Maintaining your health and achieving and maintaining a high level of functional ability should be among your highest priorities. You only live once, and both how long you live and your enjoyment of it are directly affected by your health, your physical capabilities and your appearance.
Proper exercise is a requirement for living the longest, happiest life possible. It is a requirement for self-actualization – realizing your full human potential and necessary for achieving the ideal of a sound mind in a sound body.
While many people have at least some awareness of the potential benefits of exercise relatively few fully realize its importance. I believe at least two of the main reasons for this are failure to associate a lack of exercise with the resulting physical consequences, and underestimation of human physical potential.
It is easier to make cause and effect associations when the cause is one of commission rather than omission and when the time between cause and effect is shorter. The consequences of a lack or omission of exercise are not immediately apparent and in some cases take years. Nautilus inventor Arthur Jones once explained during a seminar:
“If I were to grab you by the throat, and choke off your air supply, it would immediately become apparent to you that oxygen is absolutely essential for life. If I were to lock you in a room with no water, after several hours, the degree of thirst you would experience would indicate to you that water is a requirement for life. If I were to lock you in that room with water, but no food, it would take a little longer, a matter of a couple of days, before you would be ravenously hungry, and there would be no question in your mind that food was absolutely essential for life. However, it often takes years before ones body begins to show the harm done by a lack of proper exercise.”
In the long run, if nothing is done to prevent it, we gradually lose muscle as we age, becoming weaker and more frail and suffering other problems as a result such as decreased basal metabolic rate, decreased insulin sensitivity, increased body fat, decreased cardiovascular and metabolic capacity, increased blood pressure, osteoporosis, increased risk of falling due to reduction in speed and steadiness of movement, etc.
In the meanwhile, if you do not exercise you live with a level of functional ability and a physical appearance far below your potential. Compared to what you can and should be, you are weak, slow, and fragile. If you do exercise, properly, the improvements in strength, speed, durability, and overall health will allow you to do more, do it better, do it longer, and look good while you’re at it. I believe the average, untrained person grossly underestimates their potential, would be surprised at what they are capable of becoming with proper exercise.
Exercise is one of the most important things you can do to improve your life. It deserves the same serious consideration, attention to detail, and effort – both physical and mental – as any other major life goal or achievement of high value. It is not enough to just do exercise, you should strive to master it.
You should perform every exercise and every workout in the safest, most effective, most efficient manner possible.
Safety
It ought to go without saying that exercise should performed in the safest manner possible, but considering the sloppy and haphazard form commonly displayed in gyms and the outright dangerous antics of Crossfit, plyometrics, “core stability training” and similar activities touted as exercise it is apparent most either aren’t aware of or underestimate the potential for injury and long term damage of improper training.
While all physical activity poses some risk of injury exercise can and should be performed in a manner and with a level of control which makes it safer than almost any other activity. It would be counterproductive and downright stupid to perform an activity for the purpose of physical improvement which simultaneously poses a significant risk of causing physical injury or undermining your long term functional ability and health.
This does not mean exercise should be easy. On the contrary, to be effective exercise must involve a high level of effort. There is no conflict between safety and intensity of effort during exercise, however; the manner of performance required to minimize risk of injury is the exact same required to maximize the quality of muscular loading and effectiveness.
Effectiveness
More than any other factor, exercise effectiveness is related to effort, and effort is maximized with proper form. Contrary to claims of some ignorant trainers that how you perform an exercise is less important than the effort you put into it, proper form and maximum effort are not mutually exclusive but directly related. The better your form the higher the intensity.
The histrionics and bodily contortions often associated with a high level of effort during training are not an indication of greater intensity; many trainees commit these discrepancies even when they are not actually working hard. They are attempts to reduce the difficulty of the exercise or distractions from the discomfort of hard work.
The person who grunts, grimaces, and makes a show of heaving or jerking to gain momentum and leaning this way and that to find a lever advantage during exercise is not the one training the hardest, but rather the person who remains stoic as the pain of effort increases, impassive and expressionless, focusing on intensely contracting the targeted muscles while maintaining strict control of the position and movement of their body.
Correct form during exercise involves positioning and or alignment of the body and a path, range and manner of movement designed to effectively load the muscles. Breaking or “loosening” form makes an exercise easier, not harder. Some trainers claim “loosening” form is advantageous because it allows more repetitions to be performed displaying their ignorance of the real objective of exercise.
Efficiency
Exercise is not an end in itself, but a means to improving your health and functional ability to better enjoy other activities and aspects of life. You should spend no more time exercising than necessary for best results. Doing so will not give you better results, but will take away from the finite amount of time you have to pursue other goals or interests and enjoy the company of friends and family. Fortunately very little exercise is required if performed properly and with a high level of effort.
The only exercise you need – in fact the only activity that truly qualifies as exercise – is progressive resistance training. When performed properly it is the safest and most effective method of stimulating improvements in all trainable factors of fitness; muscular strength, size and endurance, cardiovascular and metabolic efficiency, flexibility, bone density and connective tissue strength, and body composition.
The Standard
There are other considerations, but these three – safety, effectiveness, and efficiency – are the highest priorities and the standard against which different methods should be compared if the ultimate purpose of exercise is to contribute to greater enjoyment of life.
There are a lot of training methods, programs, and modalities which can eventually maximize your strength and overall fitness and functional ability.
Any strength training method performed with a relatively high level of effort, consistently, and progressively, and any program that addresses all the major muscle groups without exceeding a volume and frequency of work your body can recover from and adapt to can eventually get you about as strong and as muscular as your genetics will allow.
Any physical activity or combination of activities performed with a relatively high level of effort, over a full range of joint motions, involving loads meaningful to the skeletal system, can eventually result in significant improvements in cardiovascular and metabolic conditioning, flexibility and bone density.
Any modality that provides the ability to meaningfully and progressively load the muscles – free weights, machines, body weight, manual resistance, isometric stations, etc. – can be effective for this purpose if used correctly.
These things are often pointed out to avoid criticizing or making comparisons between methods, however in any objective comparison of different methods of achieving the same goal one will be best.
Your life, your health, and your time, are far too important to settle for just any training method, program, modality. Accept nothing less than the best.
The Mission
My mission is to promote this philosophy, of training in the safest, most effective, most efficient manner possible to maximize life-long health and functional ability with enjoyment of life as the standard, and to teach the best methods of achieving this.
Comments on this entry are closed.
Good stuff, Drew.
When you put exercise in perspective… it makes so much sense for everyone to sit down and think about this. For some reason… nobody cares. Everyone thinks they know all about fitness; which is comical. Every guy thinks they can be a trainer. Million and one theories… nobody really sits down and thinks though…
Everybody should read this.
So, is this site going to become Renaissance Exercise 2? Based on the last two paragraphs, I’m not sure how it can be otherwise. I actually like RenX, but I was under the impression that you already stood for safety, effectiveness and efficiency? I’m also curious to see how you work proprietary info from RenX into your site? I’m curious…..So I’ll keep reading.
Thomas,
I have always stood for safety, effectiveness, and efficiency. In an attempt to be more inclusive of the larger HIT community I had become far too indiscriminate, though, and realized this was counterproductive and it was necessary to raise the bar considerably.
I felt it was necessary to clearly state and explain my position on these things as they are the basis for everything that is going to follow.
Baye.com will not become Renaissance Exercise 2, and no proprietary information or articles will be posted here unless they ask or offer. I will, however, write about how people who do not have access to ideal equipment and environments can train as safely, effectively and efficiently with what they do have.
Drew, Do you feel that forced reps, drop sets etc are no longer necessary because of the RenEx technique of the “squeeze” and longer TUL? The videos that RenEx posts are impressive, but, what about those of us who will never have access to their equipment?
Brian,
With proper form, which may or may not include a squeeze technique depending on the exercise, these would not be necessary and in many cases contribute nothing to the effectiveness of an exercise while compromising safety.
The exact performance will differ, but the same principles can be applied with other equipment, which is something I plan to write about. I will be focusing more on body weight and free weight training though, for two reasons; the vast majority of commercial machines are garbage that gets in the way of rather than improves exercise performance and I want to encourage people to train at home where they have total control over the environment.
I am adding sections on both of these in Elements of Form and will comment on them later on the site, but for now I’m just going to say that while a properly designed machine provides numerous advantages over free weights, especially for simple/rotary movements, an improperly designed machine can make exercise worse. It is possible to perform many exercises more safely and effectively with free weights or body weight than with improperly designed machines.
Good to hear that Drew. Like I said, I actually like RenX and appreciate their focus on safety while trying to produce maximum muscle stimulation. I’ll be very interested to see how you take some of their philisophical ideas (as I understand them) and encorporate them into non-RenX equipment and protocols. I’m very interested to see why you think rest pause is a flawed protocol as I was coming to quite like it as a producer of high tension and inroad. Anyway, I’m glad you are brave enough to do what you think is best for others and am also curiosu to see how it goes being employed by RenX (what capacity exactly?).
Thomas,
The protocol can be applied to a variety of modalities, and even if people don’t have access to ideal equipment they should strive to apply it as well as they can with what they have.
I am not an employee of RenEx, but rather part of the team. I work for Overload Fitness with Ken Hutchins, however, and I haven’t been this excited about the field or writing for a long time.
Drew
Your Mission & Philosophy of Exercise statements bring to mind the Ninety-Five Theses. Congratulations on teaming with the Renaissance crew; I’m certain those of us familiar with your blog saw it coming and are just wondering if you are staying in Florida or relocating to Austin or Ohio.
I had addressed supplemental exercise (would supplemental activity would be a better phrasing?) in the last public teleconference with Renaissance but did not get to hear the answer. I am curious about issues such as recommendations of exercise AND daily walking or additional activity for treatment/prevention of metabolic syndrome or John Medina’s recommending treadmills in classrooms and office cubicles for improved brain function.
Your thoughts on supplemental exercise, supplemental activity for health and well-being, or whatever it should be called…… in this blog or another E-book would be welcome.
Gayle,
I was not aware of Martin Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses and looked it up. Something with a similar format ought to be written on exercise, outlining the purpose, main principles, important considerations and their conclusions for exercise.
Recreational activity or physical play is an important part of overall health and enjoyment of life and has it’s place. To get the most out of both exercise and recreation it is necessary to distinguish between the two, however, and to perform each with consideration for their real purpose and requirements for achieving it.
I recommend reading Ken Hutchins’ article on the Renaissance Exercise web site on Exercise Versus Recreation, and I wrote something on the topic previously which is going to be updated and reposted.
“I will, however, write about how people who do not have access to ideal equipment and environments can train as safely, effectively and efficiently with what they do have.”
Drew I think this is an excellent and considerably sized niche- which desperately needs decent exercise information.
“…and I haven’t been this excited about the field or writing for a long time.”
Congratulations, I am really pleased for you, having enjoyed your writing about exercise for the last 12 years.
Simon,
The Renaissance Exercise equipment is unbelievable and Overload Fitness’s environment is ideal for proper exercise. I wish everybody was able to train on these machines and in this type of facility. Unfortunately, that is not the case for the majority of people and I hope I am able to help people get as close as possible with what they have access to.
Is Elements of Form shipping? Your website claims it will begin shipping on Jan 16th, but it is still listed as a pre-order.
Karn,
I’ve trashed all the sections on the various HIT methods and so-called “advanced techniques” and am rewriting them along with a new introduction (which this post is pulled from). With the number of pages I’m completing daily it should be done by early Feb, but I’m going to say mid Feb to be safe. I will gladly refund any one’s purchase if they don’t want to wait, no questions asked, but the price if the book is going to double when it goes live in Feb.
I’m more intrigued than ever about the upcoming book (Elements of Form).
I am very pleased to see that there will be a continued focus on free weight and body weight exercise, as I currently do train at home with fairly basic equipment, not even a power rack for squats and benches. That does create some challenges if you want to work intensely, but safely.
I understand that some machines are garbage, but I suspect than some are better than others. So for those who might be able to train at a commercial gym that doesn’t have the gold standard stuff (RenEx, MedX, ???), I hope that you do ‘name names’ and offer suggestions as to what is the best of the rest, and what specifically to avoid.
I will also confess that the comments in the last couple of paragraphs do leave me a bit confused. Just yesterday, I listened to an interview you did with Dave Durell, in which you talked about the amazing results you’d gotten by trying Rest-Pause. The rest pause method has always sounded potentially risky to me, i.e., the kind of training with deep fatigue that might lead to form errors and injuries, but the fact that you got such better results was still quite interesting. So I am curious to see how your thinking has evolved on this.
I’m also curious to see where you come out on rep cadence and TUL. I guess your older writing on these subjects is not currently available. But I did recently read an interview that you did with John Little (I think) which addressed the subject. As I recall, you said that you left the Super Slow franchise after some disagreements over the use of light weights with very long TUL, and had moved in the direction of more weight, less time under load, and somewhat faster execution of repetitions. You felt that higher tension via heavier weight lead to better results. (That sort of fits with your earlier positive comments on Rest/Pause). So I will be interested to see what you have to say on this subject, now that you have re-established links with Ken Hutchins.
I have recently experimented with 10/10 cadence on free weight exercise, and I find it hard to move smoothly at such slow speeds, especially as I get near the end, and have to focus more on maintaining control of the weight. Of course it somewhat depends on the length of the movement, with shorter movements being harder. I also get the sense that on some kinds of exercises, a very slow negative or positive gives my muscles too much time to rest when moving through the biomechanically advantageous portion of the movement (e.g., approaching lock out position on a pressing movement). I’ve sometimes wondered if it might be more effective to either move more quickly through the easy part of the movement, or shorten the ROM to just the range where the muscle is forced to work hardest. Perhaps you will also have some insight to offer in this regard.
Craig,
With the proper safety equipment, proper form, and correct weight selection it is possible to safely perform numerous free weight and body weight exercises.
As for a comparison of machines there are general and specific problems. Some entire brands or lines of equipment are poor due to the general design philosophy or manufacturing, while others may have some machines that are good and others that are bad, and a few in between. Ken Hutchins wrote an article on exercise equipment design principles which might be available on the Renaissance Exercise web site and would be the best starting point for someone who wanted to understand this better. There are too many brands and individual machines for it to be practical to compare all of them but I may write something about this later.
I did have good results with rest-pause and other methods, but the same or better results can be achieved more safely with RenEx protocol and there are specific issues with rest-pause, negative-only, and some other popular HIT methods and training techniques that make them less than optimal choices even when performed with highly skilled instructors, much less the typical trainer. They are also focused on entirely the wrong thing, which is something I’ll write about later.
I took the older articles down so they can be rewritten entirely to be better and more up to date. My previous disagreements with the cadence and set duration were due to the same errors that lead to the experiments with rest-pause, negative-only, and other methods and techniques. I should have known better, but I don’t entirely regret these because the experience with them was informative and my eventual disappointment with aspects of them is the reason for my current path, which was fortunately convergent with the RenEx philosophy.
A 10/10 movement is harder for a variety of reasons, but much of this depends on how you do it, particularly turnaround technique, hold and squeeze techniques, etc. These are covered extensively in Ken Hutchins’ book The Renaissance of Exercise and I address them in Elements of Form.
Hi Drew,
Interesting post, and a nice ‘promo’ for Elements of Form (looking forward to it). I’m especially pleased to hear that you intend to offer some focus on free weights and bodyweight technique/training. I don’t have access to high quality machines. And, for reasons you allude to, I prefer to train at home anyhow. One quick question: should one, in general, opt for dumbbell movements rather than barbell? E.g., dumbbell bench press rather than barbell? Or, vice versa? Or, is it just a matter of personal preference? I ask, because I’ve recently returned to doing barbell bench presses; I can control the speed of the movement and it’s a bit easier with weight progression. However, a colleague suggests that I’m risking inevitable shoulder injury with the barbell (I feel no pain during the movement at the present time). Thanks, Will
Will,
If you are performing a barbell bench press with proper grip position, path and range of movement and performing the turnarounds correctly and have normal, healthy shoulders there is no reason for concern. If you train at home you should only bench press inside a safety rack or with reliable safety stands which can be set high enough to prevent the bar from rolling onto your neck. It is easier and safer to bench press with a barbell inside a rack or with stands than to bench press dumbbells due to various issues of getting into position to perform the exercise and safely unloading after failure, as well as the motor control problems with isolateral movements.
Drew, I think you are leaning in the right direction and your web site is a good place to sort all of this stuff out.
In the past, the only thing I have ever disagreed with you on is your video of “one legged squat-pistols”. Ken Hutchins would flip out!
We have to come up with a better,safer,body weight exercise alternative for the quads.
Brian,
Ken would be right to, as well, and they’re not something I would recommend again. Regular body weight squats and body weight “wall squats” performed with RenEx protocol are highly effective and much, much harder than most might imagine.
To Brian and Drew: I’m curious as to why you believe ‘Pistols’ are an unsafe and ineffective exercise. I don’t use them, but I do use some unilateral leg work, principally Bulgarian Split Squats, which I find to be both very effective and ‘safe’.
Will,
With a few exceptions there is no benefit to unilateral exercises over bilateral ones involving the same joint functions. Due to the greater risks involved with uneven loading of the spine exercises should not be performed unilaterally except in rare circumstances (rehab, working around an injured limb, etc.). This is especially true with compound leg movements which can involve tilting and rotation of the pelvis, causing the spine to rotate and flex laterally while under load.
I would also strongly discourage performance of “Bulgarian” split squats due to the risks associated with having one leg supported behind you on a bench if you lose your balance.
When RenEx protocol is used regular, bilateral body weight squats are more intense than pistols as they are typically performed.
Thanks for your explanation. After I sent the earlier inquiry, I read Ken Hutchins’s discussion of unilateral exercises at the Ren Ex website. Very interesting. While the Hutchins piece that I read relies primarily on personal anecdote to support the argument against single-leg loaded exercises, it nonetheless makes some sense on its own terms. Perhaps I’ve been very lucky to this point in not injuring myself. I’ll certainly take the argument seriously and revisit my exercise choices. Thanks.
Very intresting and enjoyable to see that you guys has come together and I will follow your next step closely.
I have enjoyed youre articles for years but have to admit that RenEx has got my full intrest the last year due to their high standard and the results I got from it.
Free weight excercises would be great to learn more about, never really tried that seriously.
Anyway, congrats to your new fueled enthusiasm.
//Jonas
Thanks Jonas,
I believe RenEx is going to change the industry and I’m excited to be a part of it.
Drew, one addendum to my previous comment. Do Hutchins’s concerns about unilateral work apply to upper-body exercises as well (e.g., dumbbell rows)? I’m not yet persuaded by the arguments (in part because of my own excellent history with unilateral leg work), but I have taken your concerns seriously and will continue to look into the matter. I have a vague memory of Stuart McGill writing on this somewhere.
Will,
Yes, it also applies to upper body exercises, and there are many more reasons than the one’s I’ve mentioned here. Keep in mind, just because you haven’t sustained an injury during unilateral training doesn’t mean you aren’t causing damage that will develop into hip or spine issues with time. While unilateral and isolateral movement is normal and somewhat well tolerated during many locomotor and daily living movements, performing them under load on a regular basis over a long period of time is a different matter entirely. Also consider there is no advantage to it, no justification for greater risk of injury or additional time spent in the gym.
Drew, Have you’ve changed your opinion on the advantage of a bit more mechanical work w/a slightly faster rep speed?
Mark,
I previously suspected more excursions may contribute to better growth stimulation due to greater microtrauma, all else being equal. I was unable to find any research to support this and my own experimentation hasn’t shown any advantage either. What research does show is any reasonably controlled speed of movement will be relatively safe and effective, and in my experience a slower speed is necessary for proper turnaround technique and for proper focus during exercise.
The most important thing to keep in mind is the key appears to be relative effort, and not load. A wide range of loads and repetition ranges have been shown to be equally effective for strength and size increases in the long run, provided they are used with a high level of effort. With this in mind, the ideal approach would be to use the lowest load required to get the job done. Rather than focus on how much weight you can lift, you should focus on how intensely you are able to get your muscles to contract with a given weight, how efficiently you can use that weight to fatigue the muscles, and only increase it when you are unable to achieve failure within a reasonable time frame.
Rather than trying to lift the heaviest weight you are capable of, you should be lifting the least weight required to effectively load the muscles and thoroughly inroad them within a reasonable time. While it may seem counterintuitive, the better you are at an exercise the sooner you will fail with a given weight.
Don’t mistake being better at exercise for being better at lifting weights or being stronger. Being better at exercise means being more skilled at using the weight to challenge the muscles, to make the movement harder. Being better at lifting weights means being more skilled at creating favorable leverages and using momentum to make it easier for your muscles to move the weight. Being stronger means being able to produce more force, not being able to lift more weight, because the manner in which you lift it makes a huge difference in how much force is required.
If you want to impress ignorant people in the gym, learn to lift weights in the easiest manner possible so you can load lots of plates on the bar and make all sorts of noise.
If you want to become as strong as possible, learn to use the weight to make the exercise as hard as possible to create a stronger stimulus for growth.
Drew – has there been any attention given to the relative effectiveness of where, in the range of motion of a given exercise muscle failure occurs?
Also do progressive resistance cams help in achieving better efficient results and if so how can free weights compare with good progressive cams?
Coli
Coli,
If the resistance curve of a machine is congruent with the strength curve of the targeted muscles momentary muscular failure should occur at random positions during the positive or at the start point if the required degree of inroad is achieved during the negative.
Balanced resistance improves the efficiency of an exercise; you are able to achieve thorough inroad and momentary muscular failure more quickly with the same average load while wasting less energy getting there. Some free weight and body weight movements can be performed in a manner which provides a more balanced and more efficient resistance curve and can be very effective when done correctly, however a properly designed machine can do this better and through a greater range of motion for simple (rotary) exercises.
Hey Drew! After having – somewhat – of a “run in” with you on facebook – lol – I decided to check out your site more closely. I was already familiar with your youtube stuff, which I enjoy. You have your exercise science down-cold. I couldn’t agree more with accurate science-based exercise philosophy. The “diet” stuff, we disagree on, somewhat (only minor). But hey, that’s what makes for interesting debate fodder, right? My real point in writing is more so to tell you that I am a “fan”, and to extend the proverbial “olive branch”. I look forward to continuing to read your info and possibly meeting you at afuture event. Take care my friend;-)
Franny Goodrich
Franny,
Thanks for visiting the site and taking the time to comment. If we happen to be attending the same event would love to sit down for coffee and talk shop.
Great that a lot of activity is happening in the field of exercise and nutrition that would cater towards the well being of trainees. But, still the HIT community seems so undivided. The truth within the truth is still murky. Though workouts have to be safe and hard, done in proper form- this is still a generalization. There cannot be two facts. So what is the fact. What is the stimulus required to stimulate the body transformations? What are the requirements of that stimulus? I have TROE and have been munching the contents slowly, but it seems geared more towards RenEx equipment. I hope U address this with body weight workouts and conventional equipment( maybe very difficult) through EOF. TROE briefly touches points on diet, but it seems dated. Do U still follow paleo or have made a change in the dietary guidelines? From your pics we can see that U have been in the most sharpest condition when U were on a high carb diet and also on a brief workout schedule. Whats Ur recent take on this very important aspect? Science cannot have two effective/ efficient routes. What is that route? What are the requisites of that logic?
Karthik and Chris,
Tension and inroad are related and both contribute to the stimulation of muscular strength and size increases, as well as other factors of functional ability we are trying to improve through exercise.
I already mentioned I would be addressing free weight and body weight training.
Earlier during college I practically lived off protein powder and canned tuna with maybe a cup or two of rice daily.Later I followed a Zone type diet, which was only about forty percent carbohydrate. It wasn’t until after moving down to Orlando that I increased my carb intake, which was a mistake.
I’d like to answer your questions but I’m not sure exactly what you’re asking. Please rephrase them and be specific.
So now are you saying the inroad theory is correct? How could Ken’s new machines change your mind that quickly?
Drew,
Correct me if i’m wrong but i’m sure i noticed recently that you had changed the title of your website to exclude the “High Intensity Training” part, which you mentioned in a previous post was outdated. Today i logged on and have noticed it is back. Just curious, why did you change your mind with this?
Richard,
I don’t like the term High Intensity Training. High Intensity Progressive Resistance Exercise would be a much better description of proper exercise. The switch back was done for practical reasons related. The majority of people searching for information on this type of training on the web are looking for “HIT” or “High Intensity Training”. Unfortunately, most of what is written on the internet about HIT is either biased against it, full of errors, or poorly written and I would rather use a name that is a little off and have the opportunity to reach those people through the web site than have them go somewhere else and be misinformed.
There are all sorts of problems with the term High Intensity Training, and I wrote something about it before which I plan to revise and repost and explain why high intensity progressive resistance exercise is a better name.
Hey Drew,
I workout from home now due to my gym becoming uber-douchy. I’ve been a HITter for many years so I guess it was a matter of time before the standard gym pissed me off too much. Anyway, I’m wondering if you have any suggestions on training the neck at home? I’m just working with a cage, dip/curl station, and a bunch of plates. I figure you’d be the best person to know of legit equipment.
Thanks!
Chris,
Unfortunately, uber-douchiness is a huge problem and affects gyms all over the world. We are working on a cure, but I’m not optimistic.
It is possible to perform neck extension, flexion, and lateral flexion either isometrically using a head strap or head harness secured to one of the uprights of your rack and timed static contraction protocol, or by providing your own manual resistance.
While I might agree that rest-pause is not needed *if* the first failure set if performed correctly, I can see it’s benefit otherwise. It’s not uncommon for trainees to have a momentary lapse of concentration, will, or letting the pain overtake you that you wimp out and quit the set prematurely. Personally, when this happens to me, I know it, and in this case a second attempt is warranted. Also, I think for newby’s that don’t have much experience in HIT, they might make the error of going up in weight too fast. If lifting too heavy a weight, failure will happen before full inroading, right? So in this case a second rest-pause attempt will help. I agree once the proper weight and TUL is dialed in, sufficient inroading will happen as long as all other technique and concentration (intensity) is sufficient. But still, what is the real harm of attempting a rest-pause set? If the muscles are tired the rep speed is slow, I doubt there is much of a chance of injury. What say you guys?
Brad,
Instead of looking for workarounds for poor exercise performance trainees should learn to focus better and discipline themselves to work through the discomfort associated with high intensity effort.
If a trainee terminates a set before momentary muscular failure is achieved, rather than resting and extending the set they should resolve to try better next time. Assuming they have already achieved a significant degree of inroad, since otherwise the discomfort would not have been enough to become an obstacle to continued performance, additional work would be more counterproductive since even a brief rest would allow a significant increase in volume and the resulting increase in demand on recovery ability would most likely outweigh any slight increase in stimulus effect.
I only have about 4 months experience working out using HIT and I think one of my problems hitting a performance increase plateau has been increasing the weight too fast from workout to workout. It seems there should be a hard/fast number for TUL after which you should increase the weight. Is there such numbers? I’ve been stuck at around 60 seconds TUL for various exercises for weeks. Does this mean I should drop the weight to enable progressively better TUL times week to week? Then increase the weight only afer I hit XXX seconds?… where XXX equals what… 100 seconds?
If there is a better discussion thread for this, let me know. thanks!
Brad,
There is no hard/fast number for what is an effective set duration or repetition range. Research shows there is a wide range that is effective and it has far more to do with the effort you put into the exercise than the absolute load or reps performed. I prefer to have people err on the side of safety and 60 seconds or three very slow reps would be the minimum I’d recommend. A little longer would be better, as well as allow for a weight that would be more manageable while still being heavy enough to ensure full recruitment of all the motor units in the targeted muscles.
Plateau’s can have many different causes, but if you’ve been stuck for that long on that many exercises I would recommend taking a brief layoff and resuming at a lower frequency and a higher rep range/TUL.
Drew, thanks for the reply. I agree that trainees should strive to just (do it right), but to ignore the learning curve which can be difficult for some new to HIT is to lower the acceptance of it. Whatever techniques that can be utilized to ease people into it I think is a good thing. Less drop outs if you will. Better for them, better for you.
I’m having a problem buying into the idea behind your comment… “even a brief rest would allow a significant increase in volume and the resulting increase in demand on recovery ability would most likely outweigh any slight increase in stimulus effect.” The reason is, I find it hard to believe that an extra ~10-20 seconds of TUL during a rest-pause set constitutes a significant increase in volume, at least relative to a 3-7 hours or more per week routine that’s popular these days. Also, if full inroading wasn’t achieved in the initial set then this second set does the trick and I can’t see how that could be a bad thing. Assuming an infrequent routine, I can’t see how an extra 20 seconds of exercise can negatively affect a recover that takes place over many days, perhaps as much as 4-10. Can you clarify for me how this can be? Thanks.
Brad,
You can’t make up for a lack of effort by doing more work. The goal is to inroad the muscles as efficiently as possible, using as little volume necessary to achieve deep inroad while staying within a time frame that still allows adequate loads for full recruitment and failure due to inroading rather than “outroading”.
Any more work than necessary to stimulate optimum improvements in strength and size (and through them, other factors of functional ability) contributes nothing of benefit while adding to the stress the body must recover from. The muscles will recover enough with a brief rest to allow for you to continue considerably longer than if you had not rested, significantly increasing the volume while not making a significant difference in effectiveness.
Resolve to work harder and not terminate a set until you have given your best effort rather than looking for excuses not to work as hard as possible or to perform more work than you need.
The other thing is what’s the difference between the first set being 20 seconds longer and a second rest-pause set of 20 seconds after a 10 second rest? You’ve allowed a slight muscle recovery to take place but make up for it by re-fatiguing the muscle presumably to a higher degree by the end of it, than at the end of set one. I look at this second set perhaps as insurance – insuring that you did indeed max out the muscles in question. If they were fully gassed out during set one, then the second attempt will fail almost immediately. But what’s the harm in that? Sorry, if I’m being a pain. I’m just trying to learn. -Brad-
Brad,
As soon as you unload the muscles begin recovering. When you stop, rest, and continue you don’t pick up where you left off, you will have taken several steps back, figuratively. You will need to repeat those steps before you can go further forward and pass the level of inroad you had achieved when you quit initially, adding to the volume of work and significantly reducing the efficiency of the set, while not adding to effectiveness.
You’re not being a pain. This is helpful. It lets me know I need to go back and make sure this is addressed clearly in the book.
Also, if a trainee is working out infrequently (eg. like me, once per week), not maximizing a workout is a big time hit. ie, fatiguing a muscle 90% instead of closer to 100% can make a big difference progress-wise. And your recommendation of “they should resolve to try better next time” is a tough pill to swallow. Personally I think I’d rather try a second rest-pause set as I said before, as insurance. That is, unless I become convinced that this practice is actually detrimental to my progress.
Brad,
Yes, it is tough. If you think you can make up for a lack of effort by doing more, though, you’re not going to work as hard on improving your effort during the initial, and ideally only set. By thinking you can make up for it with a few reps after rest pause, you provide yourself with an excuse to quit. Don’t.
Drew, understood. So then any assistance on the positive or negative portion of the last rep or two would also be frowned upon, yes? Because that would allow partial unloading of the muscles similar to a brief rest-pause, or not? I’m only asking because I saw a Youtube video of yours where you were assisting a trainee on the last rep or two on a leg press machine.
Brad,
Yes, in most cases I do not recommend forced reps. I cover this in Elements of Form in detail and may post something on the site about it later.
Drew, is there scientific evidence/background to support that a rest-pause set is inferior to a strict adherence to the 1-set to failure? Or are you basing your opinion on the empirical evidence you’ve observed through your own training and trainees’ results?
I just re-read a pertinent part of McGuff’s book where he generally agrees with your viewpoint of 1-set only. He mentions rest-pause only as a technique if the equipment being used has some “sticking” problem…
“Depending on the equipment a trainee is using, certain mechanical impediments could stand in the way of inroading deeply enough to stimulate an optimal response. In the course of our own training and in supervising the training of others, we have noted that a lot of what we are calling ‘advanced’ techniques are not performed foremost with the intention of tweaking the stimulus for better results. Rather, they are being executed to counter the problem of the trainees’ having developed a level of strength that is incompatible with the equipment at hand. This problem typically concerns incongruities in strength curve and/or leverage that make continued progress difficult.”…
“Rest-pause repetitions allow you a second round of recruiting the higher-order motor units without the necessity of going through all of the mechanical work leading up to the failure point.”
Brad,
There is no evidence that rest-pause would produce better results and plenty of reasons having to do with safety and efficiency to avoid it. The equipment issue is something I will write about eventually.
Sorry, one more thing. 🙂 What is your view on the “static hold”, ie, when forward rep progress has stopped and you continue to attempt to hold the weight for 10 (or more?) seconds? Is this beneficial or is it going beyond the optimum failure point and detrimental to repair/recovery? Similarly, how about a positive-assisted last rep (negative-only) where you hold it as long as possible? Beneficial or detrimental?
thanks much! -Brad-
Brad,
A static hold or “thorough inroad technique” at failure can be beneficial if done correctly. Also wrote about this in EoF.
Brad’s post hints at a subject being dissatisfied with his inroad in the primary set: Perhaps he quit due to a distraction rather than failure, or is a beginner who feels disappointingly ‘fresh’ at set’s end due to not yet understanding/feeling how to truly go to failure. I can’t imagine anyone who’s felt the full effect of a proper set to failure wanting to use rest-pause afterwards. As far as the volume remark, I didn’t realize anyone here was looking for -more- volume!
Mark,
I suspect you are correct. I have put a lot of people through workouts who then realized their previous notions of training with a high level of intensity or all-out effort were nowhere near the level they were actually capable of. Unfortunately, it’s a very difficult thing to get across in writing.
Drew, Love your reply: “I have put a lot of people through workouts who then realized their previous notions of training with a high level of intensity or all-out effort were nowhere near the level they were actually capable of. Unfortunately, it’s a very difficult thing to get across in writing”.
HONEST-TO-GOODNESS FAILURE…”WORDS” WILL NEVER DO IT JUSTICE.
Thanks Franny,
I wish I could invite everybody to come to the studio for a workout and just line ’em all up and instruct them each through a set.
I worked at a Gold’s Gym in Green Bay, WI when I was in college, and we had a lot of bodybuilders working out there who thought there was no way you could get results doing only one set because it was “too easy” or because they thought you needed more volume. Every once in a while we’d get one to let us put them through a workout. I remember putting one of the bigger guys through a very basic, brief workout consisting of just one set each of barbell stiff-legged deadlifts, then leg press, pull down, chest press, and compound row on Hammer Strength machines. After the last exercise he stumbled into the locker room and I didn’t see him again until over an hour later. He was sitting in the front lobby waiting for his girlfriend to pick him up because he didn’t feel like he could drive himself home. He didn’t come back to the gym for over two weeks, and when I saw him back in the gym he was still doing the same old multi-set nonsense. When I asked him why, he said the workout I put him through was “way too hard”.
Hahaha I don’t doubt it for a minute, Drew. I’ll bet there are a lot of HIT Trainers out there, reading this – nodding their heads, sayin’ “yup!” As usual, very insightful stuff you’re puttin’ out there…keep it coming. And thanks;-)
Thank you Drew – it is refreshing to read your Philosophy and I appreciate your candor and expertise!
Drew –
Unless I’ve misread you, you have a newfound concern for negative reps. Is this related to safety ? I ask because, as an adjunct to my brief, infrequent workouts, since I’ve always wanted to accomplish one-armed pushups, I added a set of negative one-armed pushups … and it was unbelievable how quickly I was able to progress to the real thing.
No pain or discomfort whatsoever on the eccentric. However, the dicey part was what happened at the bottom. Insofar as I was able to maintain control throughout, and deftly unload at bottom, no harm, no foul. But the few times I was careless, no, my shoulders didn’t like it.
Is this what you’re driving at ?
Dale,
Yes. The biggest concern is the ability to transfer load, either between individuals or from the legs to arms in a gradual and controlled manner. This is also covered in the book.
Thanks, Drew.
Heads-up: I ordered the book this morning!
That -last- negative rep, continuing to attempt a positive rep until we reach bottom, (and perhaps even a few more seconds afterwards); how did we ever imagine there was a technique more intense than -that-?
Why are drop sets with as little rest as possible not a good option?
Donnie,
If the initial weight selection is appropriate additional work after failure is not necessary and can even be counterproductive, and drop sets are inefficient and performance is difficult to quantify for progress evaluation.
The quest for perfection confuses the issue of “Why not… ?” Many have obtained good results from less-than perfect methods, avoided injury over the long haul, & don’t feel a need to change. This doesn’t change the time they could have saved in workouts & recovery, or the injuries others have suffered from those workouts. Aside from progression itself, (resistance/time/focus/technique), the main factor in progress is never getting hurt. Drop sets, unilateral training, etc., may be reasonably safe & efficient, but aren’t the safest. A matter of “Good/Better/Best”.
Well put. If someone is happy with what they’re doing they’re welcome to continue and there is no reason for them to bother reading this web site. The articles here are for people who want to train as safely, efficiently and effectively and want the best rather than something that is merely good.
Hey Drew,
love your site and all the work your doing! I suffer from an IBD and since I cut the grains out I feel like a different person, much more energy!
Anyway, Id like to ask you a question or two please!
How often should you work out? Ive think I´ve read where you have said 2 to 3 times a week but then you say to have 4 to 10 days recovery!
Also about sets and repetitions, would it be ok if I do a warm up set, then a main set of high intensity, where I lift till I can´t lift anymore then go down a weight immediately and repeat then go down another weight and repeat etc, until exhaution, and then do a 3rd set to ensure Ive worked the muscle thoroughly. Does this sound o to you?
Thanks so much! All the best from Ireland!
Jon
Jon,
Cutting grains from the diet is one of the best things anyone can do for their health, not just people with IBD or Crohn’s. Congrats on dropping them and best wishes for continued good health.
The ideal workout volume and frequency varies between individuals. Most people seem to do well training the whole body twice weekly (once every three to four days) if the workouts are brief, but some may require more rest days between workouts to fully recover. If you’re not making reasonably good progress try adding more rest days between workouts.
Unless you have a joint problem which requires you to warm up to be able to exercise pain free warming up is unnecessary. If you do the exercise correctly there is no need or benefit to performing additional sets, drop sets, etc.
This is great stuff. Thx Drew. Been working out 4 days a week (each body part twice a week) and lots of ab work. Come friday I’d have a half *ss workout cuz I was feeling burnt out by then. I’m 50 and been working out almost a year. I happened upon this HIT stuff 3 weeks ago. Have integrated these concepts the last 2 weeks. 2 sets instead of 8 or so. One warmup and one very slow and intense. One week of rest. Loving being able to sleep in an extra hour in the morning. I’ll admit though, feeling sore another extra day or two than normal cuz not use to this intensity. Gonna give it a fair shot for a couple months but so far loving it.
Hey one question. At my age should I be doing dead lifts and squats? Some say it will produce back damage long term. I like the feeling it gives but want to stay safe.
Bob,
Deadlifts and squats are highly effective and productive exercises when done correctly, however I prefer to err on the side of safety and recommend using a good trunk extension and leg press machine instead. They provide the same or better work for the target muscles while posing less risk of injury or developing. long term back problems.
I am looking to peak for a class reunion this year. I currently train upper body one day and lower body one day. I work out 3 days a week, so upper and lower body are getting hit about 1 time every 5 days. I do 1 hard set to 90% to 100% failure of a bench, pulldowns, military press, pushdown and a curl for upper body. Lower body I do 1 set of squats, leg curl and standing cals raise. My question for you is is it okay for me to rotate flat bench and incline press from one upper body workout to another? Also,is the arm work and leg curls a waste of time in this routine?
Phil,
There is little reason to rotate the bench press with incline press if you are already also performing an overhead pressing movement. Some people experience better arm and/or leg development with the addition of simple movements, so I wouldn’t consider them a waste of time as long as you are making consistent progress.
can you give specific instructions on how to do a RenX approved bodyweight squat? I was on the phone with Ken while he was giving me instructions but we kept getting disconnected. Also what do you and Ken think about Goblet squats? It would seem like they would be a simple way to amplify bodyweight squats.
Joseph,
I am planning to write something later which will cover the specific performance of several body weight exercises, including squats.
I recommend using a weighted hip belt instead of performing “goblet” squats.
A couple of my friends are training for the 2014 Crossfit games and want to use HIT principles almost exclusively. Some of which you outlined in previous articles; namely, to move quickly between exercises however perform exercises in a slow and controlled manner. Additionally, maintain smooth turnarounds and strict form.
How much sport-specific Crossfit workouts are needed on a weekly basis to perform competitively and not overtrain ?
After reading your articles for the last three years I advised them to do HIT 3×3 metabolic conditioning – strength and endurance two days per week and one day per week do Crossfit sport-specific exercises using HIT exercise protocol.
I am hoping that rotating workouts on the third day will give them an opportunity to run and swim competitively.
What do you think?
Les,
Like most things it depends on the individual. It will take a bit of experimentation to determine the best balance of exercise and skill practice to produce the fastest possible rate of overall improvement without overtraining. This is a great question and one that has relevance to people trying to balance exercise and practice for any athletic activity so I will write up a new Q&A article specifically to address it.
Hey Drew,
Hope all’s well.
Just finished reading Getting Ripped and will be downloading 100 HIT Workouts later today but wanted to ask a quick question.
You often mention working harder not longer to make the best gains in size and strength and I totally agree with you, but what actually constitutes making an exercise ‘harder’ and isn’t a better term ‘more effective’ as some things that make an exercise feel ‘harder’ are not any more beneficial, ie, using a 4/10 cadence and emphasising the negative does not seem as ‘hard’ as using a 10/4 cadence where the positive is emphasised but its been shown to be far more effective at increasing size and strength gains when the same weight and TUL are used.
Like wise, you recently wrote about ‘traditional’ pre-exhaust being no more effective for size & strength gains than performing the compound and simple exercises separately, yet as a protocol it feels far more mentally, physically and metabolically draining than straight sets, so it’s ‘harder’ but not more effective.
Is ‘Harder’ therefore things like doing DC style rest-pause sets, Forced reps or multiple negatives at the end of your work set? Or do these just constitute working ‘longer’ not ‘harder’?
Is harder therefore simply using correct form and body alignment, a relatively slow cadence 3/6, 4/4 etc with smooth turn rounds and of course going to MMF?
Looking forward to reading your reply and hearing your thoughts!
Thanks!
Jamie.
Hey Jamie,
When I say an exercise is harder I mean it is performed with a higher intensity of effort. Your intensity of effort is the amount of effort you are working at relative to what you are capable of at the moment, something I wrote about in more detail in What Is Exercise Intensity? I have written about this more extensively in the upcoming Elements of Form and cover how different factors of exercise performance and different protocols affect this.
Drew,
I’m not sure if this is relevant to this post (or if you’ll read it). I was wondering about the HIT approach if you do one or two exercises per hour. Maybe you drag out your BIG 3 or BIG 5 into a couple 3-4 hours. The reason I ask is because I work for a fire department ( just like any emergency service) that has to respond to an emergency when called. We don’t determine when those happen obviously. Will I still benefit from adhering to your philosophy of exercise if the several exercises I was expecting to do in a compacted time now drag out to a few hours??
Maybe the question is: will HIT benefit with one exercise every hour?
Thanks a bunch for any input. I like your philosophy with exercise and think it’s the best way for health and performance.
Sam
Hey Sam,
This would still be effective for improving muscular strength and size but probably not as much for cardiovascular conditioning, but I wouldn’t worry too much about that as long as you are able to perform at least some of your workouts in non-stop fashion.