In my humble opinion, I think he could have handled more weight.

Clearly this gentleman is eschewing the 'multiple reps of smaller weights' approach that would be more appropriate to tone muscle; he's aiming for 'fewer reps of larger weights' for the purposes of muscle gain.

And by muscle gain, I of course mean heart explosion.

Could just be a test of his own strength.. every so often a person like this might just see what they can lift once, so they can measure their improvements and more importantly, whip their shirt off at a local bar, scream "300 pounds baby WOOOOOOOO SPRING BREAK" or something equally idiotic, just to make their friends feel weak.

>> ^Kevlar:
Clearly this gentleman is eschewing the 'multiple reps of smaller weights' approach that would be more appropriate to tone muscle; he's aiming for 'fewer reps of larger weights' for the purposes of muscle gain.
And by muscle gain, I of course mean heart explosion.


1 rep max is used to develop strength, not muscle mass. ie. 1-1-1-1-1-1-1 with as much rest in between as necessary is common in powerlifting and strength and conditioning programs. You don't do this if you're a body builder and want to look like Arnold.

Also, this guy is clearly a noob considering his form is terrible.

What a jerk friend. He goes headlong into a bank of weights and his friend's response is laughter?

>> ^blankfist:
What a jerk friend. He goes headlong into a bank of weights and his friend's response is laughter?


You've made the mistake of thinking head trauma could do anything bad to this guy.

oh nothing to worry about, that's just part of his cool-down

Oh, nice. No belt, bent back. What a smart guy! I think he had a stroke.

Actually I think he landed on those weights about as well as you code hope. They got him in the neck and under the chin, and his body flexed a good amount to absorb the impact. It would have been a terrible trip to the dentist or a broken face if he were looking down more.

>> ^mentality:
>> ^Kevlar:
Clearly this gentleman is eschewing the 'multiple reps of smaller weights' approach that would be more appropriate to tone muscle; he's aiming for 'fewer reps of larger weights' for the purposes of muscle gain.
And by muscle gain, I of course mean heart explosion.

1 rep max is used to develop strength, not muscle mass. ie. 1-1-1-1-1-1-1 with as much rest in between as necessary is common in powerlifting and strength and conditioning programs. You don't do this if you're a body builder and want to look like Arnold.
Also, this guy is clearly a noob considering his form is terrible.


Repeated single rep maxes may be common, but that doesn't mean their use is an ideal way to train. Weight training programs (including those of college and pro sports teams) are full of bad information and cultural things that "work" but are in no way scientifically or practically sound if you're trying to maximize your time/energy spent and reduce the occurrence of injury.

I think different people build muscle in different ways. I used to work out alot with some buddies. We would do 4 sets of 10 reps on any and all weights/machines as a rule. I bulked up, friends of mine toned down, even though we began with similar or identical diets, comparable weights, comparable BMI's and body fat, similar drinking habits, similar sleeping habits, and similar fitness levels to begin with. I think it was our genetic characteristics that made the difference.

@mgittle

>> ^mgittle:
>> Repeated single rep maxes may be common, but that doesn't mean their use is an ideal way to train. Weight training programs (including those of college and pro sports teams) are full of bad information and cultural things that "work" but are in no way scientifically or practically sound if you're trying to maximize your time/energy spent and reduce the occurrence of injury.


Are you saying that single rep max is not the right way to train because you have proof of what scientifically and practically maximizes your time/energy? Or are you just saying it's controversial and you don't agree with this methodology? Some resources would be nice. Also keep in mind that 1 rep max is theoretically most efficient for developing strength, not muscle mass or endurance, and is hardly the only method of weight training that you'd do even if your focus is powerlifting.

As for the safety aspect, as with all lifting, it's important to warm up, use proper technique, have a spotter, and know how to safely ditch the weight when you fail. I don't think it's any more dangerous than other kinds of weight training.

I'm just saying, "don't believe the hype". Despite strength training being an extremely common activity among athletes for a couple decades, emerging science is still calling into question many common and popular training practices. The following article is perfect for answering your query. I would strongly suggest anyone interested in weight training read and understand the entire article, but especially the sections about maximizing mTOR and minimizing muscle ATP usage, as well as the section about program features and tendon health. Oh...and don't forget push-pull methodology!

http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/strength-training-over
loading-increase-muscle-mass-40882


If you're doing something and it's working for you without injury, by all means go for it. Lifting weights is way better than not lifting weights. But, if you're looking to maximize your time and energy, which is always a concern for any busy person or (especially) athletes, there's always more to learn.

As for safety, training with machines is obviously safer than free weights. Machines are also ideal equipment for following the article's recommendations. When using a machine, angles are much more controlled (though you still need good form of course) and it's nearly impossible to drop anything. Any athlete would be best served by using machines since they offer the smallest chance of injury. Free weights and Olympic-style training may look flashy, but it's not an optimal way to train and has high chance of injury. Also, athletes need to spend most of their energy and time learning skills for their sport. Getting strong doesn't really take that much time in comparison to skills training.

Head-Rush = Smack-Down

>> ^mentality:
@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.videosift.com/member/mgittle" title="member since September 25th, 2009" class="profilelink">mgittle
>> ^mgittle:
>> Repeated single rep maxes may be common, but that doesn't mean their use is an ideal way to train. Weight training programs (including those of college and pro sports teams) are full of bad information and cultural things that "work" but are in no way scientifically or practically sound if you're trying to maximize your time/energy spent and reduce the occurrence of injury.

Are you saying that single rep max is not the right way to train because you have proof of what scientifically and practically maximizes your time/energy? Or are you just saying it's controversial and you don't agree with this methodology? Some resources would be nice. Also keep in mind that 1 rep max is theoretically most efficient for developing strength, not muscle mass or endurance, and is hardly the only method of weight training that you'd do even if your focus is powerlifting.
As for the safety aspect, as with all lifting, it's important to warm up, use proper technique, have a spotter, and know how to safely ditch the weight when you fail. I don't think it's any more dangerous than other kinds of weight training.


Also every time I try to quote in my previous post, it just shows up as a bunch of broken HTML tags. So since I never would've looked here again if I didn't get the "soandso quoted you" email, so I'm semi-double-posting to try and fix it since you seemed genuinely interested in possible informations linkage type things.

Edit: ok so that didn't work and I have no idea why it worked yesterday but not today. It looks right in the preview so maybe it's just my browser for some unknown reason.

what was that 375?

Judging by his wrestling shoes, and the grip he was taking he dead lifting noob.

You hold one over hand grip and one underhand grip, and you lift with your legs. He should have started from a squat position. The reason these power lifters get so pumped is to tap into their cortisol stores thus amplifying their potential lift weight to 80% of their maximum power.

http://stronglifts.com/how-to-deadlift-with-proper-technique/

Good technique below:



Good Technique can lead to this if you so like: He has that thing stuck in his nose to stop him from bleeding. When I was lifting they called it a bleeder. It's caused by the rise in blood pressure common to weightlifters who hold their breath when lifting. That is why you exhale when the lift is executed. Stimulants can cause the noise bleeds too.

At the end it looked like he'd had the Five Point Palm Exploding Heart Technique done to him.

dude you don't know what you are talking about.
>> ^mgittle:
Free weights and Olympic-style training may look flashy, but it's not an optimal way to train and has high chance of injury.

>> ^mgittle:
I'm just saying, "don't believe the hype". Despite strength training being an extremely common activity among athletes for a couple decades, emerging science is still calling into question many common and popular training practices. The following article is perfect for answering your query. I would strongly suggest anyone interested in weight training read and understand the entire article, but especially the sections about maximizing mTOR and minimizing muscle ATP usage, as well as the section about program features and tendon health. Oh...and don't forget push-pull methodology!
http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/strength-training-over
loading-increase-muscle-mass-40882

If you're doing something and it's working for you without injury, by all means go for it. Lifting weights is way better than not lifting weights. But, if you're looking to maximize your time and energy, which is always a concern for any busy person or (especially) athletes, there's always more to learn.
As for safety, training with machines is obviously safer than free weights. Machines are also ideal equipment for following the article's recommendations. When using a machine, angles are much more controlled (though you still need good form of course) and it's nearly impossible to drop anything. Any athlete would be best served by using machines since they offer the smallest chance of injury. Free weights and Olympic-style training may look flashy, but it's not an optimal way to train and has high chance of injury. Also, athletes need to spend most of their energy and time learning skills for their sport. Getting strong doesn't really take that much time in comparison to skills training.


@mgittle
Hey thanks for the link. There is definitely a lot of hype in exercises methodology and any real data is always appreciated. I'll look more in depth into this when I have the time.

@mgittle

I looked a bit into that article, and it seems to do a pretty poor interpretation of the science available. While the article cites papers to support the relation between mTor and muscle mass gain, as well as increased resistance and activation of mtor, there was no evidence cited for the following:

"On the other side of the equation, mTOR activity is blocked by metabolic stress. This means that we want to use as little muscular ATP (an energy yielding molecule used in muscle contraction) as possible when we are doing our resistance training."



This part just has no basis whatsoever and doesn't make sense.

In fact, if you look at the literature, the exact opposite is true:
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/506930
Increased metabolic stress is correlated with increased levels of growth hormone, epinephrine, and an increase in muscle cross sectional area.

Similarly, look at this quote from the article you linked:

"The highest absolute power is seen when performing fast lengthening contractions with a lot of weight (high jerk), or heavy plyometric exercises. This type of exercise is very effective in activating mTOR, but unfortunately can be very bad for tendon health, and as a result can lead to injuries."



The first part of this quote states exactly why 1 rep max is so effective. However, the second part of this, which quotes increased levels of tendon injury, is again completely baseless and unsourced.

I have by no means done a comprehensive analysis of the article you suggested, but it seems to me that it uses bits and pieces of science to come up with false conclusions to support the author's personal preferred exercise methodology. The evidence brought up by this article instead seems to support the theory that 1 rep max is an effective method of strength training.

>> ^imstellar28:
dude you don't know what you are talking about.
>> ^mgittle:
Free weights and Olympic-style training may look flashy, but it's not an optimal way to train and has high chance of injury.


You're welcome. I hope you do get a chance to look at it even if you just skim it over. The article's not actually as intimidating as it looks at first and there's plenty of practical and easy to digest information in there.

As for Olympic training injury:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0T-IZ3RHUqY

You can't do that to yourself on a machine without purposely trying to, but you can get just as strong as those lifters. Even if you were just as strong, you'd have a tough time doing power cleans and such without training for them, but what's the point? The Olympic style lifts are a skill. You train the skill and you become good at it. If that's what you want to be good at, cool. Go for it. But, if you just want to be strong for a sport or to stay healthy, you can gain strength in other ways that don't have the same risk. Risking your body when you are not training that specific skill is just silly.

As for optimal training, see the article I linked above. If you don't read it, you won't understand why Olympic style training is not optimal even if you disregard injury. If you don't want to learn, I'm fine with that. If you're just trolling, that's fine as well. One of the article's contributors, Mike Gittleson, was the strength and conditioning coach at the University of Michigan for around 30 years prior to the recent head coaching change. He never used Olympic style lifting or plyometric type stuff in his programs. Yet, the UofM players were always extremely strong and the team was always competing for the Big 10 title if not the national.

>> ^mgittle:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0T-IZ3RHUqY
You can't do that to yourself on a machine without purposely trying to, but you can get just as strong as those lifters. Even if you were just as strong, you'd have a tough time doing power cleans and such without training for them, but what's the point? The Olympic style lifts are a skill. You train the skill and you become good at it. If that's what you want to be good at, cool. Go for it. But, if you just want to be strong for a sport or to stay healthy, you can gain strength in other ways that don't have the same risk. Risking your body when you are not training that specific skill is just silly.

Oh yeah, the 1 rep max snatch is definitely an intimidating exercise. But for things like the clean and jerk, squat, and deadlift, I'm not convinced that the injury rates are significantly higher when you warm up, use proper technique, and work in a safe supported environment. Of course overall injury rates will be higher, but I feel that's mainly due to macho idiots who can't leave their egos in check and attempt to do weights that they just aren't ready for.

The theory I've heard often quoted about free weights vs machines is that free weights require you to develop accessory and supporting muscles and result in higher stress to your neuroendocrine system compared with machines, which limit your range of movement.

Of course safety is a factor, and if you feel more comfortable working out on a machine then by all means do what's right for you.

Can't see your link without a login, but I'd like to read it. I'll make an account later. Though I'm not sure how what you said directly after the link disproves the part of my article you quoted.

As for the tendon injury thing, it's not baseless at all. Maybe they didn't cite sources for every comment... I'm not an expert, but I've always been told/read that tendons heal more slowly than muscle. Slow lengthening contractions are easier on tendons and therefore training frequency is not affected the same way.

Also, just saying 1-rep max doesn't state what method you're using, specifically. It just states a rep frequency. If you're lifting and then letting the weight down slowly I suppose that could be good. If you're doing high-jerk stuff you're just wasting ATP.

@mgittle

Can't see your link without a login, but I'd like to read it. I'll make an account later. Though I'm not sure how what you said directly after the link disproves the part of my article you quoted.



Well, the author you quoted states that:

1. increased ATP = increased metabolic stress
2. metabolic stress blocks mtor activity (*This point is wrong*)
3. increased mtor activity results in increased muscle gain.

He's basically saying increased ATP use results in decreased muscle gain, hence the rational for minimizing ATP use. However, this conclusion is incorrect since the literature shows that increased metabolic stress is actually GOOD for muscle gain.

"I'm not an expert, but I've always been told/read that tendons heal more slowly than muscle."



This is correct because your tendons do not have good blood flow compared to your muscles. I'm not sure that this also applies on a microscopic level that weightlifting may cause because I don't know how long it takes for your tendons to fully recover from specifically weightlifting induced wear and tear. Again, this plays into the whole overtraining thing. The key I guess is to avoid overtraining, and personally, I've never had any tendon problems as a result of doing 1 rep max lifting.

Well, when it comes to sports, a single injury can mean a lot to a team. So, reducing the injury rate as far as possible is clearly ideal. Given that I injure myself in small ways at work all the time (construction...kneeling, bending, carrying crap) I personally can't afford to tear my body up outside of work as well. If I did high-jerk training on top of working all day and playing volleyball a few times a week, I'd soon not be able to work...the equivalent of an athlete not able to play.

I understand about the accessory muscles because it seems intuitive, but that isn't the case. Lifting weights makes your muscles stronger. That whole "core training" mentality with balance balls and crap like that is nonsense. If you lift with those muscles, you get stronger. Balance is a skill you train, not a method of getting stronger. If you're trying to get good at balancing, balance. If you're training for a sport, train your skills in that sport.

In no way am I trying to say that free weights are always bad or anything like that. I use dumbbells and free weight bench press, etc etc. It's the high-jerk stuff that's a bad idea. The article about mTOR is just evidence that it's not only because of injury but for a whole host of reasons.

Really, the point of studying the science isn't about supporting your preferred methodology. It's about agreeing on best practice. I hope everyone keeps that in mind.

@mgittle:

You can access it from google here.

The first link.

@mgittle

Really, the point of studying the science isn't about supporting your preferred methodology. It's about agreeing on best practice. I hope everyone keeps that in mind.



What I'm saying is that the conclusion that decreased ATP consumption is good for muscle growth is scientifically wrong. See my summary above. As a result, the program that they designed based on this false conclusion is flawed, and is not optimal training.

@mentality - Let me guess, Crossfit?

@mgittle - Let me guess, sports medicine student?

Machines are for people who want to spend 3 hours in the gym wasting their time acting like they are doing something in front of other people - aka people who go to the gym looking for dates or self esteem. Olympic style lifts are for people who want to get in, work hard, get strong for real-world applications, and go home. How many sports, hobbies, or real-life situations involve moving bars over a static range of motion? None. Training strength without the coordination to use it properly is pointless, and a recipe for injury.

Citing scientific studies about ATP is retarded. Go to the gym, try both, see which one works better for you.

@imstellar28 - Let me guess, Crossfit?



Nope. I am interested though since a lot of the exercises they do and their intensity are similar to my workouts. The community seem a bit cultish, I don't have access to some of their specialized equipment (like rings for muscleups) and their journals are filled with pseudoscience bullshit so that kinda turns me off. Also, I'm not really sure where I stand on workouts like:

For time:
100 Pull-ups
100 Push-ups
100 Sit-ups
100 Squats

@mentality

I've done "Angie" (the name of that workout) many times. Obviously you don't want to start out with 100 each, you scale it 25% then 50% then 75% etc until you can get to the full workout. Those workouts are intended for elite athletes and people who have been doing it for years, if you try to do the full workout (even if you are in great shape) you will probably hurt yourself.

It sounds like a lot, but most of the top guys who Crossfit can do 75+ pullups in a row.

@imstellar28

No, just a student of a strength coach who was a pioneer in the field of athletic strength training and trained awesome athletes for 30 years.

As for machines somehow being good for wasting time...you're just making totally baseless and confrontational statements. Being strong is a real world application. Olympic lifts are a skill...a demonstration of strength. Yes, they're often used to get stronger, but often by people who enjoy the culture, and clearly you're a part of that crowd. If you lift things in real life with Olympic style, you're doing it wrong. If you're gonna go help your friend move his house, do you power clean his couch? Sigh...

Eat right lots of high fiber. Then do 9 rounds of anaerobic exercise. 3 rounds of jump rope, 3 rounds working the bags, and 3 rounds of what you find the most fun.

Eating high fiber foods causes slow energy consumption, meaning a boxer can tolerate long matches.

How does this translate into the every day person? No more sleepy after lunch slumps.

http://www.sport-fitness-advisor.com/boxing-training.html

You don't need weights to be a good athlete. It's all about cardio, and watching what you eat. Mix that with some simple push ups, and lunges and every thing else will fall into place.\

http://www.talkboxing.co.uk/guides/boxing_diet.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hl4PJAaOXCE

Best trained athletes? Boxers, and Soccer/football players because of the cardiovascular work they do.

@imstellar28:
I've done "Angie" (the name of that workout) many times. Obviously you don't want to start out with 100 each, you scale it 25% then 50% then 75% etc until you can get to the full workout. Those workouts are intended for elite athletes and people who have been doing it for years, if you try to do the full workout (even if you are in great shape) you will probably hurt yourself.



Its not about hurting myself. I've done significantly more pullups on exercises like Cindy. It's just when I try do 100 pull-ups in a row, I have to take breaks in between, and I don't get a good cardio workout.

Compare Angie to my favorite crossfit exercise that I've tried so far, the Lumberjack 20:

20 Deadlifts (275lbs)
Run 400m
20 KB swings (2pood)
Run 400m
20 Overhead Squats (115lbs)
Run 400m
20 Burpees
Run 400m
20 Pullups (Chest to Bar)
Run 400m
20 Box jumps (24")
Run 400m
20 DB Squat Cleans (45lbs each)
Run 400m

That's just great for cardio and it nicely alternates your muscles so you can really push yourself.

@mgittle"If you're gonna go help your friend move his house, do you power clean his couch?"

Right...thats what a dead lift is for. I'm not a memember of any particular crowd, I'm just a guy who has personally trained with both methods and found Crossfit style training (which incorporates Olympic lifts) to be vastly superior.

@mentality You should try "Fran"

21 Thrusters @ 95#
21 Pull-ups
15 Thrusters @ 95#
15 Pull-ups
9 Thrusters @ 95#
9 Pull-ups