What do you think about Static Contraction training?

O

oravita

0
There is a book called "Static Contraction Training" by Peter Sisco and John Little which I'm interested in. Seems like most either love it or hate it. It looks to me like a well researched method promising better results with less time by means of a more efficient, better optimised workout. I want to get to the bottom of it! (or at least work out if it's worth buying and using as a beginner)

I did a search on the forum and was surprised that it turned up very little!

1. Who has tried it and what were your results?
2. Who thinks it's a better way to train and why?
3. Is it fundamentally flawed?
4. Should it be combined with other training?

PS I'm also interested in some of their other books on "Power Factor" etc.

I'm looking foward to hearing what you guys have to say about it, thanks :)
 
There is a little bit of info here:
http://training.fitness.com/showthread.php?p=27654

I have read Static Contractions and Power Factor. I am skeptical because I don't believe that it could be that easy. But, many people have given high praise for it (including Anthony Robbins).

I also got the downloadeable book, Train Smart (the newest addition to Pete Sisco's books). Haven't finished reading it yet, but it does look really good.

Let us know if you try it!

-Rip
 
I think streight leg dead lift is a static exercise is it not? Its supposed to make u fasted by making ur hamstrings stronger or somethin. If not whats an example of a static exercise?
 
In order to gain strength throughout the ENTIRE muscle, you must move it threw it's entire Range of Motion (ROM). Doing static or isometric training for an extended period of time will recruit more motor units, but it's just to hold that contraction of the muscle at THAT angle. So in a way, you'll just be really strong at that angle.

Basically, you need to think about what you are trying to achieve and what you're goals are. If you're trying to improve athletic performance, this is not be the best type of training to do. The reason probably why you found very little is because it really doesn't make sense to do that type of training... unless you're just going to do an isometric hold at every joint angle in order to get strong at that angle... lol...
 
Hey DeX, I had a question regarding the range of motion and muscular adaptations -- each muscle fiber is continuous from joint to joint right? At what level does the muscle actually gain strength/size? I was under the impression that as the fiber goes, so goes the muscle and that full range of motion was more for flexibility and synergist training than for strengthening the agonist (and that the agonist grew best at 50% - 70% full range of motion).

I noticed that your profile said you were going to be CSCS certified, so I thought you might know :)
 
DeX said:
In order to gain strength throughout the ENTIRE muscle, you must move it threw it's entire Range of Motion (ROM). Doing static or isometric training for an extended period of time will recruit more motor units, but it's just to hold that contraction of the muscle at THAT angle. So in a way, you'll just be really strong at that angle.

Basically, you need to think about what you are trying to achieve and what you're goals are. If you're trying to improve athletic performance, this is not be the best type of training to do. The reason probably why you found very little is because it really doesn't make sense to do that type of training... unless you're just going to do an isometric hold at every joint angle in order to get strong at that angle... lol...
Click to expand...
Pete Sisco's book talks about this subject. Apparently, it has never been proven that tiny muscle movements compared to full range do anything differently.

Many physiology scientists and doctors are currently arguing this subject. So, it might be a bit presumptuous of Dex to state this as fact when it is OBVIOUSLY still being debated and no theory from either size has been proven factual.

-Rip
 
so basically if u got a heavy dumbell and did a front raise and held it there until failure then it would make your forarms and delts bigger. am i right or wrong?
 
DeX said:
So in a way, you'll just be really strong at that angle
Click to expand...

In one of my text books, it was said that an isometric hold would increase the strength of the muscle, +/- 20 degress from the angle of your hold. So thats 40 degrees, not to bad if you ask me. IF this is true, you'd only have to do 2 holds and you'd almost get the entire range of movement. And one more thing, i've noticed that static holds at the end of your last set are great for visual results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top