Author Topic: Arthur Jones - A Genius or an Idiot? (Read 11876 times)

local hero · « **Reply #25 on:** December 21, 2009, 10:25:20 AM »

the great sergio stated he was at his biggest and best whilest training under jones ( no homo )

Mr Nobody · « **Reply #26 on:** December 21, 2009, 01:10:08 PM »

Quote from: local hero on December 21, 2009, 10:25:20 AM

the great sergio stated he was at his biggest and best whilest training under jones ( no homo )

I remember reading that somewhere, the training I think was so hard it wasnt fun so he left.

nolotil · « **Reply #27 on:** December 21, 2009, 01:48:49 PM »

Quote from: local hero on December 21, 2009, 10:25:20 AM

the great sergio stated he was at his biggest and best whilest training under jones ( no homo )

sergio as good as he was could have been even better if he had been smarter regarding his bodybuilding. i guess when he worked out with jones he benefited from the planned approach.

oldtimer1 · « **Reply #28 on:** December 21, 2009, 02:47:04 PM »

Sergio Oliva was already the best bodybuilder on the planet when Jones claimed he was responsible for his physique because Oliva trained for a couple of months in Florida. Many of the bodybuilders that Nautilus claim as Nautilus champions were already established bodybuilding stars.

I speculate Sergio's loyalty to Jones was because Jones was the only one that paid him without trying to rip him off. Anyone who has ever seen Sergio train prior and after Nautilus say he trained with volume and conventional equipment.

Having said that I think Arthur Jones has made one of the biggest contributions to bodybuilding. His Nautilus machines and Medx are still are cutting edge machines. Sure some were better than others but as a whole they are great machines. His thoughts on intensity still make sense today.

I think guys like Yates, Mike/Ray Mentzer, Bass, Dugdale, Labrada, Cardillo, Mastorakis and a few others have proven you can be an elite world class bodybuilder using high intensity methods. I just hate when they took an obvious volume trainer as proof of HIT.

nolotil · « **Reply #29 on:** December 21, 2009, 02:51:02 PM »

Quote from: oldtimer1 on December 21, 2009, 02:47:04 PM

Sergio Oliva was already the best bodybuilder on the planet when Jones claimed he was responsible for his physique because Oliva trained for a couple of months in Florida. Many of the bodybuilders that Nautilus claim as Nautilus champions were already established bodybuilding stars.

I speculate Sergio's loyalty to Jones was because Jones was the only one that paid him without trying to rip him off. Anyone who has ever seen Sergio train prior and after Nautilus say he trained with volume and conventional equipment.

Having said that I think Arthur Jones has made one of the biggest contributions to bodybuilding. His Nautilus machines and Medx are still are cutting edge machines. Sure some were better than others but as a whole they are great machines. His thoughts on intensity still make sense today.

I think guys like Yates, Mike/Ray Mentzer, Bass, Dugdale, Labrada, Cardillo, Mastorakis and a few others have proven you can be an elite world class bodybuilder using high intensity methods. I just hate when they took an obvious volume trainer as proof of HIT.

no, guys like yates, mike mentzer, dugdale etc..(with all due respect) have shown that hard work, genetics and drugs work.

you can NOT draw conclusions from drugged up athletes routines. also it is important to specify what is included under the HIT umbrella. some routines labeled HIT are good...some are not (the most extreme low volume routine)

the HIT vs volume debate is too polarized. neither too high or too low volume is good.

dj181 · « **Reply #30 on:** December 21, 2009, 04:43:33 PM »

Basically, he said that in order to make the best possible progress from training you must train as hard as possible, but not train too much. But, he also does mention undertraining, not training enough. So, you must train as hard as possible, while making sure not to train too much, but also training enough. I guess it would be called "optimized training".

jwb · « **Reply #31 on:** December 21, 2009, 04:51:02 PM »

viator got into his best shape in 1982 doing 30 sets a bodypart...

Mr Nobody · « **Reply #32 on:** December 21, 2009, 05:12:35 PM »

Quote from: dj181 on December 21, 2009, 04:43:33 PM

Basically, he said that in order to make the best possible progress from training you must train as hard as possible, but not train too much. But, he also does mention undertraining, not training enough. So, you must train as hard as possible, while making sure not to train too much, but also training enough. I guess it would be called "optimized training".

A fine line it seems between under and over training pending genetics ?

dj181 · « **Reply #33 on:** December 21, 2009, 05:27:49 PM »

"A fine line it seems between under and over training pending genetics ?"
In his early days he recommended "cycle training", for example: Leg presses to failure, imediately followed by Leg Ext to failure, and the imediately finished off by Barbell Squats. Now that's hard training

And he even recommended 2 cycles of this insanity

And he recommended this to be practiced twice a week

ARNIE1947 · « **Reply #34 on:** January 19, 2010, 01:02:56 AM »

arnie and arthur jones photo

ARNIE1947 · « **Reply #35 on:** January 19, 2010, 01:05:06 AM »

http://www.martygallagher.com/thoughts-on-the-nautilus-revolution/

« The readers take over - Volume training: sometimes less is better and sometimes more is better »
Thoughts on the Nautilus Revolution

Mr Nobody · « **Reply #36 on:** January 19, 2010, 02:57:28 AM »

He had some interesting principles for sure.

Tapeworm · « **Reply #37 on:** January 19, 2010, 05:33:06 AM »

A grumpy old man. Sorry we're all so slow on the uptake, Arthur.

jprc10 · « **Reply #38 on:** January 19, 2010, 06:16:00 AM »

Quote from: Mr Nobody on December 20, 2009, 03:00:55 PM

X2 - My thoughts as well, I think Dorrian combined the Jones/Mentzer style HIT training obviously we we know his success. Alot of bodybuilders are gym rats that just like being in the gym 7 days a week so the HIT style isnt appealing to them mentally but I think most would do better with less time and higher intensity.

Yes, I agree. The best way to go is to take/learn Jones' principles and apply them to yourself with how it works best for you, that's what Dorian did.

Yes, Arthur Jones was a genius. Not only a marketing genius, but also a training genius. He's the first that advocated high intensity over long workouts/high volume. I really don't think Mentzer would have been able to figure it out by himself.

Lord Humungous · « **Reply #39 on:** January 19, 2010, 06:51:03 AM »

Genius, just use a 40 year old nautilus machine and see how well it still works today.

mossel · « **Reply #40 on:** January 19, 2010, 06:54:53 AM »

He was a bad ass genius... read the first chapters of the book: new hit training... it tells lots about his life and seminars...

jprc10 · « **Reply #41 on:** January 19, 2010, 07:31:02 AM »

Quote from: dj181 on December 21, 2009, 04:43:33 PM

Basically, he said that in order to make the best possible progress from training you must train as hard as possible, but not train too much. But, he also does mention undertraining, not training enough. So, you must train as hard as possible, while making sure not to train too much, but also training enough. I guess it would be called "optimized training".

Yes, I think what you wrote explains what HIT really is best, at least how Arthur Jones advocated it.
Some approaches are a bit too extreme, like what Mentzer preached in his last years.

Palpatine Q · « **Reply #42 on:** January 19, 2010, 07:38:00 AM »

Quote from: Lord Humungous on January 19, 2010, 06:51:03 AM

Genius, just use a 40 year old nautilus machine and see how well it still works today.

YUP...Nautilus pullover machine still the best machine ever made. leg press was killer too

FitnessFrenzy · « **Reply #43 on:** January 19, 2010, 08:13:05 AM »

Quote from: wes on December 20, 2009, 03:38:31 PM

Johnny Falcon - A Genius or an Idiot?

he is one of the smartest guys on getbig if you understand the meaning behind his meaning

- Quote: WingedLion

nolotil · « **Reply #44 on:** January 21, 2010, 05:44:44 PM »

Quote from: pablo10 on January 19, 2010, 07:31:02 AM

Yes, I think what you wrote explains what HIT really is best, at least how Arthur Jones advocated it.
Some approaches are a bit too extreme, like what Mentzer preached in his last years.

there are many kinds of HIT,,, most extreme version is not the best way to train,, this science and real life training has show to 100%.

too much volume not good,, too less volume not good,,,,

also failure is not must to grow,, many cases stopping one rep before failure is better overall..yes sometimes failure is ok but all the time no,, it is too much for most people....

Mr Nobody · « **Reply #45 on:** January 21, 2010, 05:47:20 PM »

Quote from: Groink on January 19, 2010, 07:38:00 AM

YUP...Nautilus pullover machine still the best machine ever made. leg press was killer too

X2 on the pullover Groink, I trained on the Pullover with the lat pullown attached damn good back workout supersetting those

suckmymuscle · « **Reply #46 on:** January 22, 2010, 04:10:13 AM »

Quote from: wes on December 20, 2009, 03:38:31 PM

Johnny Falcon - A Genius or an Idiot?

Technically, an idiot has an IQ below 20, whilst Falcon's IQ is probably between 50 and 70, which puts him in the imbecile category. So: imbecile.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

kiwiol · « **Reply #47 on:** January 22, 2010, 04:21:30 AM »

Quote from: suckmymuscle on January 22, 2010, 04:10:13 AM

Technically, an idiot has an IQ below 20, whilst Falcon's IQ is probably between 50 and 70, which puts him in the imbecile category. So: imbecile.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Mr Nobody · « **Reply #48 on:** January 22, 2010, 05:25:51 AM »

Quote from: kiwiol on January 22, 2010, 04:21:30 AM

Falcon has flew the coop he is over on Matt C's site

jprc10 · « **Reply #49 on:** January 24, 2010, 11:24:27 AM »

Quote from: nolotil on January 21, 2010, 05:44:44 PM

there are many kinds of HIT,,, most extreme version is not the best way to train,, this science and real life training has show to 100%.

too much volume not good,, too less volume not good,,,,

also failure is not must to grow,, many cases stopping one rep before failure is better overall..yes sometimes failure is ok but all the time no,, it is too much for most people....

I agree, that is why I think training should always be individualized.

One thing I found out by experience though is that whenever I increased the volume of my training at the expense of intensity, I stopped making progress and just was spinning on my wheels. That is why I always train with the highest intensity I can and relatively low volume, which is what gives me the best results.
So, I think training the hardest is the most important thing, not holding back and going through the motions. Volume can be adjusted to the individual and according to frequency too.