Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 122

Thread: No enough carbs? Workingout at the gym. page 6

  1. #51
    Davidil's Avatar
    Davidil is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Nowhere
    Posts
    196
    Shop Now
    Super Slow - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


    Super Slow is a form of resistance training popularized by Ken Hutchins. The term SuperSlow and derivative terms are registered by Hutchins as trademarks. (To avoid confusion, and avoid legal battles with former business associates, Hutchins has renamed his methods "RenEx" and "Renaissance Exercise".) Super Slow involves the combination of very slow speeds of lifting and lowering the weight, along with the general principles of the High intensity training approach advocated by Arthur Jones.

    The 10 second lifting, 10 second lowering repetition speed (slow resistance training), originally invented and patented by Dr. Vincent "Ben" Bocchicchio, was suggested to Ken Hutchins by Dr. Bocchicchio. Hutchins further developed the protocol during Nautilus-funded osteoporosis research at the University of Florida in the early 80s. An identical method to the current Super Slow protocol was used in the 1940s by body builders as a plateau breaker under the name MC/MM or muscle contraction with measured movement. The repetition tempo used in MC/MM was 10/10. Therefore, Hutchins did not actually invent this type of training.

    The method incorporates very slow repetition speeds as compared to traditional resistance training methods, with emphasis on minimizing acceleration to reduce the force the body is exposed to during exercise and improve muscular loading. Super Slow workouts typically consist of one set of each exercise carried out to complete muscle fatigue. Ken Hutchins recommends performing each set for between 100 and 180 seconds. A frequency of twice weekly is recommended for most trainees, with even less frequency for more advanced trainees. Some research indicates that Super Slow produces superior results compared to traditional methods in as little as 10 weeks[1]

    Slow repetitions may be beneficial to trainees working around injuries or conditions requiring extra caution, and may be useful for practicing proper form when learning new exercises. Many personal trainers who have abandoned Super Slow for general use, still use it as a method for teaching new exercises or evaluating clients' exercise form.

    Similar methods include Fred Hahn's Slow Burn system and Adam Zickerman's Power of 10 method. Zickerman's Power of Ten is identical to Super Slow in rep speed and philosophy. Hahn's Slow Burn method does not subscribe to the strict 10/10 rep tempo, and uses of a heavier weight load than Super Slow. In Slow Burn training, the weight load chosen renders muscle fatigue in 4090 seconds. Hahn also recommends two sessions per week for the vast majority of trainees. The word burn in Slow Burn is used to describe efficient fat burning via the use of a low carbohydrate eating regimen not the feeling of burning muscles while doing the exercises.

  2. #52
    Davidil's Avatar
    Davidil is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Nowhere
    Posts
    196
    "A frequency of twice weekly is recommended for most trainees, with even less frequency for more advanced trainees. Some research indicates that Super Slow produces superior results compared to traditional methods in as little as 10 weeks"

  3. #53
    Davidil's Avatar
    Davidil is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Nowhere
    Posts
    196
    You can work every day, or twice a day. The question is what's optimal. Even elite bodybuilders train just one group a day just once a week.

    The important thing is to reach failure and micro damage and then rest. If you've done that, no need to keep going, its like pushing the down button on an elevator that is already going down anyway.

    If you enjoy living at the gym, that's a different story.... I have better things to do.

    Thanks for the discussion

  4. #54
    Shadowknight137's Avatar
    Shadowknight137 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Auckland, New Zealand.
    Posts
    610
    This you OP?


  5. #55
    Davidil's Avatar
    Davidil is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Nowhere
    Posts
    196
    Is the ugly guy in your avatar you?

  6. #56
    jakejoh10's Avatar
    jakejoh10 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    California
    Posts
    882
    Quote Originally Posted by Davidil View Post
    You can work every day, or twice a day. The question is what's optimal. Even elite bodybuilders train just one group a day just once a week.

    The important thing is to reach failure and micro damage and then rest. If you've done that, no need to keep going, its like pushing the down button on an elevator that is already going down anyway.

    If you enjoy living at the gym, that's a different story.... I have better things to do.

    Thanks for the discussion
    First of all, let's address the source you just referenced (looking past the fact that it's Wikipedia for crying out loud). The study that Wikipedia cited showed benefits of "Super Slow Resistance Training"; ok. The problem is that you didn't read the study.

    Let's look at the people they actually performed the study on:

    First study: "consisted of 74 previously sedentary men and women with an average age of 56 years."
    Second study: "consisted of 73 previously sedentary men and women with an average age of 53 years."
    Third study: "consisted of 14 sedentary women with an average age of 32.8 8.9 years."

    The key here is that all of the groups were "previously sedentary". My point is, of course people who were previously sedentary will see results with this method; they would see results with any method. So, this is not the best study to reference if you're looking at the efficacy of "super slow training".

    Also, elite bodybuilders are not the best example to use either, mostly because, well, they're all on performance enhancing drugs. They could train once per month and still gain ridiculous amounts of muscle mass.

    Yes, the question is what's optimal. Training for ten minutes once per week is not optimal at all. I'm not saying you have to live in the gym, but your argument that you can get the same results lifting ten minutes per week as if you were to lift three times per week is false.
    My nutrition/fitness/critical thinking blog:

  7. #57
    Zach's Avatar
    Zach is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,869
    Weak and lazy people want to work out 10 minutes a week or month! Lol.

    Go ahead and lift how you like but dont pretend you are getting awesome results and think that its a superior form of training. Everyone from highschool football players to elite level athletes, powerlifters, bodybuilders, weightlifters, strongman competitors, gymnasts, everyone trains anywhere from 3-7 days a week, 3-14 sessions, 3-20+ hours. There is just no argument here on what works and what doesnt.

  8. #58
    Davidil's Avatar
    Davidil is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Nowhere
    Posts
    196
    Most people eat in McDonald's. So? Yes, it is far superior and the results are as good or better, without the risk of injury.

  9. #59
    Davidil's Avatar
    Davidil is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Nowhere
    Posts
    196
    There are tons of other papers. Why don't you read the book before you pass judgment? Amazon "body by science". Kindle version is $9.


    Quote Originally Posted by jakejoh10 View Post
    First of all, let's address the source you just referenced (looking past the fact that it's Wikipedia for crying out loud). The study that Wikipedia cited showed benefits of "Super Slow Resistance Training"; ok. The problem is that you didn't read the study.

    Let's look at the people they actually performed the study on:

    First study: "consisted of 74 previously sedentary men and women with an average age of 56 years."
    Second study: "consisted of 73 previously sedentary men and women with an average age of 53 years."
    Third study: "consisted of 14 sedentary women with an average age of 32.8 8.9 years."

    The key here is that all of the groups were "previously sedentary". My point is, of course people who were previously sedentary will see results with this method; they would see results with any method. So, this is not the best study to reference if you're looking at the efficacy of "super slow training".

    Also, elite bodybuilders are not the best example to use either, mostly because, well, they're all on performance enhancing drugs. They could train once per month and still gain ridiculous amounts of muscle mass.

    Yes, the question is what's optimal. Training for ten minutes once per week is not optimal at all. I'm not saying you have to live in the gym, but your argument that you can get the same results lifting ten minutes per week as if you were to lift three times per week is false.

  10. #60
    Natureman's Avatar
    Natureman Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Zach View Post
    Secondly, depending on your goals, once a week might not he enough, try a carb heavy meal post workout and also a one day refeed.
    I may need to start doing this as well. So, if one is working out trying to get more muscle mass (kind of like how Spider-Man was in the 2012 remake), a carb heavy meal after the workout is good? Even if the workout is five days a week?

    What is refeed? I've never heard this before.

Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •