HighIntensity.net View Mike Mentzer Bodybuilding Topic

Login

– or –

Register

All Forums

Total Members: 2037

Forums moderator – Forum Admin

[email protected]

The Message from Forum Admin (moderator)

 Search Topics:  
General Forum:
Topic:
Started By GURUXX52 (Plainview, NY, United States)

Started on: 12/15/2003 7:43:07 PM, viewed 2315 times
REST-PAUSE EFFECTIVENESS

With all this talk about optimum time-under-load, how does one explain Mentzer′s apparent success with a routine of exclusively rest-pause sets, with reps as low as 4, and sometimes as low as just 2 or 3 reps, according to his Heavy Duty Journal? Obviously his time-under-load was just a fraction of anything that′s being bandied about these days as being optimal (60-120 seconds).

In my own training, I′ve made noticeable gains using just a short-range, strongest-range routine, where I allowed the weight to REST on the pins of a power rack between reps and just exploded upwards 2-3 inches. On some movements I rarely exceeded 6-8 reps (each rep taking no more than 1 second at most) with the TUL for the entire set approx. 6-8 seconds!!!

When you take a close, logical, unobstructed look at TUL, it appears to be just another of the many fraudelent myths!!! Anyone got ideas on this??? . . . Steve . . .

This Topic has 23 Replies: Displaying out of 23 Replies:

dafortae (a, a, U.S.A.) on 12/15/2003 8:17:10 PM

Excellent post GURUXX52…

Yes, I believe in the power of rest-pause 100%. I do NOT believe TUL has a large amount of merit.

Remember that our muscles are generally Type I, Type IIA, and Type IIB (there is actually others like Type IIX, but doesn′t really matter because they are too close to the others). The Type I have VERY little growth capability. Type IIA have a pretty good amount of growth capability. Type IIB leave all others in the dust with their growth capability.

I personally believe techniques like rest-pause and power factor training MAJORLY nail the Type IIB fibers, because of the explosive power required to move those kinds of poundages. You MUST put EVERYTHING into almost every rep, in order to get it to move. Type IIB fibers only require about 5-10 seconds to FULLY exhaust them of their ATP energy and surrounding Creatine energy stores. Once that′s used up, everything goes down hill for those, and they are more or less exhausted.

Type IIB fibers can go on for a minute or MORE. This, the TUL theory may pulvurize THOSE fibers more. The Type I fibers are hopeless to even mess with. They are too hard to exhaust (too much volume required).

So, one can increase the Type IIA fibers by doing standard sets more, or increase the Type IIB fibers pretty much EXCLUSIVELY by doing rest-pause. Of course ALL fibers are contracting (Type I, IIA, and IIB) during rest-pause sets, BUT the amount of time the Type IIA fibers contract may not be sufficient to stimulate MAXIMUM growth for them. I believe maximum growth CAN be stimulated in the Type IIB fibers in that period, but the others may be sacrificed a bit.

So, what does that mean? It means that if rest-pause is done OCCASIONALLY, I believe it may allow us to REALLY get our Type IIB fibers going, maybe even convert some Type IIA fibers to the big Type IIB. We wouldn′t want to do it ALL the time, because it would maybe not stimulate growth as much in the Type IIA, because not enough time passes for those under load. Also, since Type IIB take FOREVER to heal and build, rest-pause would quickly lead to overtraining.

So, by combining rest-pause, statics, and some of the other advanced techniques Mike recommends, with regular HIT sets, one could maximize growth in Type IIA AND Type IIB fibers. By doing JUST standard sets, one will probably maximum Type IIA, and maybe 75% Type IIB. However, since Type IIB are 2-3 times larger on average than Type IIA, that 25% increase would translate to MORE muscle mass than 50% increase on Type IIA.

I think that also explains why one could become VERY strong with Power Factor training in the 2-3 inch range, but loose strength in the full-range movements. You CANNOT fire too many Type IIB fibers in the "weak" range of an exercise, in my opinion. It may be to prevent injuries, because of the torque on the joints at those positions, I don′t know. Thus, your size wouldn′t shrink, in fact, you would probably get bigger. The reason? The Type IIB fibers would be maximized in size, but the Type IIA would start to shrink. The results: loss of strength when doing "slow to medium" rep speeds (non explosive/ballistic) yet TREMENDOUS explosive strength.

Thus, if one would use advanced techniques like rest-pause in COMBINATION with standard HIT, one could maximize in all realms.

Darrell

GURUXX52 (Plainview, NY, United States) on 12/15/2003 9:08:15 PM

Wow, great reply, Darrell

That explains perfectly why I was getting as STRONG AS AN OX on strongest-range training (2-3 inch movement) while SOMEWHAT increasing my mass, though not as much as I new was possible, (I was developing, and still possess a very thick physique in my trap, delt-pec tie-in area), yet my full-range strength was either remaining the same or in some cases decreasing!!! I guess I was leaving a lot of the Type IIA fibers doormant and were shrinking!!!

I always suspected something was amiss, because some of my bodyparts, like I said, were almost as massive as a Pro. Body Builder, but there was a definite lack of "complete" development, for want of a better phrase. You′re right, It was almost like some fibers were not getting total development. And understand, I hadn′t done a movement beyond 6 inches for over 5 years!!!! But I still knew that STRONGEST-RANGE TRAINING definitely had merit, because of some of the development I was achieveing!!!

It was probably the SAID principle at work. Because when I switched back to full-range training, my size definitely started to increase (Type IIA fibers responding), even though I was essentially getting weaker in my strongest-range, because when I attempted strongest-range training again after approx 3-4 month break, I couldn′t budge the weights that I was previously handling with ease.

You really hit the nail on the head about blasting primarily Type IIB with massive tonnage in the strongest range, because now when I think about it, it′s true, I was incredibly explosive at that time. I remember my sprinting ability was never better. I JUST FELT EXPLOSIVE!!

You′re definitely right, just to get that amount of weight to move from the pins requires an ALMOST SUPERHUMAN AMOUNT OF PUSH OR EXPLOSION TO GET THE WEIGHT OFF THE PINS!!!

That′s why I was convinced, AND STILL AM, that exploding the weight from the pins IS far better than holding it in "space" so to speak, even though the load or stress comes off the muscles!!! The EXPLOSION is far superior for blasting the TYPE IIB fibers. Convinces me even more that it′s superior to SCT, even though Canadian Steve claims otherwise, since you explode just once in that type of training.

I′ve really got to thank you for stimulating MY THINKING on this!!! I was always at a loss to explain it!!

It makes me want to re-examine my routine, and re-introduce STRONGEST-RANGE TRAINING, but NOT AT THE EXCLUSION OF FULL-RANGE!!!

Thanks very much . . . Steve . . .

Analyzer (CDA, id, U.S.A.) on 12/15/2003 10:28:14 PM

Just for a side bar, if you follow Canadian Steve (as you call him)′s suggestions, some people have signature TUL′s that require a single rep or only 2 or 3 reps per set. He just discussed this with me. So this info. actually supports alot of his findings so far. 🙂

Darrell,

I must ask how you came to this conclusion



I think that also explains why one could become VERY strong with Power Factor training in the 2-3 inch range, but loose strength in the full-range movements. You CANNOT fire too many Type IIB fibers in the "weak" range of an exercise, in my opinion. It may be to prevent injuries, because of the torque on the joints at those positions, I donŒt know. Thus, your size wouldnŒt shrink, in fact, you would probably get bigger. The reason? The Type IIB fibers would be maximized in size, but the Type IIA would start to shrink. The results: loss of strength when doing "slow to medium" rep speeds (non explosive/ballistic) yet TREMENDOUS explosive strength"

The point of ROM a joint angle is in, has nothing to do with which fibers are recruited. Remember, recruitment is a matter of FORCE, it′s the resistance the musle FEELS not the joint angle.

Az

GURUXX52 (Plainview, NY, United States) on 12/15/2003 11:05:30 PM

Az

Didn′t mean to sound like I was condesending to Canadian Steve. I really would like to learn more about his methods and results. I just never got the same results from SCT that I did from strongest-range training when moving the weight off the pins. Who knows? Maybe I′m just a guy that needs a very low TUL. I could be predominantly fast-twitch fibered . . . Steve . . .

Page: | | | | | – Next

To Post Your Reply:
Please Login :
E-Mail:
Password:
Remember me next time
or, Register Now
and enjoy FREE Membership

with Highintensity Fan Club!


 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.