does this make sense? casual?

[TheOak84]

when most people do a set, they neglect the negative, and concentrate on the positive.

so, lets say, with average form, a guy does 205x10 (70% 1RM) on flat bench press, dropping the bar on his chest and doin a 2 second positive. this would be basically doin half the set.

while another guy uses 155, (about 50% 1RM) doin 3 seconds down and 3 seconds up, on the same exercise, getting twice the benefits of the first guy, which in the end, means better muscle development.

my ? is, what if guy #1 did 15-20 reps, with the 205, goin to failure, still neglecting the negative but goin balls out on the postitve, would he get the same results as guy #2?

did i explain it wrong, or can you follow what im thinking about?

 

[guldukat]

That's a damn good question, giant killer. I understand what you're saying perfectly well, but to be brutally honest, I simply don't know the answer *frowns*

Where's the "cry" smily face when I need it?!

 

[TheOak84]

i was asking cuz a few guys at my gym have HUGE thick pecs and they do shitty negs, but do sets of like 12-20 with 315 for work sets.

blah, i wanna be them

 

[guldukat]

i was asking cuz a few guys at my gym have HUGE thick pecs and they do shitty negs, but do sets of like 12-20 with 315 for work sets.

blah, i wanna be them

I wouldn't mind knocking off 20 with 315, myself, LOL. So I hear ya.

 

[Scotsman]

As for hypertrophy yes you can get great gains from underdoing the negative phase. Whereas doing a proper negative will increase strength more. That is why lots of guys who bounce the bar absolutely suck at competition since they have no real strength at the bottom half of the motion. I can't do 315 for twenty but I also bet they can't do 10 perfect reps with it like I can.

Cheers,
Scotsman

 

[TheOak84]

scotts - thats my point, 2 guys the same size, training differently. i guess it all depends on what ur goin for

ive noticed great gains from hst, which tought me how usefull a negative is.
and that for the most part, the weight doesnt mean shit when ur training for size. and wsb taught me size of muscles doesnt mean shit when ur training for strength. because big guys can be weak, and small guys can be strong.

 

[westsnoop]

I'm theorizing here, but wouldn't the time under tension be similar between moderate reps/slower speed and higher reps/fast speed?

 

[Scotsman]

scotts - thats my point, 2 guys the same size, training differently. i guess it all depends on what ur goin for

ive noticed great gains from hst, which tought me how usefull a negative is.
and that for the most part, the weight doesnt mean shit when ur training for size. and wsb taught me size of muscles doesnt mean shit when ur training for strength. because big guys can be weak, and small guys can be strong.

The only flaw here is that no two people respond to training the same. The guys not doing the negative phase my be genetically better at mass building. Great point though about size and strength not being related as much as people think. If you goal is to look big then you don't need to lift heavy. If your goal is to be strong then you don't need to gain pure size, but more muscle density.

Westsnoop- Yes you will get somewhere around the same time under tension. The difference will be where the strength phase and where the hypertrophy phase is in accordance with how you are lifting.

Cheers,
Scotsman

 

[TheOak84]

bump for casual

 

[Tom Treutlein]

Good question. All I know from what I've heard is that the negative phase helps to tear down the tissue more. That's where the real damage is caused, thusly resulting in greater hypertrophy development. Maybe that information is flawed, but it makes sense to me.

Though, I do notice that really slow negatives help in activating muscle fibers more effectively and/or increasing strength. That I learned through training DC style for a bit.

 

[TheOak84]

Good question. All I know from what I've heard is that the negative phase helps to tear down the tissue more. That's where the real damage is caused, thusly resulting in greater hypertrophy development. Maybe that information is flawed, but it makes sense to me.

Though, I do notice that really slow negatives help in activating muscle fibers more effectively and/or increasing strength. That I learned through training DC style for a bit.

i agree with that, but i was wondering if twice as many positives would have the same effect as an equal amount of pos and negs. it kinda makes sense

 

[Becoming]

no two people respond to training the same

that is your answer... everything else is theory.... see how it works for you...

 

[casualbb]

oak, my answer is I have no idea. It's impossible to quantify exactly how much weight would make a concentric have the same muscle-building effect as an eccentric. Twice as much? Three times as much?

All I know is that the weight needs to be supported during the eccentric for noticeable muscle growth.

A couple studies come to mind.

The first one, they compared concentric-only reps and eccentric-only reps to full reps (both con and ecc done each time). They found that concentrics had 5% of the growth of both, and that eccentrics had 80+%.

Another one, and I remember this because it was the only study I've seen that had a HST-like protocol. They hung weight from a rat, and made it climb a cute little ladder. Over the course of a few weeks, the progressively increased the weight. Afterwards, they examined the muscle change in its limbs, and found that the only muscle that grew was the one that had an eccentric.

So the question is how much eccentric do you need? My personal opinion based on some evidence is that you want a moderate eccentric. I think DC's recommendations of 6 full seconds is way overboard. I personally don't think about it other than making sure the eccentric speed is moderate smooth (meaning I know I'm supporting the weight instead of letting it fall). It would probably be a 2-count for most exercises.

 

[Tom Treutlein]

Again, moderation is key.

 

[bignate73]

why would anyone want to hold back their concentric? explosive concentrics are the result of white fibers! holding them back doesnt do a damn thing but work intermediate and slow twitch. unless someone is truly pushing their hardest and it takes 3 seconds. if thats the case, i would venture to say that a 3 second negative and multi reps would not be a possibility.

 

[b fold the truth]

I do my reps as fast as possible...but I don't bounce.

My chest isn't "tiny".

B True

 

[guldukat]

So the question is how much eccentric do you need? My personal opinion based on some evidence is that you want a moderate eccentric. I think DC's recommendations of 6 full seconds is way overboard. I personally don't think about it other than making sure the eccentric speed is moderate smooth (meaning I know I'm supporting the weight instead of letting it fall). It would probably be a 2-count for most exercises.

I agree.

DC's actually of that opinion as well...as I understand it, he suggested a 6 count on negatives because most people he watched would count very fast (like "123456!" over the course of 1.5 seconds, tops ). He's since told people to simply control their negatives and not worry about the timing.