Yeah, bouncing off connective tissue is not a good idea for general humans. Comeptitors who are willing to risk their long-term health and physiological integrity for a couple extra pounds on their meet total can have that to themselves as far as I'm concerned. Now a stretch of the actual muscle bellies, like the hamstrings at the bottom of the squat that precedes the eccentric is a totally different story in my book. I'm not talking about divebombing, just creating tension with a controlled eccentric.
Originally Posted by Gorbag
The Champagne of Beards
I'm not really arguing one is better than the other. But what I'm gathering from this is that the "slow" group was not intentionally slow. They were hooked to some device that literally increased the load to slow them down....so we aren't just comparing speed of movement....we are comparing heavy vs light. The heavy/slow group was the one that saw the greatest strength gains measured by 1RM squat along with FACC group. The "fast" group worked at high speed with lighter weights and they saw the greater improvement for power measured by maximal countermovement jump test, but not as great as the FACC group (which is what? fast plus elastic bands is what I'm thinking from reading a couple times).
Originally Posted by Iron Will
So the FACC group did best in Division I athletes for strenth and power. So the group using chains and bands would find the most athletic advantage right? Enough to be challenging, but not so much as to slow the speed of movement too much. Thats not all that hard to believe. The authors do however point out that: " Finally, although variable resistance training has been shown to provide significant benefits, it may not be the best training method for every athlete. Athletes with a low training maturity may, in fact, benefit more from training targeted at increased maximal strength."
This seems to tell me I might invest in some chains for my home gym .
This is really my point. I snapped off a bit this morning in my first comment to old school but really the point that I'm trying to make is that yes both the slow and the FACC gained equal strength but the FACC group increased power considerably more than the slow moving group. IMO Power is the deciding factor between a 1st string athlete and a bench warmer and everyone should train for it because more power will always equal bigger weights. Even if maximal strength has an insignificant deviation.
Originally Posted by Neckhammer
Also along your point of the slow group not intentionally going slow but that the weight was adjusted to only allow for slow movement would also suggest that to purposefully go slow the participant would have to use a lighter weight for the purpose of slow controlled movement. This isn't tested but again IMO the results should reflect the use of a lighter weight on over all strength and therefore have a lower overall strength level than either the slow or the FACC group. Possibly stronger but more comparable to the fast group but still with less force production.
Thanks for all the replies...after I read them I realized I was pretty tired when I posted that and I actually reversed what was going on... I was going too fast on the descent and not pausing long enough at the bottom. Then going slow on the way up.
It seems when you drop down too fast you lose tightness which is a bad thing.
The other thing I'm working (besides forcing knees out further) on is not dropping down so low. Apparently I've been going too deep on a lot of my reps.
So even though I de-loaded by 50lbs I'm finding them as hard as ever.
But staying under tension the whole time is the key thing I guess, correct?
Under tension the whole time absolutely! Going to low? I don't think they're such thing. If you can get ass to grass then do it. 😊 If you're loosing tightness because your dropping too quickly then yes slow your decent just enough to continue loading the muscles into the hole. As for coming out you want to do that as quickly as possible. Of course with proper posture again.
Originally Posted by StupidFatHobbit
Did the trainer tell you not to go past 90 degrees? 😕 Oh bother.
^ Glad to see we're on the same train of thought here after hearing what actually went down
......Occam's razor I suppose. We are all sitting here contemplating the nuances of strenght vs power training and what impact reducing the overall tempo may have, but we forgot to get these simple truths that we all agree on down.
1. No such thing as too low
2. Slow enough to keep muscle tension...of course you shouldn't just slam down into the hole with no control!
3. Whatever your speed don't sacrifice your form (unless you are getting paid alot to eek out that .099% poor form may provide)
These truths we hold true....amen.
One of my favorite articles on the topic:
Explosive Training | High Intensity Training by Drew Baye
Slow and steady wins the race people !
Squatting without locking out on top also makes it damn harder! Let’s say a lifter can do six reps before locking out on top, and then take a pause resting and breathing before trying two or three more reps the same way. Then another pause on top and do rest pause singles with plenty of rest between reps until reaching 15 – 20 reps. The bar is kept on your back throughout the whole set, very hardcore…
That's what I've been doing, stopping a few inches short of lockout to keep all the tension on my quads, makes a huge difference !
Originally Posted by Gorbag
Yeah, the younger generations think lifting is only about loading more weight, while using every unwritten trick to take the tension off the muscles to make it more comfortable! I see it in my gym all the time how the people adjust the machines to make the exercise as easy as possible just because they can’t stand the feeling of the pain…
Originally Posted by OldSchhool