Focused EDT?

Bigger Stronger Leaner Competitive Bodybuilding
21

Don’t tell the boss I’m on here.

John, I was thinking more about what you are saying, I think what complicates things is the load. I hypothesize that the higher the load (relative to 1RM), the more likely antagonistic pairings will benefit. While it is true that working the antagonist allows for stronger contractions, this will only be of a benefit if the load is high enough as to require more rest between the “sets”. If the load is lower, then the benefit of the antagonist pair would be negated by the increased rest period.

At one end of the spectrum, you could use a load that is so low that you do not need any rest for the entire PR zone. At the other end of the spectrum, say above 90% 1RM, you would need lots of rest and pairing the antagonist wouldn’t hurt the rest time, and would benefit the force capability of the next set.

Later,
Rolo.

22

Rolo, all true.

The control issues increase dramatically as you introduce an antagonistic exercise.

Like you said, too light an antagonist poses one sort of problem while too heavy (and way-too-heavy) pose other types of problems.

I just finished a focused EDT workout. Did 10 min of bench press at 30:30 pace . . . 30 sec exercise, 30 sec rest. Did 10 sets, 54 reps . . . reps got way harder as period went on . . . I assume because of build-up of lactic acid and fatigue. (Wish I knew more about the physiology of it.)

Now, is that better than had I done a 20 min PR of say, bench and curls?

I don’t know if better or worse . . . but certainly different.

Which cuts the most fat? Which builds the bigger muscle? Which builds the most strength?

Can’t answer that . . . I just know the two modes (Focused EDT vs Antagonistic EDT) are significantly different and Focused makes me work harder.

I would rank it like this:

German Volume Training
Focused EDT
Antagonistic EDT

John

23

[quote]JJJJ wrote:
MOOK JONG,

Your example is close, but off slightly.

Antagonistic pairing looks something like this:

Bench time period A
Rest/Move time period B
Row time period C
Rest/Move time period D
Bench time period A

Focused effort looks something like this:

Bench time period A
Rest time period E
Bench time period A

The 600-pound gorilla is that time period E is always going to be less than B+C+D.[/quote]

Look at your example more completely:

AEDT

Bench (1st Set) time period A
Rest/Move time period B
Row (2nd Set) time period C
Rest/Move time period D
Bench (3st Set) time period A
Rest/Move time period B
Row (4th Set) time period C
Rest/Move time period D

VS

FEDT

Zone 1

Bench (1st Set) time period A
Rest time period E
Bench (2nd Set) time period A
Rest time period E

Zone 2

Row (3rd Set) time period C
Rest time period F
Row (4th Set) time period C
Rest time period F

The flaw is your comparison of E (One rest period) with B,C,D (Two rest periods + 1 Set) without accounting for the time spent performing C and resting in your second PR zone.

So far you have FEDT ahead because E < B+C+D

If we remove 2E & 2(B+C+D), therefore the as yet unaccounted for variables are:

AEDT

Bench (1st Set) time period A
Bench (3st Set) time period A

FEDT

Zone 1

Bench (1st Set) time period A
Bench (2nd Set) time period A

Zone 2

Row (3rd Set) time period C
Rest time period F
Row (4th Set) time period C
Rest time period F

Two As on each side cancel out - so we are left with 2C+2F unaccounted for on the FEDT side, and nothing on the AEDT side.

Therefore, for FEDT to be truly superior,

2(E+C+F) < 2(B+C+D)

ie

E+F must be less than B+D

In other words, the rest period between straight sets (E,F) must be less than the rest periods between sets which work different muscles groups(B,D).

Quite simply, this should not occur.

24

One variation on the EDT Theme I have used for my accumulation block (normally roate accum/intens weekly) is to do all of my exercises unilaterally. While this will require a heavy reliance on Hammer Strength and DB exercises, I find it gives me the cumulative work that EDT drives on without the fatigue of doing a bilateral movement for straight time, while also avoiding some of the hassles that come with antagonist pairings when working out in a crowded jim or during prime time hours. I count whichever side completes the most reps as my number to beat for the day.

25

It seems to me many of you guys are overthinking this stuff. In the long run, I don’t think micro-managing will matter that much.

Personally, 15x2 @5-6RM with strict 1 min rest is an ass kicker. With all of the density work, including ladders and EDT, since you manage so fit plenty of volume in relatively little time, you need to unload or switch to intesification after 2-3 weeks.