Originally posted by: Alienwho
What do you mean by slower reps? As in long wait times, or lifting the weight as slow as possible?
I'm under the impression that lifting the weight as fast as possible is the best. It helps to train your muscles to react quickly and give you that "explosive" strength.
Originally posted by: Wonderful Pork
i just started doing 2-up 3-down and find i have to use less weight but get more of a burn while working out. I count it out one-thousand-one, etc.
I'll probably use this for a couple weeks and switch it up with something else just so I don't plateau.
Originally posted by: Vic
You should rep as fast (or as powerful, a better word for this IMO) as possible while retaining good form and smooth motion. You should never be jerky and you should never bounce the bar or weights off any part of your body. If you find yourself being jerky as you power through your lifts, up the weight to slow yourself down. If you find you have to bounce or lose form in order to make the lift, decrease the weight until you can hold form throughout the entire range of motion in the lift.
Originally posted by: Whisper
This--and what Special K said--is what I've heard as well. Essentially, ultra-slow reps don't do much other than lengthen your workout.
Originally posted by: Vic
You should rep as fast (or as powerful, a better word for this IMO) as possible while retaining good form and smooth motion. You should never be jerky and you should never bounce the bar or weights off any part of your body. If you find yourself being jerky as you power through your lifts, up the weight to slow yourself down. If you find you have to bounce or lose form in order to make the lift, decrease the weight until you can hold form throughout the entire range of motion in the lift.
Originally posted by: Majesty
Originally posted by: Whisper
This--and what Special K said--is what I've heard as well. Essentially, ultra-slow reps don't do much other than lengthen your workout.
That is where you are mistaken. Ultra-slow reps (5-5(usually called HIT (High Intensity Training) or 10-10 (called SuperSlow)) are very effective. The trick is to put more weight than what you are used to with the time-waster-that-is-Nautilus and "burn" your muscles within 60 seconds.
My complete routine takes 20 minutes or so and I work as hard (or much) as those who stays in the gym for 1h+. My routine includes all the major muscles (biceps, triceps, quadriceps, deltoids, abs, trapezius...)
Maybe not but try doing drop sets without getting the burn.Originally posted by: Special K
Originally posted by: Majesty
Originally posted by: Whisper
This--and what Special K said--is what I've heard as well. Essentially, ultra-slow reps don't do much other than lengthen your workout.
That is where you are mistaken. Ultra-slow reps (5-5(usually called HIT (High Intensity Training) or 10-10 (called SuperSlow)) are very effective. The trick is to put more weight than what you are used to with the time-waster-that-is-Nautilus and "burn" your muscles within 60 seconds.
My complete routine takes 20 minutes or so and I work as hard (or much) as those who stays in the gym for 1h+. My routine includes all the major muscles (biceps, triceps, quadriceps, deltoids, abs, trapezius...)
Once again, "feeling the burn" is not an indicator of progress.
Originally posted by: aCynic2
I recommend you get a good book if you're asking such newbie questions as that.
Also, log in here:
forums.jpfitness.com
Read and learn. We have perhaps more CSCSs per capita than 90% of the sites out there, including NCSA strength Coach of the Year, Robert Dos Remedios, also Eric Cressy and Mike Robertson pop in from time to time, Lou Schuler is a semi-regular, etc.
Face it, when you need computer advice, do you ask on a fitness forum? No, you ask on a computer forum. When you need lifting advice, you ask on a board dedicated to it.
Originally posted by: Tencntraze
Ah, Cynic, fun to find someone else from the board on here.
<- Paradigm
Originally posted by: raildogg
Thank you guys.
The reason I was asking you this was because of this article:
link