Saw this clip after watching arthur superman jones vids
10 down and 10 seconds up?
i know he’s pre exhausting the pecs with the fly
then on the bench 10 0 10?
smart? retarded? in between?
seems like that channel has some fans.
for strength don’t we explode up?
Want to be 300 lbs with 1 percent bodyfat and bench 675, squat 900 and deadlift 1000 raw?
Go super-slow on everything, pre-exhaust, do drop-sets and avoid protein.
Also, super-sets are a must. If you aren’t using them, you will never get anywhere.
Try to really trash yourself each session. It’s totally about how much fatigue you can create in one workout…
For best results combine that with an “upper right, lower left, upper left, lower right”-split, 10 sessions total per week.
[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
Want to be 300 lbs with 1 percent bodyfat and bench 675, squat 900 and deadlift 1000 raw?
Go super-slow on everything, pre-exhaust, do drop-sets and avoid protein.
Also, super-sets are a must. If you aren’t using them, you will never get anywhere.
Try to really trash yourself each session. It’s totally about how much fatigue you can create in one workout…
For best results combine that with an “upper right, lower left, upper left, lower right”-split, 10 sessions total per week.
[/quote]
+1
This is a pretty good approach, however I do prefer to go a bit lighter than CC specifies about once every 8-10 month.
I’d want my bench press to be higher than 675
Easy, just add 3 minute negatives.
Im sure doing that will yield results but seriously who has the patience do that on an exercise? It looks mind boggling boring. And it looks like a mix between HIT and Training Beyond failure, you need a spotter to do this which most people don’t have.
What the hell is going on with these retarded threads, the bodybuilding forum is really starting to go down the shitter
I’m not in favor of SuperSlow. There is no reason to lift that slowly. The TUL is too long and the weights are too small. 10 seconds is way too long on the negative and it just turns into a respite from the positive.
If Arthur Jones is God - which being an adherent of this sort of training pretty much requires believing – it should be noted that Jones Himself came to decide that 10 seconds was too long for the negative and when 10 second positives are done, the negative should be 4 seconds not 10. For any given time under tension, results were supposed to be better with the greater number of reps possible with a 4/10 tempo than with 10/10. In other words, while any given negative might give more benefit from being at the 10 second pace, the cost of doing fewer of them and fewer positives because of that was not worth it.
Not that I think one should do that either, but it should reasonably be food for thought for the 10/10 advocates.
One thing that I think is an interesting technique, though too demanding to do regularly, is to as many reps as possible with 4/10, then immediately as many as possible with 2/2, then immediately as many as possible 1/1.
However, it’s more interesting than what I would call a regular item in the toolbox. Haven’t done it myself in at least a year and never found it something I thought suitable to make a staple.
[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
Want to be 300 lbs with 1 percent bodyfat and bench 675, squat 900 and deadlift 1000 raw?
Go super-slow on everything, pre-exhaust, do drop-sets and avoid protein.
Also, super-sets are a must. If you aren’t using them, you will never get anywhere.
Try to really trash yourself each session. It’s totally about how much fatigue you can create in one workout…
For best results combine that with an “upper right, lower left, upper left, lower right”-split, 10 sessions total per week.
[/quote]
Why are you giving away all the secrets?
The bottom comments on the video.
by the way, for everyone who says that HIT sucks, look at the guy in the video… very large and probably pushing 50
The whole time under tension approach with something like this is interesting, and heck yeah its hard to do, but the proven stimulus for muscle growth relates to the cascade of events associated with appropriate loading (relative intensity) and volume of resistance exercise. Just increasing the intensity by increasing the time under tension, but with a reduced load, doesn’t seem to elicit the increases in muscle size that people here are interested in.
This is the whole thing about making something hard for the sake of making something hard. Doesn’t really do as much as people say, but its hard so hey, that’s a great exercise…or is it??? How about standing on one leg on a BOSU trainer while doing a DB front raise on one arm and a DB shoulder press on the other with your eyes closed…that’s hard, but what’s the point?
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
If Arthur Jones is God - which being an adherent of this sort of training pretty much requires believing – it should be noted that Jones Himself came to decide that 10 seconds was too long for the negative and when 10 second positives are done, the negative should be 4 seconds not 10. For any given time under tension, results were supposed to be better with the greater number of reps possible with a 4/10 tempo than with 10/10. In other words, while any given negative might give more benefit from being at the 10 second pace, the cost of doing fewer of them and fewer positives because of that was not worth it.
Not that I think one should do that either, but it should reasonably be food for thought for the 10/10 advocates.
One thing that I think is an interesting technique, though too demanding to do regularly, is to as many reps as possible with 4/10, then immediately as many as possible with 2/2, then immediately as many as possible 1/1.
However, it’s more interesting than what I would call a regular item in the toolbox. Haven’t done it myself in at least a year and never found it something I thought suitable to make a staple.[/quote]
Because of my awful history of injuries, I tried a cycle of Superslow® a few years ago because it almost guaranteed I would never get injured following the protocol . Well that was a crock of shit. I re-injured a longtime healed knee doing Superslow squats. My problematic shoulder was worse off than before.
[quote]belligerent wrote:
by the way, for everyone who says that HIT sucks, look at the guy in the video… very large and probably pushing 50
[/quote]
Wait…he qualifies as “very large” to you? He looks athletic, period. I wouldn’t exactly pause and stare should he walk passed in the gym. I do give him credit for being in shape, but “very large”? His chest is actually UNDER developed from the looks of the vid along with his shoulders. He has relatively big arms and legs and that’s about it.
Also, the ONLY people I usually see training with slow reps are small guys. I have doubts as to the guy in that video even training that way even part of the time during his overall training life.
I lift relatively fast when I train. It works, not just on me but pretty much every other big guy out there.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
belligerent wrote:
by the way, for everyone who says that HIT sucks, look at the guy in the video… very large and probably pushing 50
Wait…he qualifies as “very large” to you? He looks athletic, period. I wouldn’t exactly pause and stare should he walk passed in the gym.
Also, the ONLY people I usually see training with slow reps are small guys. I have doubts as to the guy in that video even training that way even part of the time during his overall training life.
I lift relatively fast when I train. It works, not just on me but pretty much every other big guy out there.[/quote]
Exactly, we’re only seeing a snippet of 1 of this guys workouts. I highly doubt he’s trained this way over the entirety of his lifting career.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
belligerent wrote:
by the way, for everyone who says that HIT sucks, look at the guy in the video… very large and probably pushing 50
Wait…he qualifies as “very large” to you? He looks athletic, period. I wouldn’t exactly pause and stare should he walk passed in the gym. I do give him credit for being in shape, but “very large”? His chest is actually UNDER developed from the looks of the vid along with his shoulders. He has relatively big arms and legs and that’s about it.
Also, the ONLY people I usually see training with slow reps are small guys. I have doubts as to the guy in that video even training that way even part of the time during his overall training life.
I lift relatively fast when I train. It works, not just on me but pretty much every other big guy out there.[/quote]
Alright fair comment, he’s not “very large.” I just think he looks built in relation to his age.
[quote]belligerent wrote:
Professor X wrote:
belligerent wrote:
by the way, for everyone who says that HIT sucks, look at the guy in the video… very large and probably pushing 50
Wait…he qualifies as “very large” to you? He looks athletic, period. I wouldn’t exactly pause and stare should he walk passed in the gym. I do give him credit for being in shape, but “very large”? His chest is actually UNDER developed from the looks of the vid along with his shoulders. He has relatively big arms and legs and that’s about it.
Also, the ONLY people I usually see training with slow reps are small guys. I have doubts as to the guy in that video even training that way even part of the time during his overall training life.
I lift relatively fast when I train. It works, not just on me but pretty much every other big guy out there.
Alright fair comment, he’s not “very large.” I just think he looks built in relation to his age.
[/quote]
10-20 years ago, that would really be an accomplishment. Most of the guys I consider serious in the gym lately are in their 40’s. One is competing in the upcoming NPC.
However, like I said, looking at his chest, he is not such a great representation of how awesome that training is supposed to be. He has NO shoulders and his chest doesn’t even stick out at all.
I think people on this forum need to realize that looking huge and athletic are 2 different things. Just because your bigger then all your 150lb friends doesn’t mean you are HOOGE.
[quote]belligerent wrote:
Professor X wrote:
belligerent wrote:
by the way, for everyone who says that HIT sucks, look at the guy in the video… very large and probably pushing 50
Wait…he qualifies as “very large” to you? He looks athletic, period. I wouldn’t exactly pause and stare should he walk passed in the gym. I do give him credit for being in shape, but “very large”? His chest is actually UNDER developed from the looks of the vid along with his shoulders. He has relatively big arms and legs and that’s about it.
Also, the ONLY people I usually see training with slow reps are small guys. I have doubts as to the guy in that video even training that way even part of the time during his overall training life.
I lift relatively fast when I train. It works, not just on me but pretty much every other big guy out there.
Alright fair comment, he’s not “very large.” I just think he looks built in relation to his age.
[/quote]
Yeah, but the point is he probably didn’t achieve what level of development he does have by training in that fashion. Working in a large fitness facility that was home to a certain exercise “guru” who will go nameless, I saw many top athletes come into the club to attempt to get a competitive edge through training with “the best.” One of these idividuals happened to be an EXTREMELY jacked NFL wide-receiver.
He trained with the aforementioned “guru” twice and never returned because I believe he realized the training methods were sub-par compared to his prior training. Yet, if one saw him train with these method on either of these occassions, one might conclude it was how he got jacked to begin with, rather than a brief stint with a “guru” who didn’t deliver.