slow motion reps?

[paulsed1]

I was talking to a trainer who seems to think they have some value, the type where you lower the weight pretty slowly and also take a few seconds to lift.  I know Charles Poliquin and other trainers endorse this type of training, but I never seem to have gotten much out of it when I have tried it, haven't trained that way in years.  I have always thought it best to resist on the way down without going ultra-slow and lift as quick as you can, while staying in control with no cheating (which may not actually look fast.)  Seems like a waste of energy to do slow concentrics.  Is there anyone out there who has actually gotten results with slower motion reps?  Just curious.

[pumpster]

Super-slow doesn't appeal to many as it's gruelling without being proven as particularly effective, but of course with every method there're are always believers so it's something to be tried for a while if interested, like anything.

In general i agree with what you're already doing, since negatives have more proven effectiveness but to get max. soreness and growth the ideal form of negatives is to do them slowly. Sometimes go farther and do sets in which the weight is heavier than you can lift-get someone's help to lift them up then just do the negative/lowering part yourself.

Cheats are proven effective, at the least at the end of sets when the muscle's fatigued. The idea's to use cheats to go beyond what can be done strictly.

In each case, you have to try something for a while if motivated to find out. Don't worry about guys like Poliquin, he's just another opinion. Essentially he just recycles already existing theories. We were at the same university during the 80s; I never once saw him work out. There was zero development then surprise surprise he blew up by about 40 lbs. at the end of the 80s, no doubt with "medication". He tried to change the layout of the university gym there and they instead went with my proposal, which pissed him off since he fancied himself a guru. 

[Hedgehog]

I was talking to a trainer who seems to think they have some value, the type where you lower the weight pretty slowly and also take a few seconds to lift.  I know Charles Poliquin and other trainers endorse this type of training, but I never seem to have gotten much out of it when I have tried it, haven't trained that way in years.  I have always thought it best to resist on the way down without going ultra-slow and lift as quick as you can, while staying in control with no cheating (which may not actually look fast.)  Seems like a waste of energy to do slow concentrics.  Is there anyone out there who has actually gotten results with slower motion reps?  Just curious.

Try doing the eccentric portion of the repetition slow for a few weeks.

But do the concentric part just as fast.

[YoungBlood]

It's not so much THE way to train- in other words, there is no "best training method." But the value is that it keeps your muscles guessing, and gives them something to consistently adapt to.
If you do rep tempos at 421 for 7 months, you're bound to get tired out from it- "OK, another set....crap one one-thousand, two one-thousand...."
But you can use a 511 count, 115, 223, 313, or whatever and it shakes up the scheme quite a bit.
Will it turn you into Ronnie Coleman overnight? No, but it's good to do something different. Similar to always doing Chest on Monday night....do it for variation and to avoid complacency.

[leonp1981]

I tried going slow for a while, but I saw no benefits, and didn't feel like I was getting anything from my workouts.  After about 6 weeks, I scrapped it for something else.

[Zach Trowbridge]

I can see a little benefit to the slower eccentric stage, but the slow concentrics never made sense to me.  I know all bodybuilders care about is muscle size and not function, but damned if that isn't going to fuck up your ability to move things  dynamically outside of the weight room.

[oldtimer1]

In my viewpoint it's great for for people who are not into hardcore fitness.  It is really a safe form of lifting when you do your reps super slow on machines.  It's great for rehab. I am concerned with 45 plus year olds getting their blood pressure through the roof doing a 10 second concentric and a 10 second negative.  I don't care how many shallow breaths you take.  

Ken Hutchins who is the guru of super slow has not found the acceptance for his training protocol. He feels it is the best way to train.  His role model Arthur Jones if memory serves me didn't agree with his super slow reps.  It's also "blasphemy" that he altered Arthur Jones's Medx machines. Remember he modified all those Arthur Jones MedX machines for super slow by changing the cam?  Maybe Hutchins has some medical problems for an excuse but he always seemed like an out of shape guy to me.  The fact remains if you want to lift 100lbs. the wrong way to go about it is to lift 40lbs in slow motion.  The less weight you lift the lower the recruitment of muscle fibers.  I believe in proper form and not throwing a weight through momentum but doing 20 second reps is ridiculous for a healthy athlete trying to get stronger.

Super slow fans follow the super slow guru Ken Hutchins method of super slow.  Hutchins was a follower of Jones but he put his own twist to it.  Using mainly MEDX machines they use light weights using slow motion reps.  They train sometimes less than 20 minutes twice a week.  That's all the physical exercise they do.  I believe they are using less than 80 calories a session.  

I personally don't believe super slow involve the muscle fibers that are responsible for the greatest potential for growth and strength.  Where in athletics do you do anything in slow motion?  When you throw a punch, sprint, or tackle someone do you do it in slow motion?  The university of Sydney found that lifting at a one second concentric and one second negative built more strength than the typically preached 3 second up and 3 second down.  They found it was 11% more effective.  I don't believe in throwing weights as in what I see some people do but lifting in a typical cadence that most bodybuilder use isn't a problem.  When it comes to Olympic lifting the more explosive the better.

This subculture of bodybuilding also believes that the added muscle weight put on by super slow will get you ripped quick. They took an accepted given but ran with it to prove the efficiency of super slow.  Yes adding muscle uses more calories at rest but give me a break. I guess it didn't work for Hutchins.  No offense but maybe due to health problems he looks seriously out of shape in the last picture I saw.

 Some of the studies with super slow were gathered from a YMCA in Mass. conducted by a man named Wescott I believe. It showed that non bodybuilders using super slow put on lean body mass but any untrained person put on any lifting program will show an increase in lean body mass.  

Lastly from what I heard is that Jones wasn't to happy about super slow or the modifications to his MEDX machines.  I think super slow has a place in training.  It's a tool like any other.  To use it exclusively is a mistake. It's great for rehabilitation.  

[jpm101]

Muscle development and strength seem to be best served by quick muscle contractions, rather than a slower prolonged contraction. Example (very simple) might be short dash track athletes vs  long distance runners.  The strong majority of large BB'ers use a fast & quick rep tempo in sets. Maybe there are BB'ers who use super slow reps, strict style and by the book performance, to gain huge size, but they are very rare indeed. Good for them, and you, if it add's muscle.

There is a slow and stop rep version of slow rep's also. Get a great burn and pump, though muscle gains may not follow. In any event, slow motion reps do not require a lot of working rep's in a set.

On another way to use reps, there can be an advantage when people who want to get  strong will use static holds, not moving a weight at all, in a given position. Usually between 5 to 15 second is the goal. Seems to work best in overhead lifting, leg and back work. Some have used it to improve their bench if stuck at a  certain weight. Held in the top position, just below complete lockout. If stuck at 350 in the BP, than 400 (or so) is what is held. Also a hold in the middle position of the BP for 5 to 15 seconds. Works for some men. Maybe or maybe not you. Do not know unless you try it. Good Luck.

[Geo]

slow motion reps can eat my freakin shorts  !

[Charlys69]

i donŽt believe in super-slow training that much.....

i like to do my workouts not only with weights & reps holistic, but also do different ways i will move/lift the weights, from very-heavy not so strict...up to lighter weigths and very strict....

example how my Back-Workout could look like....

1. Exercise, warming up with 4-5 warm-up sets, but not going to far in those warm-up sets, after warm-up my first real set
    will follow....heavy weight, form not that strict but also not do harmfull/dangerous
 
1 arm dumbell row  10 reps with 105 kg/231 lbs (left side 9 reps/105 kg)

2. Exercise, T-Bar-Row (bench-row), Pitt-Force-Style (short breaks between reps)   2 warm-up set, Form stricter than in first exercise....     160 kg/352 lbs  for 19 reps (Pitt-Force)

3. exercise, lat-pulldown, 1 arm version plate-load-machine, high-reps, fast, 23 reps with 115 kg (right arm 24 reps)

4. exercise  close-grip-pulldown, high rep very-strict form, 264 lbs/120 kg

iŽll be 46 in a few months and hoping to peak my training-performance at age 50