The One Technique That Will Maximize Muscle Mass

limestix said:
Tempo's are silly. Counting numbers in your head just wastes mental energy and ruins focus. The only thing you should be focusing on when under the weight, it moving the weight effectively. Explosive concentric, no pause, controlled eccentric.

Anyway I'm not trying to rag on you, just saying:

-tempo's blow for building mass
Click to expand...


Are you kidding me? The best gains I've had is from PROPER tempo. The best gains my clients have had is from using proper tempo. (While maintaining great eating habits ofcourse)

Hypertrophy is the total volume of work done at about 80-90% of your MAX. A slow and steady tempo allows you to increase the amount of time your muscles undergo stress... get it?

Good!


KARKY: "Why do you want to go 2 seconds on the concentric instead of just doing it as fast as possible. What are the benifits?"

It depends on your goals. If you go as fast as possible your working muscular endurance. If that's what you want... great. A slower tempo is for hypertrophy and an EVEN slower tempo is for strength gains.

So again, the benefits depend on the outcome you are looking for. They each have their own benefits...
 
fitslug said:
Are you kidding me? The best gains I've had is from PROPER tempo. The best gains my clients have had is from using proper tempo. (While maintaining great eating habits ofcourse)

Hypertrophy is the total volume of work done at about 80-90% of your MAX. A slow and steady tempo allows you to increase the amount of time your muscles undergo stress... get it?

Good!


KARKY: "Why do you want to go 2 seconds on the concentric instead of just doing it as fast as possible. What are the benifits?"

It depends on your goals. If you go as fast as possible your working muscular endurance. If that's what you want... great. A slower tempo is for hypertrophy and an EVEN slower tempo is for strength gains.

So again, the benefits depend on the outcome you are looking for. They each have their own benefits...
Click to expand...

That's an interesting notion your putting forth, since everything I've read says the exact opposite. I'm not saying slower concentrics never have their place, but generally, going as fast as possible will force you to recruit more motor units.

What theory to you put behind your recommendation for doing slow concentric tempos for hyp and str gains? And why do you think faster tempos will give you better endurance gains?

If you want to increase the time your muscles undergo stress you could just do more reps with a faster tempo or increase the eccentric tempo. But anyways, the whole time under tension thing is debetable, it's just one way.

And muscle hypertrophy is getting bigger muscles by making the muscle fibers bigger, not the total volume of work done at 80-90% of 1RM..
 
Depends where you read it. It's clear our sources differ... and the amount of stuff I've read, we could sit here all day arguing.

Actually when I was researching and developing what "worked" for my book I came across alot of contradictory theories and techniques. But... there was only ONE way in my mind to see what worked and what made it in my book.

PERSONAL TESTING. I have a few friends that are personal trainers and elite gymnastics athletes, and I figured that if THEY could get significant progress then the average person will be light years ahead. Oh and ofcourse, tested it on myself... as you can see.

Well... lo behold, it worked. Now on the contrary, its not the ONLY way... IMO its the best way. OF COURSE there have been people who followed different advice and still achieved what they wanted. My advice isn't the end all or be all but I can confidently stand behind it knowing I practice what I preach.

My goal was to achieve the kind of body I wanted in the SHORTEST amount of time as possible. Efficiency... I'm ****ing obsessed with it! =)

Also, variation and eating habits also have a role to play since our bodies are awesome and can adapt rather quickly!

Do with this information what you will, I suggest putting it to solid use for a good 3 weeks. Walking the Talk is something I do better than convince.
 
fitslug said:
Depends where you read it. It's clear our sources differ... and the amount of stuff I've read, we could sit here all day arguing.

Actually when I was researching and developing what "worked" for my book I came across alot of contradictory theories and techniques. But... there was only ONE way in my mind to see what worked and what made it in my book.

PERSONAL TESTING. I have a few friends that are personal trainers and elite gymnastics athletes, and I figured that if THEY could get significant progress then the average person will be light years ahead. Oh and ofcourse, tested it on myself... as you can see.

Well... lo behold, it worked. Now on the contrary, its not the ONLY way... IMO its the best way. OF COURSE there have been people who followed different advice and still achieved what they wanted. My advice isn't the end all or be all but I can confidently stand behind it knowing I practice what I preach.

My goal was to achieve the kind of body I wanted in the SHORTEST amount of time as possible. Efficiency... I'm ****ing obsessed with it! =)

Also, variation and eating habits also have a role to play since our bodies are awesome and can adapt rather quickly!

Do with this information what you will, I suggest putting it to solid use for a good 3 weeks. Walking the Talk is something I do better than convince.
Click to expand...

If you have any articles or anything I'd love to read up on where you got the info. But regardless, do you know the theory behind it? Why does it work like that, the physiology.. or is it just something you've tested?
 
Hahaha^
Hey FitnessSlug, you might want to tone the ego down a bit(pun intended on the "tone"). Besides that, I haven't seen any rational evidence behind what you are saying besides testimonials. Articals, studies, before/afters..anything. I'd love to try it if I know for certain it won't waste my time. I've had fantastic results with explosiveness with weight training and cardio, but if this is a new way to muscle gain then i'm down for trying it with proper evidence.
 
Karky said:
And muscle hypertrophy is getting bigger muscles by making the muscle fibers bigger, not the total volume of work done at 80-90% of 1RM..
Click to expand...

Really? And how do you get those muscle fibers "BIGGER"? By recruiting the optimum amount during proper training at 80% max of your total volume of work done. Which means BREAKING THEM DOWN... providing resistance for micro-tears to occur.

ACDC: "I haven't seen any rational evidence behind what you are saying besides testimonials."

- LOL.. how much more "rational" do you want me to get? But it's good to hear you're open minded. What are your goals?

PM me and we can work something out. Obviously everything I know is in my book. This isn't a pitch fest, but just know that if ARE curious and decide to get it... you get 60 days to try it all out.

As for articles.. I read them, but they aren't really a "source" for me (unless written by someone who knows what hes doing and LOOKS like he knows what he's doing). Sorry folks... I don't have ONE main source to post for all of you, there are plenty... PLENTY.

And yes Tomahawk... references ARE included. 2 pages worth. If you really want to read 2 pages of fine print I'll let you do so. Im sure you can figure out how to do that, yes?

Anyways, this debate is one that comes up too many times and readers are often left more confused than they first started. Here's a suggestion... go try it out.

I come across new techniques and theories and studies weekly... sometimes they contradict each other. Do I make up my mind on what to believe and what not to? No, I put it through a real-world test THEN make up my own mind.

People have packed on muscle in so many different ways in the past you cannot have ONE way... there are many. I just happen to know mine is quite efficient...

"Take what is useful, discard what is not... and create something that is essentially your own" - Bruce Lee.

A piece of advice I follow to this very day.
 
Last edited:
If you don't know the theory behind it, that's ok, just say so. I'm not suggesting that just because you don't have the theory about what happens physiologically, it doesn't work. In the field of exercise experience means a lot and often times research comes 10 years later (or 100) only to confirm what we already know.

I was just pointing out what hypertrophy actually is. What you stated was not hypertrophy, it was a way to get hypertrophy.

And I'm not going to buy your book just like that, I'm a poor student and I've never heard of you before. No offence or anything, but I've got enough books to buy already :p
I would like to know what it's called though, so I could check it out.

And testemonials are easy to get, because everything will work if you work hard. Sure, doing slow tempos can get you big and strong, but that doesn't mean it's the best way.

And about authors looking like they know what they are talking about, I don't know about that. To me, their brain is more important than how they look. A lot of people who know a lot about exercise aren't huge, often they don't have time to train too much, sometimes they might be a geeky neuro scientist who is just interested in how muscles are activated, etc.
 
Karky said:
If you don't know the theory behind it, that's ok, just say so. I'm not suggesting that just because you don't have the theory about what happens physiologically, it doesn't work. In the field of exercise experience means a lot and often times research comes 10 years later (or 100) only to confirm what we already know.


And about authors looking like they know what they are talking about, I don't know about that. To me, their brain is more important than how they look. A lot of people who know a lot about exercise aren't huge, often they don't have time to train too much, sometimes they might be a geeky neuro scientist who is just interested in how muscles are activated, etc.
Click to expand...

Assuming that I don't know the theory behind it... when stated clearly, comes across as a mis-placed and odd statement.

But I do agree with what you're saying after... I'm not sure if I'm the next innovator, but surely I've come up with my own little routines and small techniques that give me the edge. I've mostly learned what I know, but only teach what I know works when applied. See the difference?

As for being a poor student... tell me about it. My book sales go straight to pay of the college debt. Canadian government is lenient, but $12 grand is nothing to sneeze at =)

As for the: " sometimes they might be a geeky neuro scientist who is just interested in how muscles are activated, etc."

... Those types worry me only whey they start to give advice. But I'm just like that... To me... a person who practices what they preach is of prime importance. Shows how much they actually believe in what they teach. If people are looking for a personal trainer... the first thing I recommend is to make sure they look the part.

But you like the brainy type... and I know quite a few people who're like that (but fit) And they work with me... ha!

And no offense taken form the book, I'm sure you'll test drive it once your not a poor student anymore lol ;)

I'll see if I can set up a limited # of review copies. What's your fitness level at?
 
fitslug said:
Assuming that I don't know the theory behind it... when stated clearly, comes across as a mis-placed and odd statement.

But I do agree with what you're saying after... I'm not sure if I'm the next innovator, but surely I've come up with my own little routines and small techniques that give me the edge. I've mostly learned what I know, but only teach what I know works when applied. See the difference?

As for being a poor student... tell me about it. My book sales go straight to pay of the college debt. Canadian government is lenient, but $12 grand is nothing to sneeze at =)

As for the: " sometimes they might be a geeky neuro scientist who is just interested in how muscles are activated, etc."

... Those types worry me only whey they start to give advice. But I'm just like that... To me... a person who practices what they preach is of prime importance. Shows how much they actually believe in what they teach. If people are looking for a personal trainer... the first thing I recommend is to make sure they look the part.

But you like the brainy type... and I know quite a few people who're like that (but fit) And they work with me... ha!

And no offense taken form the book, I'm sure you'll test drive it once your not a poor student anymore lol ;)

I'll see if I can set up a limited # of review copies. What's your fitness level at?
Click to expand...

Yeah I wouldn't take a lot of direct training advice from a geeky neuroscientist, but I would listen to what he had to say about the neuro side of training.

What do you mean my fitness level? Right now it pretty much sucks, I'm trying to find ways I can train without putting too much load on my back as I've got some kind of injury.

And where did you explain the theory behind it? You mean the TUT thing? You can get the same TUT with fast concentric as slow concentric, so I don't think that really explains it. And if fast concentric is better, there is no problem getting a large TUT with fast concentric, you just need to up the reps or slow down the eccentric.
 
Last edited:
I agree with Karky that I think an explosive (but controled) concentric and a slower eccentric is the best way to go but I'll do a bit more reading behind the suggestions you've posted.

Thanks for posting up your ideas, it's been a good read; debate is always a good thing and ideas of what the best techniques are seem to change all the time (been reading The Education Of A Bodybuilder by Arnie and that's proof if ever it were needed that ideas change and there's certainly more than one way to skin a cat)
 
Hey guys complete and uder noob here. Seems like you guys are discussing decreasing tempo of movement to increase muscle mass gain makes sense to me and I'd really love to integrate proper or at least effective tempo in my workout routine. However Im wondering what parts of an exercise concentric, isometric and eccentric refer to. If someone could just give me a breif description I would appreciatte it :D
 
Concentric = muscle shortening = weight raising

Eccentric = muscle lengthening = weight lowering

Isometric = muscle remaining same length = weight stable
 
Typhon said:
I agree with Karky that I think an explosive (but controled) concentric and a slower eccentric is the best way to go but I'll do a bit more reading behind the suggestions you've posted.

Thanks for posting up your ideas, it's been a good read; debate is always a good thing and ideas of what the best techniques are seem to change all the time (been reading The Education Of A Bodybuilder by Arnie and that's proof if ever it were needed that ideas change and there's certainly more than one way to skin a cat)
Click to expand...


I've read that very statement in several places now. Thats typically how I lift.

PS: now that I've posted here the thread will be decimated.
 
Kraken said:
I've read that very statement in several places now. Thats typically how I lift.

PS: now that I've posted here the thread will be decimated.
Click to expand...

This is only the beginning of the end ...

Let's draw this torture out for as long as is humanly possible, Krak ;)
 
I checked out the video, and then checked out your infomercial/website. Personally I wouldn't buy a fitness book, or any other item from someone who has to use terms like 'brain-dead retard' over and over in his marketing material. Just shows the moral character of the author, making it impossible to trust or believe what he preaches. :mad:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top