• H&R Moderators: VerbalTruist

Super Slow Weight Training

panty said:
^^^
no problem, ice.

As for superslow training, I guess in the end it depends on what your goals are, and if you have any physical issues to work around.

As far as strength gains for the fully functional athlete are concerned, I've read that anything more than a few seconds per repetition is wasted energy. One place I might have heard that is the Colgan institute. Let me go find a source for that...

Yep. Athletes and fighters lift weights explosivley to gain muscle strength, nothing like bodybuilders who lift weights slowly to gain muscle size.

As for the super-slow strength training, maybe leave it for the old women with osteroperosis...

Has anyone had a positive experience with super slow weight training? That is, the method developed by a Ken Hutchins originally meant to treat osteoperosis in older women.
 
panty said:
I've trained (martial arts) with a couple of special ops guys. One is a former SEAL, the other is a former Ranger. Neither of them knows much at all about effective strength training...

Yeah just because someone is in the military doesn't mean they are experts on strength training...

JimmyTheGun, your friend's training methods do sound quite outdated. Pure bodyweight training only takes you so far before adding more weight is more beneficial. And I don't know why he was doing curls in his strength training, you should stick to compound movements like squats, bench and shoulder presses and pullups.
 
Christian Solder: I actualy do somewhat of a weightless workout, and I had to start doing curls, my triceps were getting too big compared to my biceps. Granted it mostly just kind of looked funny, but if I went on another few months I could see something bad happening.

I havent quite got my workout down yet and my diet is kind of fucked up, but the extra 3 minutes I added doing curls seems to be making a decent difference, even if it is just to even things out a little. Anyone got a good weightless bicep exercise that isnt pushups? I swim alot, so what do you think the possibility is of my backside is strong enuff and just taking all the weight when I do pushups?

DB
 
pushups work triceps and chest, not biceps.

start doing curlups if you have a pullup bar.

you do them like a pullup, but your palm is facing you.
 
panty said:
I'm not exactly sure how this disagrees with what I said.

I would agree that gymnasts are quite strong (but strong compared to whom? And how does that strenght translate into time they spent developing it?), and that both gymnasts and dancers are agile and have good stabilizer/tendon strength...

B/c the alot of the sport is filled w/ holding certain positions for very long periods of time.....Im not sure of who u want me to compare them too but they are known to generally very strong AND very agile....Therefore slow strenght training does make a diff beyond a few seconds.....(My g/f was a ballet dancer and at one point was almost as strong as me....)

I have no source or anything but i think that slow strength training still has an effect on fast twitch fibers as well as slow.....
 
Christian Soldier said:
Yeah just because someone is in the military doesn't mean they are experts on strength training...

JimmyTheGun, your friend's training methods do sound quite outdated. Pure bodyweight training only takes you so far before adding more weight is more beneficial. And I don't know why he was doing curls in his strength training, you should stick to compound movements like squats, bench and shoulder presses and pullups.

Well, he has been a personal trainer and strength coach for 20 years..and he was invited to Russia to train with their special ops...What are your qualifications and how much can you curl?

Instead of adding weight, you add complexity and time to the work out. This allows for greater body control, concentration, ligament strength, endurance etc.

If you don't believe me,

do a squat with no weight, but take a full minute going down, and a full minute going back up.
do a wall sit for as long as you can hold it.
do another weightless squat (minute down, minute up).
do another wall sit.
tell me how your legs feel the next day.
 
Jimmy the Gun said:
Well, he has been a personal trainer and strength coach for 20 years..and he was invited to Russia to train with their special ops...What are your qualifications and how much can you curl?

Why do you keep asking people how much they can curl? Do you really think that's a good measure of functional strength?
 
Hypnotik1 said:
(My g/f was a ballet dancer and at one point was almost as strong as me....)

This would only mean something to me if I knew how strong you were.
 
Hypnotik1 said:
I have no source or anything but i think that slow strength training still has an effect on fast twitch fibers as well as slow.....

Good luck proving it...
 
panty said:
Why do you keep asking people how much they can curl? Do you really think that's a good measure of functional strength?

^yes

The reason I brought that up was because Christian Soldier seemed to be regarding himself as some sort of expert and dismissed body weight training as wothless after a certain point.

All I'm saying is that this guy can pick up a lot of weight and has been a professional in the field for 20 years. If CS doesn't have that sort of experties, he should keep his mouth shut.
 
I do my strength (normal speed) sets at the beginning then try to work in superslow training if I can after everything else is done. As other have said, I use it to increase muscle compaction (is that even a word?) and ligament strength.

Many famous actors have used superslow training to get fit for movie rolls and swear by it.

By the way, all this flaming in the thread is quite pathetic. You want to turn the healthy lifestyle forum into total shit like the steroid forum was a couple months ago or what ?
 
Jimmy the Gun said:
^yes

The reason I brought that up was because Christian Soldier seemed to be regarding himself as some sort of expert and dismissed body weight training as wothless after a certain point.

All I'm saying is that this guy can pick up a lot of weight and has been a professional in the field for 20 years. If CS doesn't have that sort of experties, he should keep his mouth shut.

I really don't mean any offense by this, but if you consider the weight a person can curl with their bicep to be a good measure of functional strength, then you never did your homework, and you don't have much foundation to critique the value of anyone's workout. It sounds like you have a strong friend. That's great, but that doesn't mean everything he says is the end-all of training. And there are a lot of people who make gains in spite of their training. I'm not saying your friend is one of them, but it's something to keep in mind. Also, once again, a person's goals are the main thing to keep in mind when considering the value of a person's training routine.

I think what ChristianSoldier was saying was that bodyweight exercises do have their place, but as you progress, they start to lose their value. As you get stronger, why continue to work with the same weight? You can up the number of reps, but that basically just improves your muscle endurance in that particular movement.

I guess it depends on your goals in the end, but for me, I'd rather get stronger than just stay the same, or at the most improve my muscle endurance. But I'd rather improve muscle endurance by doing sport-specific exercises. And use my time weight training to improve my limit strength and power...
 
psychetool said:
By the way, all this flaming in the thread is quite pathetic. You want to turn the healthy lifestyle forum into total shit like the steroid forum was a couple months ago or what ?

For one thing, this forum doesn't look anything like Steroids, thank goodness.

And whether the post above was directed at me, or others, or whatever, I wanted to say the following, for whomever is interested:

It seems like a lot of people here do want to contribute, but personally I get frustrated when I see people posting misinformation. I've spent a lot of time training, and researching training, and when someone spouts out something they've read from a muscle mag, or heard from some friend who doesn't know what they're talking about, I find it detrimental to the forum. Even if only one person takes erroneous info and incorporates it into their workout, it becomes a lot of wasted time. I love strength sports, and I want other people to have access to the best possible information so that they can enjoy them as much as I do. I don't consider it flaming to correct a mistake, unless there's unfounded malice. As I've said in several posts, it basically comes down to your training goals. Which is why I tried to be as specific as possible in my posts...
 
I really don't mean any offense by this, but if you consider the weight a person can curl with their bicep to be a good measure of functional strength, then you never did your homework, and you don't have much foundation to critique the value of anyone's workout. It sounds like you have a strong friend. That's great, but that doesn't mean everything he says is the end-all of training. And there are a lot of people who make gains in spite of their training. I'm not saying your friend is one of them, but it's something to keep in mind. Also, once again, a person's goals are the main thing to keep in mind when considering the value of a person's training routine.

The reason I brought up curls was because it is one work out that I remember the pounds he used to use. I meant it to be reflective of the strength he brings into other work outs as well.
He is primarily focused on functional strength for running, fighting, climbing etc. That is why body weight training is perfect for him (and me). It focuses on balance, concentration, injury prevention, and strength. It also creates dense, defined muscles..not the bulky weird looking things that excessive weight training tends to breed. If big impressive looking muscles are your goal, I agree that body weight training may not be right.

I think what ChristianSoldier was saying was that bodyweight exercises do have their place, but as you progress, they start to lose their value. As you get stronger, why continue to work with the same weight? You can up the number of reps, but that basically just improves your muscle endurance in that particular movement.

I totally disagree that body weight exercise lose value over time. In place of added weight, you add time spent on each exercise (you do each work out till exaution), as well as complexity. For instance, you start balancing on one leg and doing squats like that. This won't increase muscle mass as much as traditional lifting, but it will improve strength indefinitely.

In the end, you are totally right that it does depend on your goals :)

As far as the flaming goes...Christian Soldier rudely dismissed what I was saying as outdated. All I was trying to point out is that my friend has probably been training professionally for longer than CS, is probably stronger than CS, and was invited to another country to train with their special ops. All CS had was a rude comment and next to nothing backing it up.

(btw..his work out includes all types of push ups, pull ups, squats, and handstand pushups for shoulder presses...so he is sticking with the compound movements. In fact, he doesn't do curls anymore and he is stronger than ever)

have a nice day :)
 
Here is a bit of information that includes viewpoints from both sides. Enjoy.

http://www.gmtoday.com/content/NSL/2003/May/64.asp

The super-slow method of weight training is growing in popularity and celebrities like actor Brad Pitt use the procedure to build muscle quickly. It’s not new, in fact trainers and therapists say the method has been around for decades. Like bell-bottoms and the band Aerosmith, what was in 20 or more years ago is in vogue once again today.

The super slow method targets the body’s major muscles, called skeletal muscles, also known as the body’s engine. These muscles produce more heat, consume more calories, and receive more blood flow than any of the body’s other muscles. Proponents say lighter weights are generally used with super-slow and that means less stress on these muscles.

Laurie Howard owns Wellspring Fitness in Pewaukee and says super-slow is not for everyone. "It’s grueling," Howard exclaims. "It’s been shown to be quite effective in increasing strength levels but it’s also difficult and painful." The method causes delayed muscle onset manifesting itself in the presence of pain felt two, three and even four days after the workout.

Howard says a lot of debate continues regarding the effectiveness of the regime. "The studies are controversial," Howard explains. "Two thirds of those involved in the discussion say it’s one of the fastest ways to develop strength while the other third maintains the traditional methods are best." Trainers say super-slow can build 50 percent more muscle in ten weeks than regular weightlifting. The idea of super-slow is to bring the muscles to exhaustion by keeping the muscles "loaded" throughout the movement and exercise. "This regime is for the busy executive who’s been doing the same thing over and over and wants something new," Howard states.

"I think it’s something to be incorporated into a workout," Howard continues. "Variety is spice and it’s a good idea to re-stimulate muscles that have reached a plateau. My main concern with the people that swear by super-slow is that too often, they don’t recommend any other form of training. I don’t believe you’re getting a true cardiovascular benefit from super-slow alone."

Howard believes if a beginning weight lifter tries super-slow first, they will never want to lift weights again. "Aside from the physical strains, if you’re doing the same thing over and over, you’re going to get bored and increase your chances of an overuse injury."

The super-slow theory maintains that by going slower, you’re increasing tension in the muscle. "That will create more of a stimulus for muscle development, but the problem is that it’s so intense, most people are not going to do it regularly."

Nick Neitzel is the corporate director of fitness for the Wisconsin Athletic Club in downtown Milwaukee. He says super-slow is something he’ll incorporate into clients’ workouts from time to time. "It’s another form or method. It focuses on specific parts of the muscle contraction," Neitzel explains. "It’s a different workout so in that sense it’s a good workout." Neitzel says he’s had a few phone calls in the last month relating to super-slow from media outlets seeking new information on something that’s been around a long time.

"If it gets people in to work out, that’s great," Neitzel continues. "People will tell me they didn’t know there were so many different ways to work out." Neitzel says super-slow isn’t going to replace traditional forms of working out. "To be honest, it’s one of the most limiting forms. People want to get things done quickly. I suggest people do some reading and research before they commit to super-slow. Consult your fitness professional before beginning."

Neitzel echoes sentiments of his peers regarding pain and recovery. "You’ll experience DOMS, or a delayed onset of muscle soreness. As many as two or three days after the workout." According to Neitzel, fitness experts warn participants won’t bulk up as much when involved in super-slow, but say you will get stronger. The bulkiness comes from a lot of volume in the lifts. Therapists also caution people who have high blood pressure and arthritis to refrain from super-slow.

Ben Quist is the owner of Form and Fitness in Mequon. He’s a certified physical trainer and a licensed physical therapist. "I think too much emphasis has been placed on super-slow," Quist warns. "It’s just a different style of training. I think a lot of people are promoting it lately but it’s been around since the 1950s and it’s listed in the old strength training books."

Contrary to Howard’s philosophy regarding beginning weight lifters, Quist believes super-slow is an excellent program for neophytes. "It takes momentum out of the movement." Each repetition with the weights isolates the muscles so you can’t ‘cheat and you’re going to lift correctly. "I do believe super-slow should be incorporated into a workout rather than be used exclusively. I always say, ‘the best program to be on is the one you’re not on right now.’ My strategy is to change your lifting program every six weeks." If part of the change is super-slow, Quist says he’s all for it.

Quist echoes Howard’s comments about the delayed muscle pain realized a few days after the workout. "The reason for the delay is you typically get more structural damage," Quist says. "Any time you do effective weight training, there is going to be some damage. "What you’re doing is trying to create an environment where you can rip down the muscle and build it stronger."

In relation to a more mainstream lifting program, Quist thinks the super-slow can be a little safer. He’s also quick to point out that advertisers and businesses are always looking to tout the latest and greatest. "I think typically magazines and television news programs are looking for new stuff. Super-slow is a great headline. It’s similar to the military boot camp method of weight loss," Quist quips. "It’s one of many training techniques, it’s not the be all and end all."
 
Jimmy the Gun said:
It also creates dense, defined muscles..not the bulky weird looking things that excessive weight training tends to breed. If big impressive looking muscles are your goal, I agree that body weight training may not be right.

I have never said anything about training for big impressive muscles (Bodybuilding), but rather functional strength.

I think a lot of people still think bigger=stronger, which isn't necessarily the case. Match a bodybuilder to a powerlifter, at the same weight, and the powerlifter, although not as cosmetically pleasing, will be miles stronger than the body builder.

Other than that, fair enough. Peace.
 
Last edited:
panty said:
I think what ChristianSoldier was saying was that bodyweight exercises do have their place, but as you progress, they start to lose their value. As you get stronger, why continue to work with the same weight? You can up the number of reps, but that basically just improves your muscle endurance in that particular movement.

Yep.
 
Why are you asking me how much I can curl Jimmy? I don't curl because they are useless. Maybe asking me how much I can squat is a better measure of strength? But you only know how much your friend curls...

Rep chart:

1-4 reps for strength
5-9 reps for size
10+ reps for endurance

I've done the 1 legged squats, 1 handed pushups, handstand pushups, and all that before, but it only builds your strength so far before you are just building your muscular endurance.
 
Jimmy the Gun said:
The reason I brought up curls was because it is one work out that I remember the pounds he used to use. I meant it to be reflective of the strength he brings into other work outs as well.
He is primarily focused on functional strength for running, fighting, climbing etc. That is why body weight training is perfect for him (and me). It focuses on balance, concentration, injury prevention, and strength. It also creates dense, defined muscles..not the bulky weird looking things that excessive weight training tends to breed. If big impressive looking muscles are your goal, I agree that body weight training may not be right.

Body-weight exercises are outdated for modern day fighters despite what many still believe. Have you seen Mike Tyson workout? Go check out the strength training forums on www.sherdog.net/forums , a well known mixed-martial arts website with many professional fighters who post there, that's if you dont want to take my word for truth.
 
A lot of the older trainers held/still hold this misbelief that lifting weights make you a slower/bulky fighter, but sports training has changed vastly in the last few decades thanks to scientific research.
 
Last edited:
Top