Fatigue seeking in general. My problem with really getting fatigued during a weightlifting workout is that, at least for me, it doesnt work. I was at my strongest and best shape doing a few very basic but tough lifts and playing basketball at a high level. The harder or more complicated I made things the lower return I always ended up with.
In that same vein, one of the best books I have ever read is starting strength. It talks about this and about doing alot of exercises, or what the author calls, making sessions “a long drawn out affair”.
Just fucking deadlift, bench, pullup, squat and powerclean. In the big scheme of things spending so much time deep in thought about more exercises, techniques, etc… are of little use.
[quote]YourXLNS wrote:
What bugs me the most about them is the smugness some trainers display when they resurrect a “long forgotten” exercise or system and try to pass if off as if it is new and superior to what everyone else is doing (including what they themselves were promoting months prior).[/quote]
I agree. This is what drives me nuts more than anything else. I’ve got no problem with any of those ``fads’’ listed by the OP. whatever it takes to get lazy people interested in fitness is fine by me, but most of these so-called fads are just the same old shit that somebody dusted off and repacked for modern times.
The bottom line is the that the tried and true methods of getting strong, or getting big or losing weight are pretty much the same as they have always been
[quote]IfYouHateManUtd wrote:
And just to play devil’s advocate, if some fat ass housewife lost 20 pounds and kept if off by doing Sweatin’ to the Oldies would that not make it “a successful method that has proven results?”
[/quote]
But obviously, it has NOT withstood the test of time. IMO, both criteria must be met, otherwise, it’s a fad.
[quote]DTLV wrote:
IfYouHateManUtd wrote:
Eating “clean”
This is a fad?[/quote]
The term at least is–or at the least misused. It used to be called eating healthy.
Perhaps I should have wrote “the idea that eating clean means only consuming protein powder.”
I have absolutely nothing to add to this thread except to respond to the OP’s screen name (since I love Man Utd).
[quote]YourXLNS wrote:
…
Usually they’ll claim that its all part of their methods “evolving” or “staying at the cutting edge” but how could that be when your evolving in a circular trajectory?
…[/quote]
There’s a word for that: revolving. 
[quote]Yo Momma wrote:
IfYouHateManUtd wrote:
And just to play devil’s advocate, if some fat ass housewife lost 20 pounds and kept if off by doing Sweatin’ to the Oldies would that not make it “a successful method that has proven results?”
But obviously, it has NOT withstood the test of time. IMO, both criteria must be met, otherwise, it’s a fad.
[/quote]
I really regret using the word “fad” in the subject and original post. Obviously Sweatin’ to the Oldies is not in the same league as performing complexes or kettlebells and I’m not really up to defending a guy in gay ass short shorts.
My intent was to suggest that the ideas that have come and gone (often returning sometimes) since I’ve been on this site sometimes reinvent the wheel or are just plain unnecessary. My problem with most of them is that they often obscure the fact that bodybuilding, and all that that implies, is not that damn complicated.
[quote]dhuge67 wrote:
fightingtiger wrote:
What exactly is a non-functional muscle?
One that doesnt move?
I’d like to see a really hugely muscled bodybuilder play shortstop. That’s what people mean by non-functional muscle, I think. [/quote]
That doesn’t make any sense. Every physique doesn’t have to be ideal for every type of physical endeavor to be considered functional. I’d like to see Lance Armstrong deadlift 800 pounds. Because he can’t, does that mean his physique is non-functional?
just about all of the workout programs you see on TV drive me crazy. I hate them. This includes the recent leg magic program, the tons of core training programs, and those damn ab belts that I still see on TV.
[quote]dhuge67 wrote:
I’d like to see a really hugely muscled bodybuilder play shortstop. That’s what people mean by non-functional muscle, I think. [/quote]
I will not waste my time responding to this line of “argument” ever again. But I will say that being an infantry soldier or doing infantry training is about as “functional” as it gets. You run, jump, climb ropes, crawl under barbed wire, carry heavy shit up hills and through water, run carrying large amounts of gear, and squat down to shoot rifles. I’ve known many really large bodybuilder guys who did infantry training with great success.
Anyone who says bodybuilders can’t be functional haven’t lived in the real world or done or seen anything beyond mediocre in their lives. Once you get out of mom’s basement, you’ll realize that big guys can do all sorts of really “functional” things.
[quote]YourXLNS wrote:
What bugs me the most about them is the smugness some trainers display when they resurrect a “long forgotten” exercise or system and try to pass if off as if it is new and superior to what everyone else is doing (including what they themselves were promoting months prior).[/quote]
Yeah, the marketing stuff is pretty annoying. I am starting to like it now, though, as it lets me know whom to ignore.
I look at it this way: If you have to trumpet your own accomplishments or claim ownership of something you did not create, you haven’t accomplished much in life. Successful people are praised by others.
Most trainers are like televangelists. They put a new spin on an old message to part gullible people from their money.
[quote]IfYouHateManUtd wrote:
Perhaps I should have wrote “the idea that eating clean means only consuming protein powder.” [/quote]
Or eating .9 of a banana because that that other 1/10 would just ruin one’s diet. Or not drinking skim milk. Or wondering whether drinking a glass of skim milk will destroy one’s diet. (I have seriously seen all of that shit discussed in great detail on the forums.)
[quote]CaliforniaLaw wrote:
I look at it this way: If you have to trumpet your own accomplishments or claim ownership of something you did not create, you haven’t accomplished much in life. Successful people are praised by others.[/quote]
I agree. But some of these trainers know this and have assembled a very small network of trainers that always introduce each other as “the brightest minds in the industry” or “the leading expert in” whatever.
The cross-promoting and praise is off the charts and makes me ill.
Its too bad because some of them have interesting things to say. They just cheapen the information by whoring themselves like they do.
But I don’t work in this industry so I am not aware of its dog-eat-dog nature.
The new “postural correctness” fad has been bothering me lately.
Lift some weights. It will take care of most postural issues.
Most chronic injuries are from shitty posture
[quote]robo1 wrote:
YourXLNS wrote:
What bugs me the most about them is the smugness some trainers display when they resurrect a “long forgotten” exercise or system and try to pass if off as if it is new and superior to what everyone else is doing (including what they themselves were promoting months prior).
I agree. This is what drives me nuts more than anything else. I’ve got no problem with any of those ``fads’’ listed by the OP. whatever it takes to get lazy people interested in fitness is fine by me, but most of these so-called fads are just the same old shit that somebody dusted off and repacked for modern times.
The bottom line is the that the tried and true methods of getting strong, or getting big or losing weight are pretty much the same as they have always been
[/quote]
I do this myself to a certain extent, but the reason I do it is different. The main reason I will change exercises or bring new exercises in is because people dont seem to understand this is not necessary and always want to be doing something new.
A few months ago I started having people do Turkish Get-ups and soon all the other trainers at the gym were using them, but I used them because they were a good exercise where strength, flexibility, and functional improvement was easily noticeable and that they were different so It would give my clients something new to focus on and they wouldnt waste time asking me so many stupid questions.
Everyone was like wow where did you come up with this you, wow, where did you dream this up, “Its an old exercise, it’s just an exercise, just fucking do it I didnt make it up, comeon, christ” This is what I am thinking.
[quote]Nothingface wrote:
dhuge67 wrote:
fightingtiger wrote:
What exactly is a non-functional muscle?
One that doesnt move?
I’d like to see a really hugely muscled bodybuilder play shortstop. That’s what people mean by non-functional muscle, I think.
That doesn’t make any sense. Every physique doesn’t have to be ideal for every type of physical endeavor to be considered functional. I’d like to see Lance Armstrong deadlift 800 pounds. Because he can’t, does that mean his physique is non-functional?
[/quote]
Yes it does if you put it in context. His physique dosen’t perform the ‘huge deadlift’ function.
[quote]IfYouHateManUtd wrote:
Since “complexes” are apparently the new fad around this place their sudden popularity has reminded me of past ideas that had me shaking my head. Such examples include…
Kettlebells
Split training producing non-functional muscles
Working out outside(think Coach Davies)
HIIT as the only cardio choice
Eating “clean”
Anything involving MMA
Am I missing any? I’m sure there are many more. And I realize I don’t post much and that in turn makes me totally worthless, but I have been registered since 2002.
[/quote]
I almost get the feeling this must be satire. None of those things are, in and of themselves, bad.
However, the way they come into the spotlight, are the best thing since sliced ass, then fade away (only to be brought back a few years later)… yeah, I guess that can get annoying. But thats more a gripe about the industry than any specific thing you listed.
The fads that bother me are any program that tries to lure people in with false promises of easy weight loss or “30 second abs”, anything that promotes the myth of spot reduction, etc.
them electrode things that you stick on the target muscle to make it contract, and then people believe they’ll never have to pick up a weight and in a few weeks they’ll have ripped abs like the guy and girl on the advert.
infact any ab machine or probuct