnifies the resistance in the stretch portion as momentum more than muscle contraction takes it up the rest of the way.

Jason Huh seems to have really shitty and lazy training but he is big because of all the drugs he is on. When you stick enough drugs into your body, and have good genetics,  you will grow. It has nothing to do with this nonsense of partial training to maintain tension. have instinctively or deliberately notice this relationship and just discards full range movements altogether and just concentrates on the stretch portion essentially performing partials on all his movements.

Fixed.

[Teutonic Knight]

Basile, ignore the flotsam.

I am proud that you are willing to share your newly found hypertrophy discoveries with us.

 
 
 

[Teutonic Knight]

Nice nursing home chair 

[The Ugly]

"Vance, uh, Baysole. What can you say? Says here, Vance, uh, he always studied the hypertrophy. You gotta give him that. Goddamn! You gave this guy a muscle and he hypertrophied it! This guy was a hypertrophy studying son of a bitch.

"He, uh, took some pictures ...

"Ah, I got nothing."

[FitnessFrenzy]

[Teutonic Knight]

FAKE,fake,fake WHERE is his double chin & 25 kg of HIS pork gone 

 

[The Ugly]

"Vance, uh, Baysole. What can you say? Says here, Vance, uh, he always studied the hypertrophy. You gotta give him that. Goddamn! You gave this guy a muscle and he hypertrophied it! This guy was a hypertrophy studying son of a bitch.

"He, uh, took some pictures ...

"Ah, I got nothing."

C'mon, no Burr fans here?

[Teutonic Knight]

C'mon, no Burr fans here?

Burr was on Iron Age, if I remember well 

[Coach is Back!]

You see, an analysis like this is Bro Science. Please use terminology relevant to hypertrophy. Intensity of effort and time under tension.

What trainees need to attempt is isolating the target muscles so that the mechanical tension is felt there. It matters not is one does

complete reps. Just complete sufficient time under tension with adequate intensity.

I remember a huge guy at McGill University back in 1961-2. He did only partials and had all manner of stretch marks

from his size. He knew what to do. Most of us fail to make rapid gains so keep reading and asking to find something that works.

It is possible to measure DOMS. You can do that in several ways. By how long it takes to disappear, by felt pain, and location of pain.

If you can keep your biceps sore for a month your arms will be an inch larger. Well, as long as you gain weight.

Again, you're full of shit. There isn't one bit evidence that DOMS is a factor in hypertrophy or sports performance. You're talking out of your ass with nothing to back it up.

[Vince B]

Again, you're full of shit. There isn't one bit evidence that DOMS is a factor in hypertrophy or sports performance. You're talking out of your ass with nothing to back it up.

If you knew the science of hypertrophy you wouldn't make such a silly statement. Of course there is scientific evidence.

My word should be gold around here and not just ordinary anecdotal observations.

[Coach is Back!]

If you knew the science of hypertrophy you wouldn't make such a silly statement. Of course there is scientific evidence.

My word should be gold around here and not just ordinary anecdotal observations.

Bullshit, this is what I do for a living. Research and apply what works and what doesn't work with our athletes and hypertrophy is a big factor. Why should your word be gold if you have nothing to back it up. Years ago this very argument came up and I presented a shit load of data. Not from one source but several. DOMS has nothing to with adding hypertrophy, power, strength and especially performance.

[Vince B]

Bullshit, this is what I do for a living. Research and apply what works and what doesn't work with our athletes and hypertrophy is a big factor. Why should your word be gold if you have nothing to back it up. Years ago this very argument came up and I presented a shit load of data. Not from one source but several. DOMS has nothing to with adding hypertrophy, power, strength and especially performance.

Thank goodness hypertrophy doesn't depend on opinions. What is obvious to me seems to be foolish to you. I can see a clear correlation between DOMS and growth.

[Coach is Back!]

Thank goodness hypertrophy doesn't depend on opinions. What is obvious to me seems to be foolish to you. I can see a clear correlation between DOMS and growth.

It's not an opinion genious. It's scientific fact. What are you do Vince, cripple people everyday in the gym and say "no it's ok, you not being able to walk or wipe your ass is a good thing. It means you're growing" but you know Vince, even with science you have to apply some commonsense with practical application. Even without studying I can tell you you're full of shit because 40 years of training tells me so, science just backs me up.

[The Abdominal Snoman]

With Basile's old age, he gets sore getting in and out of his white van. He then translates that soreness into hypertrophy...WTF!

[Vince B]

It's not an opinion genious. It's scientific fact. What are you do Vince, cripple people everyday in the gym and say "no it's ok, you not being able to walk or wipe your ass is a good thing. It means you're growing" but you know Vince, even with science you have to apply some commonsense with practical application. Even without studying I can tell you you're full of shit because 40 years of training tells me so, science just backs me up.

Well, Coach, you obviously don't know how to conduct yourself in an intellectual discussion. So you have 40 years experience. I have 57. It isn't how long you have been around gyms lifting weights but how long you

have been actively searching for the true theory of hypertrophy. This includes reading the research in the area.

I rather doubt that many of us, and especially you, can even comprehend the scientific literature. Sometimes we need others to interpret the studies.

I haven't seen a single study done on maximum human hypertrophy. Not one. The scientists aren't interested so I doubt they know what the theory is.

It really is amazing that in 2015 people still argue about lifting weights. We have been to the moon and can put 128 Gb of data on a micro SD card but we have no clue about the true theory of hypertrophy

that explains all growth from training and all non-growth as well. Yes, the method had better be a safe one because we have to avoid injuries at all costs.

[Coach is Back!]

Well, Coach, you obviously don't know how to conduct yourself in an intellectual discussion. So you have 40 years experience. I have 57. It isn't how long you have been around gyms lifting weights but how long you

have been actively searching for the true theory of hypertrophy. This includes reading the research in the area.

I rather doubt that many of us, and especially you, can even comprehend the scientific literature. Sometimes we need others to interpret the studies.

I haven't seen a single study done on maximum human hypertrophy. Not one. The scientists aren't interested so I doubt they know what the theory is.

It really is amazing that in 2015 people still argue about lifting weights. We have been to the moon and can put 128 Gb of data on a micro SD card but we have no clue about the true theory of hypertrophy

that explains all growth from training and all non-growth as well. Yes, the method had better be a safe one because we have to avoid injuries at all costs.

When you've been training for 57 or 40 it doesn't matter. It becomes irrelevant. But what it relevant if you pay attention to what works and what doesn't. For example. I can tell you when I was younger that if trained legs on a smith before a show I lost a lot of size. Then I didn't know why even though I was sore. I know why now! It's because the isolation of the smith caused little recruitment of other motor units. This isn't hearsay, this is fact. YOU might not find a study on maximum hypertrophy but there is on DOMS. Unless you have some kind peer reviewed study and several studies to back it, you have nothing.

[mr.turbo]

you need to discover a method for quantifying DOMS

it's probably impossible but good luck with it

hope this helps

[Vince B]

you need to discover a method for quantifying DOMS

it's probably impossible but good luck with it

hope this helps

The interesting thing is why does the body sometimes experience DOMS after an exertion? What exactly is happening in the muscles?

If I can walk down stairs and get really sore calves then is that the same kind of DOMS I experience from heavy lifting, especially after a layoff?

Once we know all about the mechanism we can determine the value for hypertrophy.

I am talking about natural bodybuilding here. I rather doubt the pros have much clue about what is responsible for their growth. It could

be many things or a group of things combining to give the huge size.

I was telling an older woman about my theory and she replied that she didn't want to get sore. That was the end of our discussion.

If we go back to our primitive animal ancestors then what purpose did the DOMS have? Is it just something that happens when we do

some unusual exertion? We all know that soon enough the soreness stops and it becomes increasingly more difficult to train hard enough

to experience DOMS. I can tell you that in our gym we have always introduced people to resistance training gradually....so they don't get

DOMS. In the literature on DOMS we find they are looking for ways to reduce the effect not generate it.

About 17 years ago I was training arms to get them bigger. I got to a point where they wouldn't grow any more. About 17 inches.

Then one day I did the lying triceps movement where you support your upper arms on pads. The next day my triceps were quite sore.

A light went on in my brain. Ah, ha! Maybe this is the key to hypertrophy that I have been searching for? So I kept training arms and calves

for 30 days while still sore. Both body parts were growing rapidly. I was so keen I couldn't wait for my next workout. I was getting stronger by the week as

well which pleased me. I trained every 3rd day. Over the month I was growing 1/10" per workout which is impressive. Then I had to end

the experiment. I was putting my elbows on the pads like Larry Scott and everyone else did. Nope, I damaged the sheath that goes over

the elbows. Now I know you never put your elbows on a surface under tension. Keep elbows clear of all pads just like we do with the knees

when we do lying leg curls. My Achilles tendons experienced some damage. I was doing multiple sets with up to 700 pounds for 60

bouncing reps. I discovered that ballistic movements can be dangerous. I put on over an inch on my calves doing that. So I would modify

what I was doing but still try to generate DOMS.

I doubt anyone would want to try this for all body parts during a week. Nope, just target a couple of body parts.