Notifications
Clear all
22/05/2019 12:26 pm
So you think the correct point of view is that you need at least concentric failure to gain strength (am not talking about hypertrophy here)???
You can have gains in strength by concentric actions only (1,2,3), but research has shown that repetitions that include both concentric and eccentric motions are most effective in eliciting strength gains and hypertrophy (2,4).
(1) O'Hagan FT, Sale DG, MacDougall JD, Garner SH. Comparative effectiveness of accommodating and weight resistance training modes. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1995;27(8):1210-9.
(2) Dudley GA, Tesch PA, Miller BJ, Buchanan P. Importance of eccentric actions in performance adaptations to resistance training. Aviat Space Environ Med. 1991;62(6):543-50.
(3) Higbie EJ, Cureton KJ, Warren GL 3rd, Prior BM. Effects of concentric and eccentric training on muscle strength, cross-sectional area, and neural activation. J Appl Physiol. 1996;81(5):2173-81.
(4) Colliander EB, Tesch PA: Effects of eccentric and concentric muscle actions in resistance training. Acta Physiol Scand. 1990;140:31–9.
"The medals don't mean anything and the glory doesn't last. It's all about your happiness. The rewards are going to come, but my happiness is just loving the sport and having fun performing" ~ Jackie Joyner Kersee.
22/05/2019 12:55 pm
quote:
You can have gains in strength by concentric actions only (1,2,3), but research has shown that repetitions that include both concentric and eccentric motions are most effective in eliciting strength gains and hypertrophy (2,4).
Yes I know, but the question was: do you need at least concentric failure?
Because you seemed to say that in the quote in my previous post.
Just remember, somewhere, a little Chinese girl is warming up with your max (Jim Conroy, Olympic weightlifting coach)
22/05/2019 1:11 pm
Yes I know, but the question was: do you need at least concentric failure?
Because you seemed to say that in the quote in my previous post.
Your question have already been answered, just read the article that I previously posted: Izquierdo M et al. Differential effects of strength training leading to failure versus not to failure on hormonal responses, strength and muscle power gains. J Appl Physiol. 2006 Jan 12; [Epub ahead of print].
So it seems that you don't need to go to concentric failure to gain muscular strength. Hope that helps.
"The medals don't mean anything and the glory doesn't last. It's all about your happiness. The rewards are going to come, but my happiness is just loving the sport and having fun performing" ~ Jackie Joyner Kersee.
22/05/2019 1:30 pm
quote:
So it seems that you don't need to go to concentric failure to gain muscular strength. Hope that helps.
OK, I agree then, but before that you said:
Hope that helps to support your correct point of view
After DocJ suggested you did need concentric failure.
Which I see you have edited in the mean while
Just remember, somewhere, a little Chinese girl is warming up with your max (Jim Conroy, Olympic weightlifting coach)
22/05/2019 1:55 pm
OK, I agree then, but before that you said:Hope that helps to support your correct point of view
After DocJ suggested you did need concentric failure.
Which I see you have edited in the mean while
What one thing has to do with the other? Are you drinking? Bro, I think you got a problem. One does not have the right to improve his writting, specially for a non native American?
"The medals don't mean anything and the glory doesn't last. It's all about your happiness. The rewards are going to come, but my happiness is just loving the sport and having fun performing" ~ Jackie Joyner Kersee.
22/05/2019 2:26 pm
Relax! Yes I have been drinking....milk.
What one thing has to do with the other is that in the first version of your post (the one I quoted) you basicly said you agreed with the statement that at least concentric failure is needed for increasing strength. So naturally, disagreeing with that, I respond to that to find out that in the meanwhile you seem to have changed your mind and also edited your post to not say that anymore.
That's confusing.
Just remember, somewhere, a little Chinese girl is warming up with your max (Jim Conroy, Olympic weightlifting coach)
22/05/2019 2:44 pm
actually i find it encouraging that someone can change their mind. I do not see any malicious intent here do you?
jb
22/05/2019 3:08 pm
For me being here at CEM among friends is a pleasure, yeah I really enjoy it, hope it keeps on that way.
"The medals don't mean anything and the glory doesn't last. It's all about your happiness. The rewards are going to come, but my happiness is just loving the sport and having fun performing" ~ Jackie Joyner Kersee.
22/05/2019 3:34 pm
Didn't say there was malicious intent and don't care either way.
Said I agreed now, and explained why I asked a question which was said to have already been answered.
Just remember, somewhere, a little Chinese girl is warming up with your max (Jim Conroy, Olympic weightlifting coach)
22/05/2019 3:53 pm
Alright, I admit my curiosity got the best of me. I've been using a modified HST regimen during the last 4 weeks while dieting and so far am enjoying it. I don't do squats and sub regular deadlifts for SLD without an additional leg exercise that particular day.
22/05/2019 4:10 pm
Recovering from leg workouts 3x/week (even on HST where you don't train to failure) was hard for me as well when I started HST.
You can work a bit around this by using big enough jumps in weight from workout to workout (meaning more time with lower weights and more 'zigzagging' in weights going from one 2-week block to another. In terms of dual factor theory/fitness fatigue theory you would call this zigzagging: unloading.
But in the end I think your tolerance for training load is something you can increase with training.
Before higher frequency training like HST I had trouble recovering from squats 3x/week. Now I can recover completely (without fatigue accumulating) on 3x/week squats (not to failure).
With Deadlifts 3x/week on the other hand I still need some form of unloading, like zigzagging in HST or by taking a step back another way for a while, but even there I notice an increased tolerance to training load compared to before.
Just remember, somewhere, a little Chinese girl is warming up with your max (Jim Conroy, Olympic weightlifting coach)
22/05/2019 4:36 pm
True, strength doesn't equal hypertrophy...........
Hypertrophy might not be a linear correlation of strength after some point, but my experience, (meaning below the competetive bodybuilding level), tells me hypertrophy usually follows strength gains. When I'm stronger, invariably I'm bigger. In fact I can't ever remember a time when being stronger didn't mean being both bigger and harder. I understand fully the correlation at some point disappears. But I think that point is pretty far down the road, and for most people, is likely well beyond the point of commencement of androgen supplementation. From a natural trainining perspective, stronger seems to equate to both bigger and harder.
...........................But proof is in the pudding and I gained in those 2 years about 4kg of musclemass without ever going to failure. Which is pretty decent after about 7 years of training.
Before that I trained HIT style and was going nowhere for around a year.
[/B]
If I converted kg - lbs correctly, that's just under 9 lbs? Very good results indeed! I'd bet that simply by adopting a different style of (but effective) training that we make generic gains across the board. It probably has less to do with the new style being "superior" than it does with it being a different form of stimulus. And when it feels different we start thinking "hey, this feels different, and it feels good........ and I'd bet it will work for me here" ..... and the physical and mental come together and voila, by God it works!
Be well.
PC1
"You still got the tools, but they're different" (Angelo Dundee => Muhammad Ali)
6'4"
242 lbs.
leaning out a bit
"One guy thinks he can, another guy thinks he can't. Both are right. Which one are you son?" (Nike commercial football coach)
22/05/2019 5:02 pm
quote:
From a natural trainining perspective, stronger seems to equate to both bigger and harder.
Think a lot depends on your trainingstyle and diet.
My experience is that I get stronger a lot easier than I get bigger and even be stronger smaller compared to bigger (musclemass not fat).
Think that this is because I have a tendency to undereat and a tendency to train in a way that is geared more to strength than hypertrophy (weights above 80-85% 1RM, and long pauses between sets).
quote:
by adopting a different style of (but effective) training that we make generic gains across the board. It probably has less to do with the new style being "superior" than it does with it being a different form of stimulus. And when it feels different we start thinking "hey, this feels different, and it feels good........ and I'd bet it will work for me here" ..... and the physical and mental come together and voila, by God it works!
Agree that you can make gains by just mixing it up and am not saying HST is superior to all other programms. It's just a good program that gets a lot of things right IMO.
Just remember, somewhere, a little Chinese girl is warming up with your max (Jim Conroy, Olympic weightlifting coach)
22/05/2019 5:29 pm
Think a lot depends on your trainingstyle and diet.
My experience is that I get stronger a lot easier than I get bigger and even be stronger smaller compared to bigger (musclemass not fat).
Think that this is because I have a tendency to undereat and a tendency to train in a way that is geared more to strength than hypertrophy (weights above 80-85% 1RM, and long pauses between sets).
Sounds like you're just increasing neural efficiency, like a powerlifter.
Page 3 / 3 Prev