![]() ![]() Counting the muscle action phases comes to mind. We're currently inundated with enough additional parameters to complicate and delude you into thinking that the results of modern methods must be better than days of old. Where should they be buried? Next to Jimmy Hoffa. So why are we still using the same old traditional parameters? Obviously, it's not an issue of short-term, adaptive hypertrophy limitations (since significant lat hypertrophy can be achieved by spending eight weeks on the rings) it's an issue of suboptimal parameters that don't seem to get buried deep where they should be. A trainee who spends eight weeks training on the rings will absolutely annihilate the results that the traditional lat program induced. Let me tell you, there's no comparison between the results of these two drastically different training methods. Luckily, I've witnessed such a phenomenon. Compare the results to your "traditional" weight-training parameters. He'll probably have you hanging from those rings almost everyday and for hours each week. Hire a rings coach and let him do his thing. Then, spend eight weeks training to be a gymnast on the rings. Spend eight weeks training your lats with all your favorite back exercises by using the slow eccentric, 8-10 reps, 3-4 sets, and five days of recovery shtick. If that's the case, I've got a little experiment for you. That's what methods you write about or that's how you train your clients. That's the way you train, and you're dogmatic. Hell, if slow eccentric actions, 8-10 reps, 3-4 sets, and five days of recovery are what's best, then why do very few trainees build muscle at an appreciable rate? I mean, come on, are we going to sit around for the next five years and rehash the same old tired training methods? I'd venture to say that today's modern hypertrophy methods are no more efficacious than the methods from decades past. Sure, 5 x 5 and 10 x 3 parameters work well, but there's gotta be someone who "pushes" this hypertrophy training steamroller along. Indeed, no one has seemed to devise a training methodology that effectively challenges our full adaptive capabilities in an intelligent manner. Virtually all "modern" methods fall short of what I'd consider optimal for fast and efficient results. Why am I bored? Because of today's hypertrophy (size) training methods.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |