@@Junglebtc Oh I highly agree on that. I see several young guys doing "bro" lifting where I torture my client until he can barely walk with slow controlled sets.
I challenge anyone talking about tempo to try the Horse Stance. No tempo just get in a mid squat position and hold it. They are brutal. Amazingly you can get about all of the benefits of any squat or leg press and the hip and knee only have to move in and out of position once. Your channel is a breath of fresh air. The answer is always take it to failure if you can do so safely.
Unfortunately there are quite a few people in the HIT community who do state that super slow reps are superior when it comes to stimulating muscle growth (and have done for over 30 years) , rather than just being safer .
Going slower could be more effective because it can ensure you are actually hitting failure rather than sticking points. By going too fast, you are more likely to mistake a sticking point for failure. Going slower means failure will be reached gradually.
Intensity of Effort is not what causing motor unit recruitment as you can recruit a large number of motor units immediately without having performed a relatively high amount of effort. Effort is a psychological thing. Having the psychological conditioning to be able to exert the required amount of effort is necessary. But it's not the cause of motor unit recruitment. Motor unit recruitment is caused by force production requirements for your muscles in response to resistance. The question is as to whether or not you are effectively recruiting all relevant motor units during exercise. It just happens to require more effort by the person exercising than training in a way that gets only partial motor unit recruitment. Perhaps one can find a way that is lower effort for themselves to recruit all motor units during exercise compared to another way which requires more effort for them. For example, some people may find doing static exercise would require much higher effort to get the same motor unit recruitment compared to them doing the standard barbell motions to train or using a specific machine for dynamic exercise. There are just other factors that can come into play like a more intense burn or boredom that might not be present in a dynamic exercise with the same motor unit recruitment still taken to failure. Because the person enjoys barbell motions more than static exercise it requires less effort for them.
Using a slow safe speed is so much better because it is so much safer! I have been weightlifting and resistance training for 25 years but used to do it the wrong way before knowing it. I used to constantly be injuring myself with minor and occasionally even more major injuries. After learning hit and slowing things down it only took a few months before all of my joints are back to 100%. I also think some people think slower is better because in my opinion it actually is better if you compare it to faster. Because when slowing things down it keeps tension on the muscle so it's constantly progressing towards failure instead when increasing speed it's using momentum so throughout the movement it gives the muscles short breaks. So Innoway I think this is why some people simply say slower is better for making muscles grow and from my experience it's actually true if by slower you mean properly done rep speed versus two fast reps speed. The slower will recruit more muscles faster. In my personal experience this is very much true. When doing it slower versus faster you get both the benefits of the safety instead of injuries as well as a more intense workout faster than versus high speed. Seems like a win-win. I think that's why it's so successful and effective. But that's been my personal experience.
But nippard and isratetal claimed it was better for hypertrophy. Menno hensellmans studies suggest it's not. Safety is a side issue. 3 to second eccentric is not better for hypertrophy
Training at a slower speed also allows you to use lighter weights, which prevents greater pressure and friction on the joints, failing in fewer repetitions but with a longer time under tension. For several of these reasons it makes slow rep training superior for hypertrophy.
Explosive concentrics are quite safe with resistance bands, as the force is limited to band resistance - no momentum. You can also combine this with isometrics - if you use a heavy band, it will "catch you" at the point where your strength equals the resistance.
Anyone to point out Nippards downfalls is a G imo. That guy smells his own farts and says "mmm hints of vanilla". But also you made a great point about the no movement resistance, clearly forgotten about in his study - and what you said about it avoiding injury is just so logical you don't even need to read and research the "science" of it. Nippard is bro science who definitely brags that he's a full time scientist.
i feel like this whole tempo got a little bit out of control, i tested this myself, for example if we take tricep pushdown on a one pulley system, if i lifted with control but with normal pace i could do like 36kgx10, but when i slowed down purposely like negative took me 3/4 seconds, i could only lift half of it so i guess that tempo isn't the best ratio force wise.
Even if, for argument's sake, it were I wouldn't care one bit. Slower rep tempo, 5/5 for me, simply helps my joints not hurt as much and the same with single set training. That's pretty much all that I care about long term.
@Jay vincent, Q: considering all this, when doing 1 set of 1 to max 6 reps ( mainly focus on compounds) to positive failure at this slow rep speed, is 1 set of this low rep range enough? Or should one do 2 sets because 1 set of 3 to 6 reps dont last very long...
HIT proposes time under tension rather than reps. Starting from rep cadences of 3/3 to 10/10 with a goal of achieving failure within 40 seconds to 90 seconds.
Okay, so isometrics are the way to go. Hmm...That was the hot new way to lift back in the late 90's. Then that fizzled out. Now, long length partials are all the rage. I think that's the road to muscle tears and joint injuries.!
My right shoulder impingement, elbows pain and knees pain disappeared when I started implementing your advice (slower rep and removing "cardio"). But my left hip/lower back pain is still not gone, should I do unilateral exercises for them?
@@bxajay8 I use a 10/10 cadence so every part of the rep is slow - but sometimes I do a 20 second eccentric on my last rep, because I know that I wouldn't be able to do even a half rep on the last rep that's usually only done on lifts or machines where the resistance curve becomes hardest at the bottom, like a 45 degree leg press, or a hack squat. If a machine is well designed then I'll try for another rep I'm extending my TUT doing this but the goal is deeper inroad than from 'just' hitting concentric failure
@@bearshapedbubs6626 that's good incite thanks, I still choose to do slower pace because if I have whatever the load is doing 20 seconds a set kills you so much more than 12 to 13 seconds, might not be a difference when it comes to the science factor of things but the intensity feels so much different man lol
20 seconds a rep or 20 a set? Stick to 60-90 a set for maximum safety (see my videos for examples of how heavy you can go with longer TUTs, you can lift plenty heavy with long sets)
Jay, I suffered a heart attack just last week, but I want to start training as soon as I get the "green light" to do so. I'm now wondering about the safety of the slower tempo in regard to keeping my blood pressure elevated for a protracted period (something I wouldn't have even considered prior to what transpired). I have read about an increased risk of aortic dissec†ion being associated with H.I.T., but nothing on raised blood pressure over prolonged periods by way of H.I.T. What's your take on the matter?
Contact Doug Mcguff directly,my father has elevated blood pressure and I asked Doug. He responded in my case positve, just not to use valsalva manuver for breathing. But also if I had a heart attack, I would really wait a bit until I am really able to go to gym
