For more information on the UXS click here

In this Q&A I’m going to address a few common questions about training to momentary muscular failure (MMF); what it is, whether it is necessary, and if it’s more effective to train past it.

Answer:

What is momentary muscular failure?

Your muscles fail when fatigue has momentarily reduced their strength to below the level required to continue an exercise in the prescribed form.

When performing typical dynamic exercise protocols your muscles fail when you are unable to continue positive movement (positive failure). When performing yielding isometric protocols like static holds your muscles fail when you are unable to hold the weight motionless preventing negative movement (static failure). When performing negative-only your muscles fail when you are unable to lower the weight as slowly as prescribed (negative failure).

Is it necessary to train to momentary muscular failure?

No. It is not necessary to train to MMF to stimulate improvements in muscular strength and size or other aspects of functional ability, you just have to consistently work your muscles harder than you did previously. However, since results from exercise are proportional to intensity of effort, you should train to MMF.

Exercise intensity is best defined as how hard you are working relative to your momentary ability. If at the beginning of an exercise your muscles are capable of producing one hundred pounds of force but you are only working against a resistance of eighty pounds your intensity is eighty percent. As your muscles fatigue over the course of an exercise the eighty pounds of resistance requires an increasing percentage of your decreasing momentary strength. When your strength has been reduced to just below eighty pounds all of your momentary strength will be required to  just hold  the resistance and you will be working at one hundred percent intensity.

With most equipment it is impossible to know your exact strength or intensity of effort at the beginning of or at any point during an exercise (and both one rep maximum and max effort isometric testing should be avoided for safety). The only time you know how intensely you are working is when you reach MMF, at which point your intensity is maximum.

Is it better to train past momentary muscular failure?

Yes, but only very briefly.

When performing normal dynamic repetitions the only way to be certain you have achieved MMF is to continue attempting to move positively for a few seconds. Occasionally when you think you have achieved MMF if you attempt to gradually contract harder you will find you are able to continue positive movement. You may only move a few more degrees or inches, or you may end up completing  another repetition. There is no way to be sure you have achieved positive failure unless you keep trying for at least a few seconds. However, beyond some point additional contraction post-failure appears to be counterproductive. Advanced trainees who routinely perform extended static holds, multiple forced reps, or  multiple rest-pause reps beyond failure often find they require a much longer time to recover between workouts but do not make faster overall progress. A little seems to go a long way, and it is very easy to overdo or misuse these techniques.

Some of these have uses when training beginners who are still learning to train with a very high level of intensity, but only very few, and they need to be done correctly and used very judiciously or they will not have the desired effect.

For most people I recommend only continuing to contract for about five seconds after positive movement stops. If you’re really contracting as hard as you can and the weight doesn’t move after five seconds you’re probably not going to move it, and you should just slowly lower it and unload.

When performing static holds, once you are unable to maintain the prescribed position you should slowly lower the weight, unload, and terminate the set. If you used an appropriate load and time additional reps are unnecessary and potentially counterproductive. I recommend a conservative range of around 60 to 90 seconds.

When performing negative-only repetitions (which I do not recommend in most cases) you should unload and terminate the set when you are unable to perform the negative at least slowly enough to maintain a ten-second cadence. Never attempt to continue a negative-only set beyond this point.

Is it possible to get as strong and muscular with bodyweight training as you can training with weights?

Answer:

As long as you train hard, progressively, and consistently you can get bigger and stronger with just about anything, including your own body weight; and I think most people can get just about as big and strong with bodyweight training as anything else if they do it correctly. The key is learning how to perform bodyweight exercises to make them progressively harder as you become stronger.

When using free weights and machines resistance progression is simple; as you become stronger and require more resistance you just add more weight to the bar, use heavier dumbbells, or pin more weight on the stack. Resistance progression is trickier with bodyweight. You can use weighted vests and belts to increase resistance, or you can manipulate other variables like leverage and timing, using body positioning to increase the leverage against the target muscles and spending proportionally more time in more challenging portions of the range of motion. For example, bodyweight squats can be made more challenging by only performing the harder lower half of the range of motion, and holding at parallel for a few seconds before slowly starting the positive (as opposed to only going down halfway and bouncing back up like most people).

Another option, if you have the motor control and discipline to do it, is what I call intentional antagonistic co-contraction or IAC. By intentionally contracting the antagonists of the target muscles during an exercise you can increase the intensity considerably. Assuming you have relatively balanced strength, if you learn to use IAC effectively no matter how strong you become you will be able to make any exercise as hard as you need it to be. There are several disadvatages to IAC, however. It takes time to learn, requires good motor control and focus, and makes evaluating workout performance more subjective.

A slightly less efficient but more easily quantifiable way to increase resistance is to wear a weighted vest or belt. While technically not pure bodyweight exercise, people who have difficulty with IAC will find it more practical and it allows more objective evaluation of workout performance.

A very challenging but less safe and efficient option for stronger trainees is to perform some exercises unilaterally. If you’re skeptical of how challenging bodyweight exercises can be I suggest you attempt a set of strict one armed chin ups, push ups, or squats. Unless you can do a high number of these in slow, strict form, pausing and squeezing at the top of chin ups or pausing and holding motionless at the start of squats and push ups, you are not so strong you won’t be challenged by a proper bodyweight workout.

In his column My First Half Century In The Iron Game in Iron Man magazine in 1986 Nautilus inventor Arthur Jones had the following to say about this,

…chins and dips, if properly performed, will stimulate muscular growth in your upper body and arms that will eventually lead to muscular size and strength that is very close to your potential. Adding full squats, eventually leading up to one-legged full squats, and one-legged calf raises, will do much the same thing for your legs and hips. Using this very simple routine, when you get strong enough to perform about ten repetitions of one-armed chins with each arm, your arms will leave very little to be desired.

So, whether you are limited to bodyweight training by location, time, space, budget, or other circumstances, or you prefer it for it’s efficiency and convenience, you don’t have to worry you might be compromising effectiveness.

While the exercises Arthur Jones recommended are a good foundation, and have been the cornerstones of my workouts for a very long time, I would add a few more exercises to round out your workout. Minimally, I like to have people perform six basic movements: a squat, a trunk extension, a vertical push and pull, and a horizontal push and pull. It doesn’t hurt to add a heel raise and timed static contraction neck extension and flexion to round things out, and although they can get worked pretty hard during other exercises some people may want to add a direct exercise for the abdominal muscles. The following is an example of how this could be done with bodyweight only:

1. Hip Raise or Hyperextension
2. Squat
3. Chin Up or Parallel Grip Pull Up
4. Dip or Push Up
5. Inverted Row
6. Pike Push Up or Handstand Push Up
7. Crunch
8. Heel Raise
9. TSC Neck Extension
10. TSC Neck Flexion

A few tips for performance:

• Move slowly and focus on contracting the target muscles continuously throughout the exercise, taking at least four seconds each to perform the positive and negative
• Hold for at least two seconds at the end point of pulling and simple (rotary) movements and at the start point of pushing movements (parallel with the ground for squats, in a slight stretch for dips and push ups, just above the ground for pike and handstand push ups)
• Start, stop, and reverse direction as smoothly as possible, the lower the acceleration the better. Imagine you’re trying to sneak through the turnarounds.
• When you think are unable to continue positive movement in strict form, continue to contract as hard as you can for about five more seconds, just to be sure, but do not loosen your form.
  
• Move quickly between exercises. Once you’ve finished an exercise try to begin the next as soon as possible. If you begin to feel light headed, dizzy, or nauseous and wait for it to pass before continuing, however.
  

Give it a try, and let me know how it goes in the comments below.

Over the years people have invented a variety of exercise protocols and machines meant to provide greater resistance during the negative portion of an exercise, under the assumption the heavier weight and more resistance means  a more effective stimulus for strength and size increases. Nautilus inventor Arthur Jones developed and experimented heavily with these types of protocols and designed a line of Nautilus “Omni” machines specifically for negative-only training, which were used during the famous Colorado Experiment. Of these only the Omni Multi-Exercise was ever sold commercially; the rest were not for a variety of reasons including exorbitant friction.

Protocols and equipment providing greater resistance during the negative or emphasizing the negative portion of the exercise have generally produced an impressive rate of strength and size increases. There have been a few interesting studies and experiments and some anecdotes (not to be confused with evidence) showing greater results over short periods of time than with conventional repetition methods. I do not, however, think the reason is the heavier negative. Instead, I think the reason these protocols and equipment tend to be very effective is because they force you to work harder than you have learned to with conventional high intensity training repetition protocols.

Consider the following:

Stimulating strength and size increases has more to do with relative effort than absolute load. If the heavier loads used during protocols like negative-only and negative-accentuated were the important factor then we would see a positive correlation between load and effectiveness during other protocols, but we don’t. Instead, a variety of repetition ranges and loads can be equally effective as long as exercises are performed with a high level of intensity (which is relative effort, not percentage of 1RM as it is often mistakenly defined).

The ability to train with a high level of intensity is something that must be learned and practiced, particularly being able to maintain strict form through increasing fatigue and discomfort (the behavior most people associate with intensity – yelling, grimacing, bodily contortions, etc. – are attempts to reduce or distract oneself from it and should be avoided). Mastering it takes time. Most people stop short of a true maximum effort during conventional high intensity training protocols due to discomfort or lack of will. Many repetition protocols and machines which increase negative resistance force people to contract harder during the negative to control the speed of movement than they have learned to as they approach positive momentary muscular failure during normal reps. When someone else hands you a heavy weight at the end point of an exercise, or if you transfer a heavy weight from your legs to your arms at the top of chin ups or dips, you have to contract hard enough to slow negative movement to a safe speed or you risk injury.

I think with proper teaching and motivation almost anyone can eventually learn to learn to work this hard during conventional high intensity training repetition protocols. Once you have learned to work at this level of intensity you would probably see little difference in muscular strength and size increases between regular high intensity training protocols and those which hyperload or emphasize the negative.

While these protocols have proven to be highly effective, I have concerns over the safety and practicality of some of them.

Without specialized equipment performing negative-only repetitions on most exercises requires two strong spotters, since a single spotter would tire quickly of lifting the heavy weights required. It also makes communication during the hand-off trickier, especially when free weights are used, since both spotters need to gradually transfer the weight to the trainee at the same time and rate (Using spotters and conventional equipment is actually preferable to using motorized machines which hand-off additional weight to the user since the machines tend to do so in a very abrupt and jarring manner). If the weight is not handed off gradually or evenly there is a greater risk of injury. While this is less of a concern during exercises with intrapersonal transfer

Machines incorporating long assist-levers like Randy Rindfleisch’s Negative Attitude and Eccentric Edge machines provided a more practical way for a single trainer or spotter to either easily lift a weight which would provide a very high level of resistance for the user or to easily perform manual negative-only training, but because of the lever advantage they require extreme caution during resistance transfer.

Various repetition methods have been developed as a way to make the negative harder without spotters or specialized equipment, such as negative-accentuated repetitions (lifting a weight with both limbs and alternating between lowering with only the right or left), and negative-emphasized repetitions (taking twice as long or longer to lower the weight than lift it). These have their own problems, however.

While the unloading of alternate limbs which occurs during negative-accentuated training may not be detrimental as some suggest, there is a greater risk of injury during heavy unilateral loading due to uneven forces on the pelvis and/or shoulders and spine during certain exercises.

Rather than make the negative harder, the longer time spent performing the less metabolically-demanding negative during negative-emphasized repetitions makes the exercise easier over the same time under load. While this allows you to handle a heavier weight, keep in mind relative effort rather than absolute load appears to be what counts where muscular strength and size increases are concerned. The upside is, this can be beneficial if you want to minimize metabolic demand for some reason, such as when training someone with very poor conditioning.

While the transient, short-term effects may differ slightly in the long run I don’t believe all the variations in repetition method, rep range and TUL, etc. make much difference, and definitely not as much of a difference as the proponents of specific repetition methods often claim. Ultimately, how strong and muscular you can be come is dictated by your genetics, and any repetition method can get you there as long as you work hard, progressively, and consistently. However, repetition methods do differ in safety, efficiency, and practicality, and these factors should be considered when deciding what to use in your workouts or prescribe for others.

Considering the impracticality, inefficiency, and greater injury risk of negative-only and negative-accentuated repetitions and the higher cost of many machines designed specifically for hyperloading the negative, and that they probably make little difference in long-term results I don’t recommend them. Instead, learn to focus better and push yourself to work harder performing conventional high intensity training repetition protocols.

Negative strength is greater than positive strength.

Strength is the ability of your muscles to produce force. A muscle must produce force to lift a weight. A muscle must produce force to hold a weight motionless. A muscle must produce force to lower a weight more slowly than the acceleration due to gravity (if it didn’t the weight would simply drop). Strength can be positive (concentric contraction, lifting), static (isometric contraction, holding), or negative (eccentric contraction, lowering).

When a muscle contracts concentrically heads on the myosin filaments attach to the actin filaments forming cross-bridges which bend and pull, then release and repeat, causing muscle fibers to shorten. When a muscle contracts isometrically or eccentrically it forms more of these attachments. If the force against the muscle exceeds the force of contraction it begins to lengthen, and as the cross-bridges are stretched forcing detatchment they immediately reattach (approximately two hundred times faster than during concentric contractions). This difference in cross-bridging mechanics makes the motor units significantly stronger when contracting isometrically or eccentrically, so to stop lifting or begin lowering a weight your body recruits fewer motor units in the working muscles to reduce the force produced. Because of this it is less metabolically demanding to hold or lower a certain amount of weight than to lift it.

Another protein in muscle fibers called titin also contributes to the increase in eccentric strength. It is “wound” by the action of the myosin and actin during concentric contractions, then stiffens to resist lengthening during eccentric contractions.

This difference in positive and negative strength is easy to demonstrate. Perform a few strict test repetitions on a good biceps machine or barbell curls until you find a weight that is just slightly too heavy for you to lift. Rest for several minutes (to satisfy those who suspect congestion due to pump and the resulting friction is a contributing factor). Increase this weight by approximately twenty five percent and have someone help you lift it, then hold the movement arm or barbell motionless while they gradually transfer it to you. Although it is too heavy for you to lift you will find you are able to hold it, and lower it slowly under strict control.

While the implications for training will be discussed in more detail in another article there is one important consequence of this I want to mention now. Occasionally a novice trainee will stop exercises short of momentary muscular failure (MMF) because they are afraid they will drop the weight or movement arm and possibly injure themselves. While this concern may be reasonable when performing exercises where grip strength can be a limiting factor it is usually unfounded because of the difference in positive and negative strength (if this difference did not exist you would drop the weight whenever you reached MMF during an exercise).

Even after you have achieved MMF (the inability to continue positive movement in the prescribed form) you will be strong enough to hold the weight motionless for a period of time afterwards and lower it slowly. It is important to teach this to novice trainees to improve their confidence in their safety and willingness to continue to contract intensely as they approach failure when learning high intensity training.

In her recent New York Times article, Fitness Playgrounds Grow As Machines Go, Courtney Rubin writes,

Simple exercises with no-tech equipment (call them paleo or playground exercises, depending on how much fun they are) have long found disciples at niche gyms and in movements such as CrossFit. But in the last year and a half, major health-club chains have begun making hefting sandbags and shaking 25-pound ropes the standard, ditching the fancy weight machines that have dominated gym floors for more than 30 years.

In other words they’re replacing productive, efficient, and safe tools and methods with less productive, inefficient, and riskier ones.

The so-called “functional training” trend is primarily based on the beliefs that exercises must mimic other physical activities like daily living or vocational tasks or sports skills to improve your ability to perform them and that exercises should be performed on unstable surfaces or unilaterally to improve balance and more effectively strengthen your “core” muscles.

These beliefs aren’t just wrong, they are completely backwards.

Your functional ability – how well you are able to perform various physical activities – is determined by several factors. Some of these factors, like your muscular strength, cardiovascular and metabolic conditioning, and flexibility are general; improving them helps you better perform any physical activity. One factor of functional ability, skill, is specific; improving your skill in a particular physical activity only helps you better perform that specific activity.

While the number of possible body movements a person can perform is practically infinite, all of them are just different combinations of a few basic joint movements. Regardless of the specific exercises performed, as long as you strengthen all the muscle groups which produce those joint movements your general ability to perform any movement will improve. For example, it doesn’t matter that the exercise movement performed on a leg extension machine does not resemble some other movement; if your quadriceps are stronger your ability to perform any movement involving knee extension or requiring you to resist knee flexion will improve.

Since the improvements in functional ability from strength gains are general there is no benefit to performing exercises in a manner that mimics other activities. Instead, exercise movements should be based on the requirements for effectively and safely working specific muscles or muscle groups to stimulate increases in strength. This includes both compound (multi-joint, linear) and simple (usually single joint, rotary) or so-called “isolation” exercises. As a corollary, the tools used for exercise should be appropriate for or designed around these movements, and this can include anything from low-tech barbells and dumbbells and basic bodyweight apparatus to high-tech machines.

Attempting to mimic another activity with exercise usually results in inefficient muscular loading and can interfere with the skills of the movement being mimicked (negative skill transfer). Attempting to mimic sport movements involving rapid acceleration during exercise also unnecessarily increases the risk of injury.

If you want to improve your ability to perform a specific movement don’t try to mimic it during exercise, learn and practice the movement, and if it involves a tool, instrument, or sporting implement practice using that exact tool, instrument, or implement.

Performing an exercise on an unstable surface will improve your skill at performing that specific exercise but will not improve your skill in other balance tasks. Also, activation of the target muscles and the stimulus for strength increases is reduced when exercise is performed on an unstable surface, not improved. The more focus required to maintain your balance the less you can devote to contraction of the targeted muscles.

Proponents of so-called “functional training” often claim exercise on unstable surface is more effective because it involves more muscles. They fail to distinguish between muscular involvement and efficient loading. Just because a muscle is involved in an exercise in some manner does not mean it is subject to loading sufficient to stimulate increases in strength and size. Since maintaining balance requires the center of gravity of the body to be maintained directly over its base the muscles involved in balance work against minimal moment arms, thus minimal resistance and receive little exercise benefit.

As an example of this myth, the article quotes Adam Campbell, fitness director for the Men’s Health brand as saying,

…machines like the leg press strengthen muscles, but asked: “What’s the real logic in sitting or laying down to train your legs?” Functional fitness is “far more bang for your buck” because it works multiple muscles simultaneously, he said, providing better overall strength and mobility, and a higher calorie burn.

Adam Campbell doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

The logic of sitting or laying down to train your legs is these machines allow the target muscles to be loaded more efficiently and more safely than conventional barbell movements, and much more effectively than squatting on a ball like the idiot pictured above. While many so-called “functional” exercises involve more muscle groups than machine exercises or conventional barbell exercises they do so in a manner that loads those muscles haphazardly and inefficiently.

Exercises performed in a manner that efficiently loads the targeted muscles, using equipment designed for this purpose will provide “better overall strength and mobility” than exercises which mimic other movements or involve unstable surfaces or spread the work over a larger number of muscle groups in a way that loads them inefficiently (like exercise “complexes” which combine several different movements into a single exercise).

And, while exercising to burn calories is generally a waste of time, the calories burned during or metabolic demand of an exercise are not determined solely by the amount of muscle involved but also how hard the involved muscles are working.  If you don’t experience a tremendous metabolic demand performing a circuit of machine exercises you aren’t using them correctly.

Later, Josh Bowen, formerly of Urban Active is quoted as saying,

Gyms are way out of the times if all they have is machines.

Bullshit. A gym with nothing but forty-year-old first and second generation Nautilus machines is way ahead of any gym whose equipment consists mostly of so-called “functional training” staples like stability balls, ropes, medicine balls, truck tires, plyo boxes, and kettlebells.

After a few more paragraphs of ignorant machine bashing the author quotes several people on how odd so-called “functional training” looks to people used to more conventional training. One person is quoted as saying his wife “looks like a circus clown” when doing her “functional” exercises. Another worries people are watching him thinking it’s the dumbest thing they’ve ever seen.

While I have seen and heard about people doing a lot of really dumb things over the years, and so-called “functional training” might not be the dumbest, it is definitely close to the top of the list. It violates motor learning principles, violates principles of safe and efficient muscular loading, and gives people less exercise benefit with more risk. Forget about looking stupid, getting injured because you lose your balance and fall or drop something on yourself is a great way to quickly (and in some cases permanently) reduce your functional ability.

Like the guy who was badly injured when he lost his balance and fell through a plate glass window a few years back because his idiot trainer had him doing dumbbell flys on a stability ball.

Like the college quarterback who is now paralyzed because he broke his back when he lost his balance doing weighted step-ups.

Like the CrossFitter who smashed his foot doing sledgehammer swings.

If you want the greatest possible improvement in general functional ability don’t follow the so-called “functional training” crowd. Work hard, progressively, and consistently on a few basic exercises involving all the major muscle groups. Move slowly during exercises to keep consistent tension on the target muscles and minimize risk of injury, but move quickly between exercises to maximize cardiovascular and metabolic conditioning. Separately from your workouts, learn and practice the correct performance of the specific sport or vocational skills you want to improve at.

And finally, if other people in the gym are doing so-called “functional training” exercises, make sure to give them plenty of clearance so when they do lose their balance or grip and fall, or drop something heavy, or lose control while swinging or throwing something, they don’t reduce your functional ability in the process.

Saturday, July 10, 2004

I’ve recently joined an online discussion group for SuperSlow exercise instructors and enthusiasts, and while much of the conversation has been your typical training and equipment talk, there have been a few debates over certain aspects of training which have been very productive, and a few others that have become a bit heated. I recently posted the following to the group, and wanted to include it here as I brought up several things in it which have been on my mind recently and I think deserve further discussion:

“I only recently joined the list, but I get the feeling there has been a lot of ongoing arguments here on various subjects for a while. I think it’s important that despite our own perspectives, experiences and biases we try to be as open as possible to new suggestions or perspectives, and consider them critically but objectively.

I have been an advocate of SuperSlow for a long, long, time, so much so that I’ve at times found myself more concerned with proving I’m right than with listening to what the other person has to say. Scientists don’t start an experiment to prove anything, they do it to discover something. As a matter of fact, the point of an experiment to attempt to disprove the hypothesis. We need to step back and consider whether we’re more caught up in proving what we think is right, or trying to discover where we might be wrong so that we can improve upon it. The more critical we are of ourselves and our methods, the more likely we are to be able to improve upon them.

Even things which may appear to be self-evident shouldn’t be immune to questioning.

Before we can argue about methods, we need to define desired outcomes. Since different people may desire different outcomes, we may find that we require different methods or applications of principles to achieve those.

We need to clearly and honestly distinguish between what we know and what we suspect so we have a better idea where to expend our investigative or experimental efforts. There are a lot of things I think we’ve taken for granted that need to be questioned.

Danny [Thompson] mentioned he believes Ken [Hutchins] is “way over-concerned with safety”. I have known and worked with Ken for the better part of the last eight years and agree, but the condition of many of the people he trains justifies it. The problem is when you try to extend that to everyone else. Based on things Dr. McGuff has written and my understanding of the nature of force, acceleration, injury, etc., I think the speed and performance of the turnarounds is far more important than the speed of the positive and negative excursions, and that even if you were to move as fast as four or five seconds in most movements you will not risk injury so long as your form is good and you perform the turnarounds slowly. We may find that speed of movement, like intensity, volume, frequency, etc. is something that must be tailored to the individual, with those who have injuries or conditions requiring caution are prescribed a slower rep cadence than those with a much greater structural integrity.

I worded this poorly. I do not think it is possible to be overly concerned with safety – safety should be one of the highest priorities of training. However, I think some overestimate the risk of certain exercises and methods to the average healthy person.

If, as I and a few others suspect, there is a benefit to repeated negative excursions after a particular degree of inroad is achieved, but it is also necessary to limit the TUL, then we may find that the ideal speed of movement from a safety standpoint or efficient muscular loading is not ideal for growth stimulation due to other factors requiring a greater amount of mechanical movement during the exercise. We may find that we have to compromise between moving slowly enough to reduce the force the body is exposed to and minimizing acceleration and increases in momentum during the positive, and performing enough repetitions within a particular time frame to allow for some minimum number of negative excursions during which micro-trauma can occur and growth stimulated.

This assumes that the model Ryan [Hall] posted for muscular growth stimulation is correct, and I suspect it is. However, like anything else, I’m going to remain open and critical of everything.

After reposting this I contacted Ryan Hall and received his permission to repost his biochemical model for stimulus and growth process of skeletal muscle. Ryan said that although the model is still correct some of the details are now better understood and he intends to update and expand upon this later. 

It is hard to do so, however, when in my own experience, Heavy Duty produced major size gains. So much so that I was constantly excited about it. In more years of SuperSlow than months of Heavy Duty, I have not even equaled that degree of muscularity. The only explanation for the muscular strength gains is that there are factors other than muscular size which contribute to force output that are improved dramatically by SuperSlow.

What do we know? What don’t we know?

We know that muscular work of a demanding nature is required to stimulate a response.

We don’t know the exact nature of how this is best applied to produce size or strength increases, we only suspect we do.

We know that too much work, or too frequent work, can have a negative effect.

We don’t know exactly how recovery works, or how to determine without a long period of experimentation how much or how little is ideal for someone or how it changes over time, we only suspect we do.

We know that progression is necessary for continuous improvement.

We don’t know the best method of progression, although we suspect we do. As for single vs. double progression, my own suspicion is that double progression only works because in the process people stumble across the best TUL for them every few workouts. Dr. McGuff wrote about this also.

We know that a reduction in acceleration is necessary to maintain a relatively continuous amount of momentum during the positive, which improves muscular loading. (We have to get away from saying “reduce momentum” because that is not correct, what we are trying to do is maintain a consistent momentum at a given level of resistance).

We don’t know how big of a difference this makes past a certain point, or just how slow it is necessary to move for just this purpose.

We know that moving more slowly allows for greater force production depending on an individuals level of motor control.

We don’t know how slowly is necessary for the average person or if there is any benefit to moving even more slowly from a nervous perspective.

We know that moving slowly reduces the force the body is exposed to and reduces the risk of injury.

We don’t know how slowly any individual must move for this purpose, and I suspect if we had massive amounts of data on injury rates associated with different repetition speeds and could cancel out other factors, we’d find it would vary from group to group depending on age and a whole host of other factors. If in doubt, it’s obviously best to err on the side of safety, but not so greatly that it is impractical [compromises size gains if that is the trainee's primary goal].

For someone in good physical condition, a 4/4 repetition cadence performed with careful turnarounds probably provides a good margin of safety. Someone with osteoporosis or who is very deconditioned or who has a pre-existing injury may require a greater margin of safety and thus a slower speed.

If we find that prescribing rep cadence involves a compromise between efficient loading/safety and adequate mechanical movement to allow for micro-trauma (for the sake of argument – I suspect but I do not know) we may have to vary the movement speed based on the individual.

I still use a 10/10 protocol with some clients with certain spine or joint issues, but have been using a 4/4 or 4/3/4 protocol as standard with many clients for years with no problems and good results.

Studies show there is no significant difference in results between performing one set per exercise and two or three. While this might seem to indicate that one set is as good as two or three, and of course more time efficient, what does it say about overtraining? If two or three sets would result in overtraining, then why is there no significant difference? I suppose it would be necessary to read all of the studies and figure out exactly how they were conducted before going any further with this, but it’s something to consider.

I could go on and on. The important thing to consider here is that we must constantly question everything and not be so attached to a particular theory or method that we can’t be objective about it.

Drew Baye”

There is a tremendous amount we do know about exercise, but there are still many things which are not completely understood, so it is important to always remain objective and critical and to be open to new perspectives and information.

Since the principles of high intensity training are consistent with what we know to be true about biology and the physiology of how organisms respond to stress in particular, we know we’re on the right track. Since the use of slow, controlled repetition speeds is justified by both physics and biology from the standpoints of safety and efficient loading, we know we’re on the right track there also. We just need to continue to experiment and study the application of those principles while considering new information and ideas, to develop protocols or systems for prescribing them to individuals based on their unique physical attributes and desired results.

Questions? Comments? Post them below or discuss in the HIT Forum.

After working out and training people on the original for almost a year I made several improvements to the design. The sides are angled in more to provide a closer grip spacing near the back and better accommodate smaller people. The roller pads in the back have been replaced with a single roller pad on a movable arm in the front, both to provide clearance in the back for various exercises and to provide better positioning for the leg exercises and the ability to change the body angle for push ups and rows. A set of handles has been added to the top back for close parallel grip pull ups and another set of handles has been added at the bottom back for shoulder push ups as a safer and more scalable alternative to handstand push ups.

My motivation for designing the original UXS was my dissatisfaction with the design and construction of existing chin up and dip stations; most have handles or bars that are the wrong diameter, angle, and/or width and many felt flimsy and unstable. I had originally considered modifying existing equipment, but with everything I wanted to do it made more sense to design my own from the ground up. Once I decided to do that I also decided that to justify the time and expense involved it had to provide more exercises than just chin ups and dips. I wanted it to minimally provide the ability to perform a bodyweight “big five”: chin ups, dips, rows, handstand push ups, and squats.

Of course, you don’t need anything to perform squats other than a place to stand. However, when I decided to use a roller pad for a support for handstand push ups it occurred to me a second, lower one could be used as a support for a squatting movement similar to the wall squat often performed with a ball or roller, and that the roller and bars could be used for support so one-legged squats could be performed with the foot in a further forwards position, reducing the stress on the knee (the pros and cons of unilateral exercises are a topic for another post).

In using the design I found the combination of the lower roller pad and the various bars provided the ability to perform several other exercises. There was a problem, however. The original UXS was too big for very small people, and if they used the handles at the narrowest point the pads got in the way during dips and parallel grip rows. During a photo shoot on the original UXS with the model in the picture below, who is approximately four feet and ten inches tall and around eighty pounds,  we had to leave out several exercises because the station was too big for her to perform them on correctly.

This was solved by angling the sides in more and moving the lower pad to the front, which also works better for all the leg exercises and provides the ability to change the body angle for parallel grip push ups and rows. I will probably have her model the new one as well, along with someone over 6’2″ to show how well it accommodates a broad range of height and body sizes.

The close parallel grip pull up handles started out as an additional set of more sharply angled chin up handles but they seemed redundant since the angle of the front chinning bar feels just about perfect, so they were changed. They also work nicely as a place to hang your dipping belt, stopwatch, or tally counter.

The shoulder push up handles are the result of a lot of experimentation with angled push up handle designs, trying to find a way to provide a safer alternative to handstand push ups since it is not something I am comfortable recommending to most people due to the greater difficulty and risk of injury, and because it’s generally not a good idea to have the head below the remainder of the body for too long while training intensely. Handstand push ups can still be performed on the UXS if someone is strong enough and wants to, but they either need to place their shins on the roller pad (half handstand push up), have someone hold their feet, or have good enough balance to perform them unassisted. A word of warning though, the greater range of motion possible on the handles makes them much harder.

If you want to try these (starting at 3:02 on the video) you can do something similar with a set of handles you can make yourself by connecting two eight inch lengths of 1-1/2″ PVC with a 90 degree joint and placing T joints at the ends for stability. Place them against a wall to keep them from sliding, and perform them on a surface your feet will not slip on.

In addition to the dynamic bodyweight exercises several isometric exercises are demonstrated in the video. The UXS is obviously not required for these, they can be done in a variety of ways with all sorts of equipment, but I included them to show how they should be done with the UXS and to get people thinking about how all these exercises can be combined. Here are a few examples of pre-exhaustion using a simple exercise performed isometrically using timed static contraction protocol followed by a dynamic compound exercise:

• pullover to chin up
• chest fly to push up
• lateral raise to shoulder push up
• simple row to parallel grip row
• arm curl to chin up
• triceps extension to dip

Over two dozen exercises are demonstrated in the video, but the UXS can be used for a lot more, including a variety of trunk or “core” movements from either a hanging or support position. Although the station was designed with a single user in mind it is possible for two or three people to simultaneously perform certain combinations of exercises without getting in each other’s way.

The exercises demonstrated are:

As I mentioned in the recent Q&A on rest between exercises the UXS allows for very quick movement from one exercise to the next. Without rushing I was still able to move from one exercise to the next in seconds because everything is right there and other than opening or closing the roller pad arm the only thing that needs adjusting is your body position. If you want an effective tool for overall strength and conditioning, this is it.

Some general information for those interested:

• The frame is heavy gauge cold rolled steel.
• The finish is a durable textured powder coat which comes standard in black, white, gray, and silver (other colors available at additional cost).
• The roller is upholstered with high grade, bacteria-resistant, easy-care BoltaFlex with PreFix protective finish and available in a variety of colors.
• Assembled dimensions: 52” L x 43” W x 84.5” H
• Weight: approximately 250 lbs

The UXS sells for $1,495 USD. They are built to order and require approximately two weeks to complete depending on Regeneration Equipment’s current workload.

If you’ve got questions or comments please post them below, or join the discussion over at the HIT Forum!

Adam Shaw and Rocky

There are many stories about people performing heroic physical feats to save others:

Almost every year there are stories of people lifting cars to save people. In 2011 college football player Danous Estenor lifted a car off a man trapped underneath in Tampa and a group of people in Utah lifted a burning car off a man trapped under it after it struck his motorcycle.

The pro wrestler Chris Masters once uprooted a tree and threw it through the window of his mother’s house to save her from a fire started by a neighbor.

In 2009 Shelly Johnston, a 115 pound female college athlete, carried her 160 pound boyfriend down a hill it took them forty five minutes to climb after he fell about 120 feet from a waterfall and sustained severe head injuries.

In 2006 a woman fought off a polar bear long enough for hunters to arrive and save her son and two other children.

I love stories like these because they show people at their best; heroic, compassionate, and strong. However, I can’t help but wonder how many stories with similar beginnings ended tragically because an otherwise heroic person lacked the necessary strength or stamina. Whatever the number, it is far too high.

What if the Edmonton man didn’t have the stamina to run through the snow quickly enough to reach the first girl before she also slipped into the river? What if the various people who have saved people by lifting cars off of them lacked the strength?

Sometimes when I’m out I watch people and wonder if there were some disaster or emergency whether any of them would be able to help themselves, much less others. Sadly, the answer is usually no; most people are weak, slow, and frail compared to what they can and should be. While proper strength training will not turn everyone into Superman, most people would be amazed at the strength, stamina, and toughness their body is capable of if they are willing to put in the time and effort.

I think most people are good and will do what they can to help others in a bad situation, but what most people can do physically isn’t much. Wanting to help is not enough – you must also be able.

While most of you reading this already work out regularly, all of you know people who don’t. You never know if you or someone you know – a relative, friend, classmate, coworker, etc. – will find themselves in a situation where lives might depend on them.

Offer to take them to the gym with you and teach them how to work out. Buy or offer to help them pick out some home equipment and teach them how to use it if they don’t want to join a gym. In addition to the health, fitness and appearance benefits to them, every person you help start exercising is another person more capable of helping others and someday might even save a life.

Proper exercise is one of the most important things a person can do to improve their quality of life and human well-being in general. Help spread the word:

High Intensity Training Basics

Effective exercise is simple. You must work your major muscle groups hard enough to send a message to your body that it needs to increase their strength and improve the supporting factors (cardiovascular and metabolic conditioning, bone and connective tissue strength, flexibility, etc.) then provide your body proper nutrition and rest and enough time between workouts to do so.

While proper exercise is hard work, very little of it is required to be effective. One set of one exercise for each of the major muscle groups is all it takes. While individual response to exercise varies, most people will get good results training only once or twice weekly. In most cases more does not produce better results and in some cases less exercise works better.

Examples of basic, full-body workouts covering all the major muscle groups using different equipment:

Machines

1. Leg Press
2. Pull Down
3. Chest Press
4. Compound Row
5. Overhead Press
6. Trunk Extension

Free Weights (Barbells and/or Dumbbells)

1. Squat
2. Pullover
3. Bench Press
4. Bent Over Row
5. Seated Press
6. Stiff-Legged Deadlift

Bodyweight Only

1. Squat
2. Chin Up
3. Push Up
4. Inverted Row
5. Shoulder Press Up or Handstand Push Up (static, half, or full depending on ability)
6. Hip Raise

Optionally, additional exercises can be performed at the end of the workout to more directly work smaller muscle groups like the neck and calves, or the abdominal muscles (although those are worked in almost all other exercises).

A variety of repetition methods and cadences can be effective. For simplicity, safety, and efficiency I recommend taking four seconds to lift and lower the weight over a conservative range of motion (avoid extreme stretches).

• Move slowly and focus on intensely contracting the muscles you are working during each exercise.
• On compound pushing movements reverse direction immediately but smoothly at full extension without pausing to avoid unloading the target muscles. Reverse direction or “turnaround” about ten to fifteen degrees short of full extension on lower body pushing movements like squats and leg presses.
• On compound pulling and simple (rotary) movements pause and hold the weight at the top for a few seconds before reversing direction, unless there is little resistance in this position (for example, free weight pullovers and stiff-legged deadlifts). Starting with the third rep, “squeeze” the target muscles during this hold.
• As soon as you complete a repetition begin the next without stopping to rest or setting down the weight.
• Breathe continuously. Do not hold your breath.
• Do not have anything in your mouth during exercise, like gum.
• Keep your head and neck still, looking straight forward with your chin slightly down.

A variety of repetition ranges can be effective. I recommend a moderate range of  six to ten repetitions on compound pushing movements and five to eight on pulling movements (taking into account the additional time spent holding at the end point) which allows for loads heavy enough to be challenging without compromising form or safety for most people. When you can perform the upper number in strict form (only count good repetitions) increase the weight slightly the next time you perform the exercise.

For bodyweight exercises attempt to increase the difficulty as you become stronger by deliberately contracting the antagonistic muscles during each exercise, for example contracting your upper back muscles, rear deltoids and biceps during push ups to make them harder for your chest, anterior deltoids, and triceps.

Move slowly during exercises, but quickly between them to maximize the cardiovascular and metabolic benefits of the workout. Attempt to gradually reduce the time you rest between exercises until you are able to move from one to the next in only a few seconds. When done with a high level of effort these workouts effectively improve cardiovascular and metabolic conditioning more safely and efficiently than traditional endurance activities.

Keep accurate records of your workouts and attempt to gradually increase the amount of weight you use on each exercise, while maintaining strict form (how you do each exercise is far more important than how many repetitions you perform or how much weight you use).

How long should I rest between exercises?

Answer:

It depends on your goals and your current level of conditioning.

If you’re just starting out I recommend resting just long enough after an exercise to not feel winded when starting the next. Depending on your condition you may not feel winded at all, especially since your focus during the first few weeks should be on learning and practicing proper form rather than training intensely. However, as you become more skilled, learn to train more intensely, and gradually use more resistance you will start to experience a greater metabolic and cardiovascular demand, especially during compound exercises involving large muscle groups.

At this point, if you are only concerned with increasing muscular strength and size it probably makes little difference whether you rest a few minutes between exercises or rush from one to the next. I’ve worked out and trained clients both ways with good results.

If you want to maximally improve overall functional ability including cardiovascular and metabolic conditioning you should attempt to progressively reduce the time you rest between exercises until you are able to move from one to the next with only a few seconds in between. Research on sprint interval training shows is possible to improve cardiovascular and metabolic conditioning with work intervals similar to typical high intensity training set durations and longer rest intervals (around four minutes), however the shorter the rest interval the more effective the stimulus should be for improvement.

This might seem counterproductive for strength and size increases because the more rapid systemic fatigue with shorter rest intervals reduces the resistance you can use for subsequent exercises, however keep in mind those have more to do with relative effort than absolute load. Also consider that as your metabolic conditioning improves systemic fatigue becomes less of a limiting factor. If you are still concerned about load you can mitigate the effects of local muscular fatigue somewhat by alternating exercises for different muscle groups. With very short rest periods I recommend alternating compound pulling movements with other exercises to minimize the effect on your grip.

Unfortunately, unless you have a home gym with enough equipment to set everything up in advance,work out in a private training studio, or only go to the gym during off-peak hours it isn’t always possible to move quickly between exercises. Fortunately, there are a few ways around this.

If you have a training partner they can set up your next exercise so you can start it right after the one you’re doing, as long as you don’t need them there to spot you. If the equipment you need for the next exercise in your workout is in use they can determine which other exercise to do next based on available equipment and set that up, so you don’t have to take the time to look around and decide and can stay focused on your workout. If you use a barbell or plateloaded machine they can also go back and put the plates away when you’re done.

If you don’t have a training partner and can’t get to the gym during slower hours but want to emphasize metabolic conditioning you can minimize rest between exercises by performing two or three circuits of a three or four exercises that can be performed on or around one piece of equipment or a few that can be positioned right next to each other. A popular high intensity training version of this is the 3×3 (“three by three”) workout which consists of three circuits of three compound exercises performed non-stop.

A 3×3 HIT workout at home: shrug bar deadlifts, chin ups, push ups

If the equipment at your gym is laid out for full-body circuits this is easier, but many gyms organize equipment into groups based on the muscles worked because of the popularity of split routines. If this is the case the best option is often to set up in front of a chin up and dip station or a power rack with a chinning bar and a barbell or dumbbells. While occupying the same few pieces of equipment for fifteen minutes might be considered poor gym etiquette, it wouldn’t be necessary if gyms provided adequate equipment and enforced policies preventing people from tying up other equipment preventing people from training efficiently.

The following are examples of  three 3×3 workouts with different equipment set ups:

Power rack with chin up bar and barbell:

1. Squat
2. Chin Up
3. Push Up

Position the hooks so the bar is out of the way for chin ups, and stop short of failure on the first two sets of squats so you can re-rack it on the hooks. Do the push ups inside the squat rack so people will know you are still using it.

Chin up and dip station and barbell, dumbbells or shrug bar:

1. Deadlift
2. Dip
3. Chin Up

Set the bar or dumbbells directly in front of the chin up and dip station so you can quickly move from one to the next and so people can’t cut in on the station while you’re deadlifting. If you perform the deadlift with dumbbells do so facing the chin up/dip station. If you use a barbell face away so you do not have to step over it going to the dips.

With another barbell or set of dumbbells you could substitute rows for the pulling exercise and/or overhead presses for the pushing exercise.

Dumbbells:

1. Squat
2. Row
3. Push Up

Depending on your level of strength you can do the squats with only bodyweight or dumbbells. Most people underestimate them, but when performed correctly bodyweight squats are extremely challenging. If you think you need a large amount of weight to squat effectively you don’t know how.

Consider these routines are typically done with moderate repetition speeds and ranges and the individual sets often last around 60 to 90 seconds. A similar effect can also be achieved performing only one circuit of a few exercises using much slower reps and a a higher time under load, although above some TUL I suspect the effectiveness for strength and size increases might be compromised. This is less ideal than performing a workout with separate exercises which more effectively target different muscle groups.

Realize the 3×3 is not ideal. It compromises the effectiveness of the workout for individual muscle groups by limiting the number of exercises for the sake of minimizing rest time to emphasize metabolic conditioning. If you decide to do these I suggest alternating them with regular workouts performing only one set of different exercises covering all the major muscle groups.

If you don’t want to compromise either go to the gym during off-peak hours when you can set up your equipment ahead of time or wait less for equipment, or set up a home gym with enough equipment that you can move between exercises with minimal adjustments or plate changes. One way to minimize the equipment required and maximize space is to get extra sets of collars for each barbell and load a single barbell for multiple exercises. For example, if you are going to use the same bar for rows and curls, load the weight you will use for curls first, put on the collars, then load the additional weight required for rows. When it’s time to do curls you only have to remove the weight from the rows and you’re set to go.

If you’re really pressed for space my UXS bodyweight multi-exercise station was designed with these kinds of workouts in mind, and since it requires no adjustment other than to open or close the roller pad arm on the new design for chin ups you can move between any of over two dozen exercises in seconds. An example of a full-body routine that could be performed entirely on the new UXS is:

1. Knee Flexion
2. Knee Extension
3. Squat
4. Chin Up
   
5. Dip OR Push Up
6. Inverted Row
7. Shoulder Press Up OR Handstand Push Up (regular or “half”)
8. Inverted Curl OR TSC Arm Curl
9. Triceps Press Up OR TSC Triceps Extension
10. Heel Raise

Lastly, for more advanced trainees capable of working at a very high level of intensity it is common to experience dizziness, light-headedness, and nausea when moving quickly between exercises. If you begin to experience any of these wait until they subside before moving on to your next exercise. While some view puking or passing out as a badge of honor and proof of their commitment to going all-out during their workouts it is not necessary and puts you at unnecessary risk. Also, while they might be impressed with your effort, most gym and studio owners do not appreciate people who puke every time they work out.