MB Madaera
Lost 31.7 lbs fat
Built 11.7 lbs muscle


Chris Madaera
Built 9 lbs muscle


Keelan Parham
Lost 30 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle


Bob Marchesello
Lost 23.55 lbs fat
Built 8.55 lbs muscle


Jeff Turner
Lost 25.5 lbs fat


Jeanenne Darden
Lost 26 lbs fat
Built 3 lbs muscle


Ted Tucker
Lost 41 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle

 
 

Determine the Length of Your Workouts

Evaluate Your Progress

Keep Warm-Up in Perspective


ARCHIVES >>

"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.

 

Mission Statement

H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy

Privacy Policy

Credits

LOG IN FORUM MAIN REGISTER SEARCH
A Big Score in San Diego
First | Prev | 1 | 2
Author
Rating
Options

marcrph

Spain

Pullover!


http://www.youtube.com/...7lbwtoUvWQ&NR=1

Who is the guy in the shiny shoes?
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Spain

Lots of machines!

http://www.youtube.com/...PbH1DWsuC4&NR=1


I thought I saw BIO-FORCE snooping around!

No way:)
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

marcrph wrote:
Pullover!


http://www.youtube.com/...7lbwtoUvWQ&NR=1

Who is the guy in the shiny shoes?


Ell,

As has always been the case with this technology, it appears on the pullover that there is a small lag (unavoidable) as the load angle changes.

Do you know if the ignition for that change is ROM dependant? or Motion dependant?

It appears to be Motion dependant. That is as the postive/concentric motions stops it senses that stop and tells the stack to shift angles.

Glad to see the videos and how smooth they seem to operate.

Hard to get much better than that with a mechanical system. This is FAR superior to the old Stairmaster attempt of the 80's.

Open User Options Menu

Ellington Darden

John,

As you finish the positive phase and pause briefly the weight stack is still tilted. As soon as you initiate the negative phase, the machine senses the change of direction and instantly returns to the vertical position. Thus, the machine is motion dependent.

And, yes, the transitions are very smooth.

Ellington
Open User Options Menu

Bill Sekerak

California, USA

marcrph wrote:
Lots of machines!

http://www.youtube.com/...PbH1DWsuC4&NR=1


I thought I saw BIO-FORCE snooping around!

No way:)


You mean skulking don't you ?
Open User Options Menu

BIO-FORCE

California, USA

Ellington Darden wrote:
southbeach,

Yeah, I know what you're saying. It didn't make sense to me either . . . until I tried it. But it definitely works. At least, it "feels" like it works. I'll have to give the entire situation some thought to figure out exactly why.

X-Force has told me, however, that their pullover will be sold with, or without, elbow pads.

Ellington


While I have no idea as to the "design intent" of the pullover, the X-FORCE design is biomechanically more effective.

By excluding the elbow pads you allow a more natural activation of the long head of the triceps in the action. The long head of the triceps is a large contributor to the action and placing the elbows on a pad reduces that activation.

This creates a more natural and synergistic Motor response to the lats, and all the muscles in the action, while not reducing the effectiveness to any of them.

Secondarily I can only presume that X-FORCE did not want to place the shoulder in that extremely stretched (and in some vulnerable postition) and have the load increase 40%. The shoulder joint is more stable and controllable from the hands than the elbows.

Open User Options Menu

mrhd

BIO-FORCE wrote:
Ellington Darden wrote:
southbeach,

Yeah, I know what you're saying. It didn't make sense to me either . . . until I tried it. But it definitely works. At least, it "feels" like it works. I'll have to give the entire situation some thought to figure out exactly why.

X-Force has told me, however, that their pullover will be sold with, or without, elbow pads.

Ellington

While I have no idea as to the "design intent" of the pullover, the X-FORCE design is biomechanically more effective.

By excluding the elbow pads you allow a more natural activation of the long head of the triceps in the action. The long head of the triceps is a large contributor to the action and placing the elbows on a pad reduces that activation.

This creates a more natural and synergistic Motor response to the lats, and all the muscles in the action, while not reducing the effectiveness to any of them.

Secondarily I can only presume that X-FORCE did not want to place the shoulder in that extremely stretched (and in some vulnerable postition) and have the load increase 40%. The shoulder joint is more stable and controllable from the hands than the elbows.



Dear Dr Darden:
I wanted to know if your new book is available in Spanish, because I'm from peru and I do not speak much English. (I have translated this paragraph)
I get the most knowledge of exercise science. that book I recommended.
Thank you.
Open User Options Menu

Ellington Darden

No, it's not available in Spanish. Sorry.

Ellington
Open User Options Menu

d0lle

Dr. Darden

Last year at FIBO I was really impressed by the X-Force machines.

This year I took a handful of friends and colleagues (who had to listen to me talking about the equipment for the entire year) to FIBO for them to see and feel 'the revolution' for themselves. They loved it...

I spoke with Dr. Alden for a while and he told me that you would soon start a new research program starring X-Force's equipment and that you're planning to write another book.

Can you share any details about this oncoming research and confirm that a new HIT book is in the making?

I am a great fan of HIT and as a fitness instructor and personal trainer have all my clients train according to the principles of HIT.

Dani?l
Open User Options Menu

stairway7t

Dear Ellington, Dear HIT-enthusiasts

I was informed about X-Force-Technology last year through this web site. This year I had the chance to test the machines at the FIBO 2010 and well this thing has rhyme and reason. Besides some design bucks (for example the weight increments are much to high, 1-2 lbs. steps would be optimal) and the currently incomplete machine park (for example no lumbar extension device, instead a lumbar flexion machine is offered, I could understand the opposite, I think AJ would turn in his grave about that) this technology is the most important development of the last 40 years in dynamic strength training.

I hope the company will have a big market success. I can not follow the 3-1-5 concept of X-Force, it is much to fast. If you perform the positive stroke of the pullover movement for example in 3 seconds you can save yourself that trouble and perform double-arm javelin synchronic throw right away. I can not see any necessity in terms of better progress and safety to move faster than necessary to just stay concentric while lifting and just stay eccentric while lowering.

EMG-results seem to support that whenever a moving contraction comes closer (not reaching it) to static condition EMG-output is increasing which means intensity of contraction is rising and isn`t the latter that what HIT is all about?
Counting repetitions as a measurement of the duration of an exercise especially if isotonic devices are used is inadequate due to the different ROM of the joint functions (from about 30? of hip abduction per leg to about 270? of lowering the completely lifted arm behind the torso per arm). The TUT-method is superior in that.

The same reason makes general cadences worthless (velocity of motion would be destandardized by doing so). Velocity of motion is an important variable in the iron game, to standardize it an individual joint angle speed (due to different motor control abilities and potential to develop them) must be applied which automatically leads to different cadences from exercise to exercise and subject to subject.

The ASAIP-method (as slow as individually possible, avoiding isometric stops while moving of course)is the best choice to individually standardize velocity of motion.

To come close to perfection I wonder if it wouldn`t be possible to extend X-Force-Technology (or maybe by constructing extra machines) by offering 20% more isometric resistance than concentric resistance in the position of maximum contraction (John Little has created a complete training system around it) in camed full range single joint exercise machines and by offering a practical possibility of negative only training eventually?

The latter could possibly be achieved by adding a horizontal lying position in the weight stack tilting technology and integrating a second motor driven mechanism which does the lifting part of the weight by pushing and/or pulling the weight in the "lifted" position while weight stack is lying, simultaneously moving the movement arm to the ending position of the exercise or may be the subject could perform the lifting action while the stack is lying by himself because necessary positive work needed to push and/or pull the chosen lying weight in its` 'lifted' position while moving the movement arm to the ending position of the exercise could be negligible (low friction conditions presupposed).

If the weight stack would be tilted back then in its upright position a negative only repetition could be performed. Of course a small break of muscular loading would be unavoidable before the device would be ready for the next negative only repetition (2 tilting movements and 1 pulling and/or pushing movement per eccentric repetition) but it would be significantly better than that was is presently possible in negative only training.

With such a device or device enlargement the superiority of negative only training would be practically possible to use and not be restricted to exercises like negative-only chin-ups or dips.

The former could possibly be achieved by adding another angle position in the tilting technology which would meet the 20% higher resistance requirement in the peak position (multiple joint exercises excluded). A perfectly camed device offering additionally correct resistance balancing while performing concentric, isometric and eccentric work would mean the ending point of the long search of perfect resistance balancing in complete isotonic full range dynamic strength training. It would be impossible to get more out of the variable 'resistance' in the iron mix!

Powerful wishes

Uli Siewert from Germany
Open User Options Menu

Ellington Darden

Rest assured the guys from X-Force understand the problems you've described. A new weight stack, with smaller pound adjustments, has already been approved and will soon be in place. Other things will also be attended to.

Thanks for your observations.

Ellington
Open User Options Menu

stairway7t

Michael

I like your closed kinetic chain argument concerning the reported effectiveness of the pullover exercise without elbow pads. I think this occurrence should let us think about the construction principle of direct resistance when it is not absolutely necessary.
I think it is not decisive what we expect mechanically derived, decisive is what our commando office puts into play. An open kinetic chain starting with open hands in this case could have recruitment reducing effects on all following muscles of the chain. In natural movements as climbing for example (remember we are all erect walking monkeys) no direct latissimus muscle work is occurring (it always occurs in combination with grip and arm work), so why should the latissimus muscle be activated as much as possible if our brain senses that the grip muscles are not involved meaningfully which means there is something unnatural going on.
I remember doing lying bench presses with lifted bent legs in my early training years and always asked myself why I had been weaker in doing so than performing with my feet placed on the ground while exercising (without arching my lower back while performing bench presses!). I think the explanation goes in an equal direction. Whenever 'unnatural' muscle work is done our long evolved motor activity patterns could be mixed up thus resulting in reduced muscular activity.

Powerful wishes from Germany

Uli
Open User Options Menu

Dr.Kurt

How do I contact Dr. Darden? There seems to be no contact information on this site.
Open User Options Menu

H.I.T.=Life

Minnesota, USA

Mr.Ellington. My name is Tony I am 20 yrs old and I have recently discovered and read your book the new high intensity training. I am currently on beginner routine number 2 and I have followed everything to a T, Super hydration with cratine pretty much everything and I would like to say that this is by far the best way to work out period!

I am constantly gaining strength and increasing how much weight I can put up I cant thank you enough for all the work you have done and are currently doing it has really opened my eyes and brought me to levels I have never even though possible (and I train MMA so I have been through some tough shit)H.I.T. routines are GREAT!!! I absolutely LOVE them....and I realize that is a sadistic thing to say because I go all out on my routines I usually get carried or get help walking out of the gym. I push myself to the max and when I cant do anymore I have a buddy screaming in my ear to get one more rep!

I just want to say THANK YOU VERY VERY MUCH!!! I hope you respond to this post, and I also was wondering if there was a way to send you messages personally I have a few ideas I would like to share with you and bounce back and fourth.
Open User Options Menu

rkutner

California, USA

Looking for a HIT training partner here in San Francisco. Is there anyone out there interested in working through a HIT regimen over the next few months?
RobK, SF
Open User Options Menu
First | Previous | 1 | 2
Administrators Online: Mod Jump'n Jack
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy