"Doing more exercise with less intensity,"
Arthur Jones believes, "has all but
destroyed the actual great value
of weight training. Something
must be done . . . and quickly."
The New Bodybuilding for
Old-School Results supplies
MUCH of that "something."
This is one of 93 photos of Andy McCutcheon that are used in The New High-Intensity Training to illustrate the recommended exercises.
To find out more about McCutcheon and his training, click here.
Drew Baye wrote:
HIT wrote:
I wasn't impressed by the intensity, maybe is just not me who doesnt see that Drew trains at 100% intensity.
And how exactly do you judge intensity? What were you expecting? Grunting, screaming, and slamming the weights? Sloppy form and histrionics doesn't equal intensity.
If I had been using better form, it probably would have looked even less intense, although it would arguably have been more intense. In fact, the better a person's form, the harder it is to tell how hard they're working since if very good form is being used, except for a reduction in speed the last rep should look nearly identical to the first.
The most interesting thing that has come out of this is that I'm finding many people don't have enough of an understanding of the subject to be able to really judge what is happening in the video, and very little idea of what proper, or even "good" form is.
Only you know what is happening in that video and if that is your 100% I can be wrong. Maybe I need to say it in another way, it would have been better to say that I didn't see 100%, but maybe it was.I don't think that one can give 100% without grunting and screaming a little bit. With so much discomfort that you should be feeling from going back and forth between exercises, I believe that there has to be some grunting and screaming... It doesn't have to be sloppy form for that to happen. This are just my views... And I'm still not impressed by the video. I concur with Ell's views.
The Nautilus Nitro leg press doesn't have a heavy enough weight stack to stay within my desired rep range unless I use it one leg at a time.
Over the past few weeks I've tried moving the seat further forward, and am still able to do more reps than I care to with the full stack. We either need to get more add-on plates or I have to start doing it one leg at a time.
Thanks for the straight up answer Drew, that makes perfect sense; I was pretty sure from your articles and the clip where you do 100 lb weighted chins that you would prioritize a heavy squat or leg press in your routine. I think you should definitely get the plates!
I'm curious why you did not do the leg press first since it allows you to work the muscles harder (stimulates more hypertrophy).
The Nautilus Nitro leg press doesn't have a heavy enough weight stack to stay within my desired rep range unless I use it one leg at a time.
Over the past few weeks I've tried moving the seat further forward, and am still able to do more reps than I care to with the full stack. We either need to get more add-on plates or I have to start doing it one leg at a time.
Make weight horns by removing the shield and adding some pipe flanges from home depot. It means the lightest weight you can use is 100lbs, but that's alright most of the time.
Thats the problem with a lot of machines...not enough weight on them unless you pre-exhaust. Why is this? Who do machine manufacturers cater to? Joe and Jane average looking to "tone" or athletes looking to get stronger and gain a little mass? There are certainly some machines its hard or damn near impossible to lift the whole stack for reps, but most are seriously lacking in that department.
My wifes bowflex is great for her and what she's trying to do, but except for isolation exercises I can do so many reps on compound exercises it becomes a cardio machine. Not bragging as I'm nothing special, just stating a fact.
I did the leg press in an alternating fashion tonight, and it's awkward but it'll do for now (until we get something heavier).
That's one major benefit of plate-loaded equipment over selectorized: you'll never run out of weight. You can always buy 100 lbs plates if you run out of room for 45s, and even if you manage run out of room for 100's, you can always weld on more or longer weight sleeves if you know what you're doing.
I think you gave a very clear description of pre-exhaustion, but it's less clear why you think that "doing the compound movement first defeats the whole concept of the pre-exhaustion technique."
Also, you alluded to Mentzers pre-exhaust routines; don't they have you doing a heavy squat or leg press somewhere in the workout before the leg extensions? Please show me as with the Jones example, perhaps the routine is different than you recollect.
the concept of normal pre-exhuast was to eliminate the weak links when training large body parts like back, chest and legs. If you use them in your first movement you defeat that purpose.
Double pre-exhaust lets the weak links rest during the second movement, so they're able to assist again during the 3rd movement.
Mentzer's "Ideal routine" listed in "HD II" and "High Intensity training the Mike Mentzer Way" has one doing pre-exhaust supersets for back, chest and legs, always with the isolation movement first.
davise wrote:
My wifes bowflex is great for her and what she's trying to do, but except for isolation exercises I can do so many reps on compound exercises it becomes a cardio machine. Not bragging as I'm nothing special, just stating a fact.
I have the same problem with my Bowflex and i would bet I am even less special than you are, lol!
I only use it for leg extensions, leg curls and lat pulldowns and even those are getting really hard to do because i have to take the seat out, kneel under the bar and tuck my legs under the support legs so I dont pull myself up when executing the movement.
for leg presses, forget it! I was using all 300lbs of resistance by the 3rd workout and that was for more than 20 reps and with pre-exhausting my thighs with extensions first.
thankfully i got it for free!
I think pre-exhaustion is just working the target muscle prior to working the target muscle; when you hit it again right away it's pre-exhausted.
No that is not what it is.
By your definition, ANY following set working the same muscle would be considered
A preexhaust set, whether it was the same movement or another movement.
This makes the concept pre-exhaustion meaningless.
reverse pre-exhaustion is contradictory and/or meaningless as well.
Below are quotes from 5 different websites.
?Pre-exhaust, as the name implies, is pre-fatiguing or pre-tiring a certain muscle of a body part (e.g., chest, legs, deltoids) using an isolation or "single-joint" exercise first and then finishing with one or two compound or "multiple-joint" movement(s). Utilizing two single-joint exercises followed by a multiple-joint movement is typically referred to as a "double-pre-exhaust". ?
?Do a set of an isolation exercise for a muscle group, then, with no rest, do a compound movement for it, e.g. dumbbell flyes then barbell bench press. This fatigues the target muscle then allows the fresher secondary movers push the target muscle harder.?
?Pre-Exhaust Training is one of the single most effective techniques for FORCING reluctant muscles to respond to training. The idea behind this technique is simple: first, use an exercise that works ONLY the target muscle. Then, immediately follow that with an exercise that works the target muscle AND several other muscles in addition. You essentially exhaust the target muscle first (with an isolation exercise that works only that single muscle) then use an exercise that utilizes other muscles (a compound exercise) to help push that already pre-exhausted target muscle harder.?
?The pre-exhaust routine is based on the concept of attacking a muscle area. First, you must exhaust it with an isolation exercise, and then immediately perform a combination movement that utilizes this target muscle. As a result, the muscle which is isolated is forced to work. It has to perform at its maximum limit because it is already pre-exhausted from the previous exercise.?
?Pre-Exhaust training is when you do an isolation exercise (an exercise that involves motion at only one joint, such as a dumbell flye) immediately followed by a compound exercise (an exercise that involves motion at two or more joints, such as a bench press).?
That's one major benefit of plate-loaded equipment over selectorized: you'll never run out of weight. You can always buy 100 lbs plates if you run out of room for 45s, and even if you manage run out of room for 100's, you can always weld on more or longer weight sleeves if you know what you're doing.
Yup, I have that problem all the time, always running out of weight at the gym :-)
Turn to pages 57 for the press routine. There is also another pre-exhaust routine on page 69.
I don't have the book, can someone please tell me the exercises in the routines being referred to above?
thanks.
gorlando,
I don't think it would help to quote from the book; you should read it in context. I recommend you pick up a copy when you are able to - the book has a ton of great content and information on HIT and old school training (I've still got two chapters to go - it's over 300 pages).
Besides, you answered my questions about the Jones routine you quoted by making contradictory quotes.
Quoted Jones routine:
A multiple joint movement followed by a single joint movement followed by a multiple joint movement.
Quoted definitions:
"Utilizing two single-joint exercises followed by a multiple-joint movement is typically referred to as a "double-pre-exhaust"
"pre-exhaustion ...first, use an exercise that works ONLY the target muscle..."
And what about post-exhaustion? I can't tell if that's referring to when I'm in the sauna, or when this thread gets too big :)
pickle logic wrote:
intense training cannot be achieved on too few reps. no less than 15 reps, achieve 25 add weights. 15-25 ideal. burn em up
This simply is not true.
In fact, research shows that while low and medium reps are effective for producing hypertrophy (3-5RM and 9-11RM in this case) high reps (20-28RM) are not. There is an excellent article on this on Dan Moore's web site. The reference is
Campos, G.E. Muscular adaptations in response to three different resistance-training regimens: specificity of repetition maximum training zones. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2002 Nov;88(1-2):50-60
Nice video, Drew. You have great form. But where do you get the notion that most people don't train has hard as you? Maybe I'm an exception...but I didn't see your workout as being anything more difficult than mine. Maybe you just puke easy? :)
Drew
I was impressed with your workout.Your ability to go nonstop was awesome.Making faces and noise don't equate to more intensity.Focus and the ability to work through pain do! I beleive some people can't grasp that you are perfrming at a level several steps ahead of most serious hit trainers!
Jim
NATUREBOY wrote:
Nice video, Drew. You have great form. But where do you get the notion that most people don't train has hard as you? Maybe I'm an exception...but I didn't see your workout as being anything more difficult than mine. Maybe you just puke easy? :)
From my experience and discussions with a large number of HIT instructors who've also said the majority of people they've worked with over the years, even many who believed they were doing HIT and truly working hard, were not.
jmcb wrote:
Drew
I was impressed with your workout.Your ability to go nonstop was awesome.Making faces and noise don't equate to more intensity.Focus and the ability to work through pain do! I beleive some people can't grasp that you are perfrming at a level several steps ahead of most serious hit trainers!
Jim
Thanks Jim, but I'm starting to wonder whether I should have done the video at all. The only people who really "get it" are people who already know what I'm talking about and don't need to see it.
Drew Baye wrote:
...I'm starting to wonder whether I should have done the video at all. The only people who really "get it" are people who already know what I'm talking about and don't need to see it.
The video was a good thing. I'm sure it helped a lot of people.
I particularly liked how you went beyond failure with forced reps and negatives on some of your exercises. I'd bet tha most trainees prematurely stop at positive failure...so it's good that they got to see when failure is really failure.
You should only worry about what the HIT community thinks of the video.
One guy on power and bulk said that the video would have been better if Drew had done barbell squats,stiff-leg deadlifts, military presses,chin-ups and barbell bench presses.
But it wouldn't have mattered. Instead of having a dig at machines and isolation exercises, the guys on the power and bulk forum would have had a go at 1 set to failure, slow reps and the small amount of weight on the bar.
You can't win. It doesn't matter what you do, people like those on the power and bulk forum will never like HIT.
The major arguments about the video seem to focus on a slightly fast rep speed, the number of reps being too low and Drew not looking like he was taking it to the limit.
I still think it takes guts to post a video like that, knowing that no matter what you do, someone somewhere will always pick holes in it.
I only hope that Drew posts more videos as time goes on.
Thanks Jim, but I'm starting to wonder whether I should have done the video at all. The only people who really "get it" are people who already know what I'm talking about and don't need to see it.
It certainly does seem that way, but that doesn't mean it's useless to post one's training online. Not only does it offer an opportunity for constructive criticism but it exposes others to one more way of training. Criticism or not, if that's how you train and it works for you then why not share it with others who are at least curious?
Drew Baye wrote:
jmcb wrote:
Drew
I was impressed with your workout.Your ability to go nonstop was awesome.Making faces and noise don't equate to more intensity.Focus and the ability to work through pain do! I beleive some people can't grasp that you are perfrming at a level several steps ahead of most serious hit trainers!
Jim
Thanks Jim, but I'm starting to wonder whether I should have done the video at all. The only people who really "get it" are people who already know what I'm talking about and don't need to see it.
I am very thankful for that video. If that is HIT-training 100% then I'm training really hard. I also know that no "noisemaking, not moving, not doing what you can to increase reps, lamaze-breathing-training" is not for me.
To me this is training that will not build any massive amount of muscles.. I am impressed that BDJ hasn't put this training video done. If he impressed then I will be surprised.
This kind of intensity and training will work in those who hasn't trained with intensity before, after the initial gains of musclemass it will stop. Of course you will gain strength, but that is because the body will adjust to this type of training. But it will not build musclemass......
This kind of intensity and training will work in those who hasn't trained with intensity before, after the initial gains of musclemass it will stop. Of course you will gain strength, but that is because the body will adjust to this type of training. But it will not build musclemass......
Drew Baye wrote:
Thanks Jim, but I'm starting to wonder whether I should have done the video at all. The only people who really "get it" are people who already know what I'm talking about and don't need to see it.
You're probably right Drew, but even for those of us who "get it", it's always a help to see an experienced trainer workout. I'm glad you posted it!
i'm one of those guys who trains fairly quietly but has a very bad habit of tensing my face and neck sometimes to a degree that makes my neck sore the next day!
I also have a tendency to hold my breath on the last few hard reps and i KNOW that's a habit that has to go. Your video gives me something to visualize in my mind when i train, so I thank you for that!
