Fast Twitch Hypertrophy

[TheUnlikelyToad]

How would one go about increasing fast twitch fiber size?

My Dad read something somewhere about a program by Phil Campbell and has been thinking about buying his book. Here are Phil's related links:

Ready set Go Fitness official Website
Speed Training for Sports


Is there any merit to increase overall size with this (bodybuilding applications), or is it primarily for old time athletes trying to make a comeback like my Pops?

 

[somewhatgifted]

I 'll do fast twitch exercises to begin my workout then superset with slow twitch, the end result total annihalation of said muscles.

 

[dontknowaboutme]

How would one go about increasing fast twitch fiber size?

My Dad read something somewhere about a program by Phil Campbell and has been thinking about buying his book. Here are Phil's related links:

Ready set Go Fitness official Website
Speed Training for Sports

If you are bodybuilding or practicing high-intensity cardio you should already be increasing fast twitch fiber size. Unless you are doing reps of 30.

Is there any merit to increase overall size with this (bodybuilding applications), or is it primarily for old time athletes trying to make a comeback like my Pops?

Could you clarify this statement a bit? The reason that ready-set-go fitness seems to focus very much on the older crowd is probably due to the fact that fast twitch muscles atrophy as we age (if you don't use it you lose it). As we know, older people have a problem with lack of muscle and strength, so bodybuilding/strength training becomes very beneficial as we age.

 

[CRUNCH]

Heavy, heavy weights with low reps is the only way to really hit the fast twitch fibers.

You body follows a recruitment pattern when it comes to using muscle cells and motor units. Your body will always try to use slow twitch first, but depends on the weight lifted. Meaning the heavier the weight, the more fast twitch that will be recruited and the quicker they will be recruited.

 

[TheUnlikelyToad]

Heavy, heavy weights with low reps is the only way to really hit the fast twitch fibers.

You body follows a recruitment pattern when it comes to using muscle cells and motor units. Your body will always try to use slow twitch first, but depends on the weight lifted. Meaning the heavier the weight, the more fast twitch that will be recruited and the quicker they will be recruited.

So it's not a matter of low weight and explosive reps? I was under that assumption... but I'll take your word if you're pretty sure on this.

Thanks for actually offering some insight to my question.

 

[TheUnlikelyToad]

If you are bodybuilding or practicing high-intensity cardio you should already be increasing fast twitch fiber size. Unless you are doing reps of 30.



Could you clarify this statement a bit?

My dad is 48 and a former almost pro football player. I think he would like to get back into what he thinks might be similar training. That, or he just wants to seriously vary his normal routine.

I rather have him spend tha money on a few key health supplements personally.

 

[CRUNCH]

In that light, you could do lower weights as long as the reps were very explosive. That's kind of the premise behind plyometrics.

Explosive reps are kind of tough with squats and a bar...LOL. But doing a body weight squat and exploding upwards into a jump would hit fast twitch.

Are you training for a sport that involves explosive strength?

 

[TheUnlikelyToad]

Are you training for a sport that involves explosive strength?

See above post...

Unfortunately, my dad doesn't feel tha need to squat. :lol:

 

[CRUNCH]

LOL...understood.

 

[cable626]

bodybuilding's goal is the development of fast twitch fibers. thats why people who work out get bigger muscles. These fast twitch fibers are the ones that grow larger in diameter through weight training.

If you are doing reps higher than 15, you'd be hitting slow twitch fibers primarily.

 

[CRUNCH]

I have this vague memory of one of my college professors saying that bodybuilders, on average, had more slow-twitch muscle fibers than the average person.

I searched for about 10 minutes and couldn't find an answer either way. There may not be an answer either way.

I'm tired now though, so maybe I'll look around some more tomorrow.

 

[cable626]

I pulled out my physiology textbook, it says here:

"Fast glycolytic fibers are the last to be recruited because they are found in the large motor units. These fibers are not usually recruited unless a muscle is generating a large amount of force, as occurs in high intensity exercises such as weight-lifting or sprinting." -Human Physiology, Germann and Stanfield 2001 published by Benjamin Cummings

Crunch, Slow twitch fibers are the high oxidative ones meaning they're the ones that are the endurance fibers.


As far as fiber type populations in muscles, it varies from person to person. Its all based on genetics. check out this thread about fiber type distribution:
http://anabolicminds.com/forum/exercise-science/9840-average-slow-twitch.html

 

[CRUNCH]

I know what fast and slow twitch fibers are, I've got a masters in ex phys.

Bodybuilding is quite different from weight-lifting or sprinting. I was talking about fiber type displacement differences in bodybuilders as compared to a normal human being. Bodybuilding is not an "explosive" sport. I imagine that when you your book refers to "weight lifters", they are referring to olympic lifting.

I'm not saying they don't have a large number of fast twitch fibers or slow twitch. Just that I thought I remembered hearing that they had a larger number of slow-twitch. I will research that some more tomorrow.

 

[CRUNCH]

Still can't find any definitive studies. But several said that fast-twitch were the ones most likely to respond to hypertrophy-type training. So who knows what I was remembering from kolege! LOL!

 

[TheUnlikelyToad]

Ain't this some sh*t, lol.

Maybe we need some Bobo for clarification.

Bottom line is, can you enlarge tha muscle fibers commonly associated with speed/explosiveness/endurance and if so how?

 

[CRUNCH]

Bottom line is, can you enlarge tha muscle fibers commonly associated with speed/explosiveness/endurance and if so how?

Yes. Heavy weights and explosive movements for speed and explosiveness. Light weights and higher reps for endurance.

 

[NCSU33]

how can you be a "former almost pro football player"

isnt that like saying he didnt make it?

 

[NCSU33]

:FUfinger: does that clear it up

idk, i just dont understand what that had to do with anything

 

[TheUnlikelyToad]

how can you be a "former almost pro football player"

isnt that like saying he didnt make it?

Pretty much... He was signed as an Eagles Free Agent in '81.

$500 signing bonus back then.

 

[jminis]

Your body adapts to whatever type of training you give it. Remember your body is always looking to be efficient. Look at a sprinter, marathon runner, a swimmer, and a gymnast. There's your answer. Just think about what the difference is between these 4 athletes. They are living examples of how to train slow twitch as well as fast.

 

[TeamSavage]

Maybe we need some Bobo for clarification.

There should be a button next to the Reps and Report Post buttons with a clown face... "Call In the Clown". Bobo would then be summoned to give a succinct one-line answer that clarifies the whole issue and makes all others look like the fools that we are. He does seem to have a knack for doing that anyway, though, even without the button.

 

[jminis]

Crunch although it's true bodybuilding is different from say sprinting there's a lot we can learn from that athlete. Upper body in a sprinter is usually well built but pale in comparison to their quads, glutes, and hams. What we have to look at is the leg training and grueling way those muslces are worked day in and day out. We should be asking how can they work those muscle groups everyday and still recover to get that kind of growth. THe answer is the amount of fast twitch muslce fibers they've created in their lower body.

I know what fast and slow twitch fibers are, I've got a masters in ex phys.

Bodybuilding is quite different from weight-lifting or sprinting. I was talking about fiber type displacement differences in bodybuilders as compared to a normal human being. Bodybuilding is not an "explosive" sport. I imagine that when you your book refers to "weight lifters", they are referring to olympic lifting.

I'm not saying they don't have a large number of fast twitch fibers or slow twitch. Just that I thought I remembered hearing that they had a larger number of slow-twitch. I will research that some more tomorrow.

 

[CRUNCH]

In world-class sprinters or pro athletes of any sport for that matter, I think a lot of it comes down to recovery ability. They are able to recover from all those long grueling workouts and continue to get bigger, faster, and stronger.

Plus the genetic component to what kinds of fibers they were born with. Those sprinters had waaaay more fast-twitch cells in those legs (and everywhere else) since they were born.

Add those genetics with years of brutal workouts, and the dedication and determinitation to be the best, and you've got a world class athlete.

 

[jminis]

In world-class sprinters or pro athletes of any sport for that matter, I think a lot of it comes down to recovery ability. They are able to recover from all those long grueling workouts and continue to get bigger, faster, and stronger.

Plus the genetic component to what kinds of fibers they were born with. Those sprinters had waaaay more fast-twitch cells in those legs (and everywhere else) since they were born.

Add those genetics with years of brutal workouts, and the dedication and determinitation to be the best, and you've got a world class athlete.

I hear ya and agree completely so I think the answer to the orginal question is years of brutal training will increase your type II's

 

[cable626]

I hear ya and agree completely so I think the answer to the orginal question is years of brutal training will increase your type II's

yup... and your genetics. :duel:

 

[marso70]

Define "explosive" strength? Strength is strength, period.

Yes. Heavy weights and explosive movements for speed and explosiveness. Light weights and higher reps for endurance.

Does this mean If I lift heavy weights slowly I will become more slow?

As correctly stated fibers are recruited in a set pattern, it is load and force that recruits the fast twitch muscle fibers, speed is not a factor in so much that lifting faster will recruit more fast twitch fibers, in fact the opposite is true as faster lifting speeds, increase momentum thereby actually reducing the loads on the muscle and therefore limiting the amount of actual muscle fibers called into play.

Also reps higher then 15 will increase endurance? Incorrect, it is not the reps per se, but the time under load. Sets with TUL in excessive of 120 seconds will do more to increase endurance, so one has to consider rep cadence when accounting for rep ranges.

Paul.

Team H.I.T. Online

 

[TeamSavage]

Define "explosive" strength?

Bruce Lee's 1" punch.

 

[CRUNCH]

Define "explosive" strength? Strength is strength, period.



Does this mean If I lift heavy weights slowly I will become more slow?

As correctly stated fibers are recruited in a set pattern, it is load and force that recruits the fast twitch muscle fibers, speed is not a factor in so much that lifting faster will recruit more fast twitch fibers, in fact the opposite is true as faster lifting speeds, increase momentum thereby actually reducing the loads on the muscle and therefore limiting the amount of actual muscle fibers called into play.

Also reps higher then 15 will increase endurance? Incorrect, it is not the reps per se, but the time under load. Sets with TUL in excessive of 120 seconds will do more to increase endurance, so one has to consider rep cadence when accounting for rep ranges.

Paul.

Team H.I.T. Online

Fine then, if you want to get nit-picky.

How would you define plyometrics?? Are they done slowly to improve speed?? If you do them slow as you imply, they will make you faster?? Is that right. Dr Chu would beg to differ with you. Heavy weights and explosive movements was written as two different things.

Heavy weights will recruit fast-twitch fibers, explosive movements will recruit fast-twitch fibers (max vertical jumps). NOT doing explosive movements WITH heavy weights, I did not say that!

Of course it's time under tension when talking about endurance and high reps, I just think it didn't need to get that in-depth for the guys father.

 

[Mass_69]

ALR has a lot of insight on this subject. Too bad he's busy these days and doesn't post much anymore (hint-hint Viperspit & FitnFirm )

Here's a little excerpt from Building the Perfect Beast (the original one):

Earlier we discussed muscle fiber types. We know there are two fiber types,
Type-I and Type-ll with each consisting of sub-types. Basically Type I are endurance
fibers with a low growth (size) potential. They respond to low weight loads, and sets
that achieve positive failure above 15-20 reps. Type II fibers are strength orientated
fibers with a high growth potential. They respond best to higher weight loads and
sets that achieve positive failure below 1 5 reps.
Like I said, this is basic. Type II fibers are the primary focal point in
bodybuilding since the goal is maximum size. This means utilizing a weight that
achieves maximum fiber recruitment and achieves positive failure at 1 5 reps or below.
However, there are three Type II fiber sub-types; a, b, and c. Each responds to
different and somewhat specific rep/load protocols. (1) Type Ma are mostly effected
by sets of 11 -1 5. (2) Type Mb are mostly affected by sets of 6-10. (3) And Type lIc are
mostly affected by sets of 1-5 reps.
Remember, these rep ranges refer to sets taken to positive failure. This is why
most training systems call for sets that result in positive failure in the 9-1 2 rep range.
Unfortunately 8-1 2 reps would mostly focus upon Type IIb fibers with some carry over
effects upon Type Ma and Type IIc muscle fibers.

 

[CRUNCH]

Cool post Mass...thanks.

 

[marso70]

I'm not getting picky I'm stating physiological facts, as for plyometrics, again this is a concept born out of fallcys and mis truths.

Plyometrics simply improves the SPECIFIC skills of the jump etc which is being PRACTICED, so to become better at jumping onto a box of a certain height one must practise the specific motor SKILLS of jumping onto a box of a SPECFIC height, the motor skills of said movement does not transfer over to other movements of a similar nature ie: they do not make you more explosive or improve your explosive squatting strength.

This is based on the PRINCIPLE of SPECIFITY and plyometrics flys in the face of this.

As I stated fast twitch fibers are recruited as per load and force requirements, this does not imply that high force rates need to be applied as lifting weights with a relative slow speed with sufficient loads and taken to momentary muscular failure will do everything possible to recruit the maximum amount of muscle fibers available.

Again, answer my question if lifting fast will make you more "explosive" (which you have yet to define) then does lifting slow make you more slow? As I've done superslow with heavy weights but can run just as fast as before. If I become stronger, then my ability to produce force is increased which means I can generate more power, but nothing indicates that I have to lift fast to do this.


Also if lifting weights fast makes you faster, then logic must therefore dictate that lifting without weights will make you even more explosive as one can lift faster without weights than with?


Again with regards to rep ranges the above post does not account for rep cadence, there are numerous studies which indictate for hypertrophy sets should last between 30-90 seconds with 60 being the optimum.

I could go on and on but I've argued this positon too many times before and it seems the same old mistruths regarding explosive lifting still prevail. I've stated my case and I'll leave it at that.

 

[CRUNCH]

Plyometrics are concepts of fallacies and mis-truths eh? We have nothing to talk about then, believe what you want to believe.

All the studies on plyometrics must have been made up. Dr Donald Chu knows nothing.

 

[marso70]

The studies are not made up but are often done in support of the method in which is being studied. The reality is studies prove nothing, as I can found countless studies by well renowned strength coaches and exercise scientists which support the notion that plyometrics flys in the face of the principle of specificity a well documented and accepted principle of exercise science, not to mention the increased risk of injury through high rates of force

If indeed Dr Donald Chu promotes the principle of plyometrics and "explosive" strength then yes he is wrong and indeed knows nothing of value regarding exercise science.

As is the law of identity, A can only be A, and nothing else, therefore strength is strength, it is not made up of different entities which must be trained separately.

As I stated and which you STILL haven't answered, if lifting weights fast makes you faster, then lifting without weights would make you even faster, and lifting with weights slowly will therefore (based on your logic and the logic of plyometrics) make you slower? Nothing else is possible, as per the law of identity. Follow me so far? Good, then explain to me then how this is physiologically possible? is there then such a thing as "slow speed" strength, as there is "explosive" strength?

What about "intermediate" speed strength? I could think of endless variations of the concept of strength does each and every one have to trained separately?

Explosive strength or more correctly the ability to recruit a large percentage of your available muscle fibers (neurological efficiency) is determined at birth and CANNOT be changed through exercise. People who are explosive, are born that way...period.

But hey, we have nothing to talk about right? As you have yet to answer or challenge any of my questions, now I wonder why that is.........hmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

 

[CRUNCH]

FOLLOW THE CAPS…

The studies are not made up but are often done in support of the method in which is being studied. The reality is studies prove nothing, as I can found countless studies by well renowned strength coaches and exercise scientists which support the notion that plyometrics flys in the face of the principle of specificity a well documented and accepted principle of exercise science, not to mention the increased risk of injury through high rates of force

SO THEN DON'T YOU THINK I CAN ALSO FIND STUDIES THAT REFUTE THE PRINCIPLE OF SPECIFICITY. WHICH I WON’T DO AS I BELIEVE IN THIS PRINCIPLE, JUST NOT YOUR EXTREMELY NARROW VIEW OF IT.

SINCE YOU THINK PLYOMETRICS FLYS IN THE FACE OF SPECIFICITY AND HAS NO CARRYOVER TO SPORTS, WHY DO YOU BELIEVE IN WEIGHT LIFTING AT ALL. BY YOUR LOGIC, EVEN WEIGHT LIFTING HAS NOTHING SPECIFIC TO ATHLETICS OUTSIDE OF THE WEIGHT ROOM. AGAIN, BY YOUR DEFINITION OF SPORTS SPECIFICITY, FOOTBALL PLAYERS SHOULD NOT EVEN BE DOING SQUATS, SINCE THEY DON’T DO SQUATS ON THE FIELD, THERE’S NOTHING SPORTS SPECIFIC ABOUT THEM, RIGHT?

If indeed Dr Donald Chu promotes the principle of plyometrics and "explosive" strength then yes he is wrong and indeed knows nothing of value regarding exercise science.

DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHO HE IS?

As is the law of identity, A can only be A, and nothing else, therefore strength is strength, it is not made up of different entities which must be trained separately.

SO THE STRENGTH A MARATHONER IS THE SAME THING AS THE STRENGTH AN OLYMPIC SPRINTER HAS? STRENGTH IS STRENGTH…IS THAT RIGHT. WHERE DO YOU GET THESE IDEAS FROM??

As I stated and which you STILL haven't answered, if lifting weights fast makes you faster, then lifting without weights would make you even faster, and lifting with weights slowly will therefore (based on your logic and the logic of plyometrics) make you slower? Nothing else is possible, as per the law of identity. Follow me so far? Good, then explain to me then how this is physiologically possible? is there then such a thing as "slow speed" strength, as there is "explosive" strength?

I'M NOT ADVOCATING LIFTING WEIGHTS FAST, BUT DOING SOME LIFTS IN AN EXPLOSIVE FASSION, LIKE POWERCLEANS. THERE REALLY IS NO WAY TO DO THEM SLOW NOW IS THERE?? ARE YOU NOW GOING TO TELL ME THAT OLYMPIC WEIGHT LIFTERS DO NOT HAVE ANY EXPLOSIVE STRENGTH?? THAT THEIR TRAINING HAS NOT IMPROVED THEIR ABILITY TO PRODUCE FORCE BETTER THAN SOMEONE UNTRAINED, OR SOMEONE LIKE A MARATHON RUNNER. SINCE THESE THINGS AREN'T SPECIFIC, IT SHOULDN'T MATTER HOW THEY TRAIN, RIGHT? ISN'T THAT YOUR LOGIC?? OLYMPIC WEIGHT LIFTERS WOULD DO JUST AS GOOD BY RIDING A BIKE RIGHT…AFTERALL, STRENGTH IS STRENGTH.

YOU ASK ABOUT LIFTING WITHOUT WEIGHTS MAKING YOU FASTER. YES, IT CAN, DEPENDING ON THE CONTEXT, WHICH I’M SURE YOU WILL TWIST AROUND. IT’S TRAINING CALLED “OVERSPEED TRAINING”. IT ALLOWS THE ATHLETE TO MOVE HIS/HER LIMBS THROUGH THEIR RANGE OF MOTION FASTER THAN THEY COULD ON THEIR OWN. THIS IS DONE BY PULLING THEM WITH A ROPE AS THEY SPRINT (THERE ARE ALSO TREADMILLS DESIGNED TO DO THIS), AGAIN, ALLOWING THEM TO MOVE THROUGH THEIR RANGE OF MOTION AND TRAIN THE NERVE AND MUCSCLE TO FIRE FASTER, WHICH LEADS TO GREATER SPEED. BUT YOU’D TRAIN A SPRINTER BY HAVING THEM JOG, WOULDN’T YOU? AS PER YOUR LOGIC, IT DOESN’T MATTER, STRENGTH IS STRENGTH.

BY SAYING LIFTING WEIGHTS SLOWLY IS TAKING THINGS OUT OF CONTEXT. LIFTING WEIGHTS IN AN EXPLOSIVE FASHION (POWER CLEANS) WILL MAKE YOU FASTER, DOING POWER CLEANS SLOWLY WILL NOT MAKE YOU FASTER...PERIOD! YOU CAN’T DO A POWERCLEAN SLOWLY, IF YOU CAN, I’D LOVE TO SEE IT. LIFTING A VERY HEAVY WEIGHT SLOWLY WILL STILL MAKE YOU FASTER AS IT RECRUITS THE FAST TWITCH FIBERS YOU NEED TO MOVE FAST, THE VERY SAME ONES. DOING LIGHT WEIGHTS SLOWLY WILL NOT MAKE YOU SLOWER (DUH), BUT IT CERTAINLY WON'T MAKE YOU FASTER. BUT AGAIN, IT DOESN’T MATTER, STRENGTH IS STRENGTH, RIGHT? YOUR LOGIC.

What about "intermediate" speed strength? I could think of endless variations of the concept of strength does each and every one have to trained separately?

WHAT????? ENDLESS VARIATIONS OF STRENGTH…MAKE UP YOUR MIND!

DIDN’T YOU JUST SAY THIS, IN THIS VERY POST: “As is the law of identity, A can only be A, and nothing else, therefore strength is strength, it is not made up of different entities which must be trained separately.”

IN ONE PARAGRAPH YOU SAY THAT STRENGTH IS STRENGTH, THEN A FEW PARAGRAPHS LATER YOU SAY THERE ARE ENDLESS VARIATIONS OF STRENGTH. WELL WHICH IS IT?? YOU JUST CONTRADICTED YOURSELF BIG TIME? IS STRENGTH, STRENGTH, OR ARE THERE ENDLESS VARIATIONS???

WHY AM I EVEN DEBATING WITH YOU ANY FURTHER??

Explosive strength or more correctly the ability to recruit a large percentage of your available muscle fibers (neurological efficiency) is determined at birth and CANNOT be changed through exercise. People who are explosive, are born that way...period.

ARE YOU SAYING SOMEBODY BORN WITH A HIGH PERCENTAGE OF FAST TWITCH FIBERS BUT HAVING NEVER DONE ANY TRAINING WILL STILL BE JUST AS FAST AS A TRAINIED OLYMPIC SPRINTER THAT WAS ALSO BORN WITH THE SAME PERCENTAGE OF FAST TWITCH FIBERS? SINCE YOU’RE BORN WITH THIS ABILITY, WHY DO ANY TRAINING AT ALL? JUST SHOW UP TO THE OLYMPIC TRIALS AND YOU’LL BE GOOD TO GO. HOW CAN YOU POSSIBLY BELIEVE THAT FAST TWITCH FIBERS CANNOT BE TRAINED?

edit: THE AVERAGE UNTRAINED PERSON MAY BE ABLE TO ONLY RECRUIT 50% OF THEIR AVAILABLE FIBERS IN ANY ONE REP MAX. A HIGHLY TRAINED INDIVIDUAL MAY BE ABLE TO RECRUIT 60%, 70%, OR EVEN 80% OF AVAILABLE MUSCLE FIBERS IN A ONE REP MAX. THIS IS A TRAINING RESPONSE, AND COMES FROM NOTHING ELSE. IT'S A TRAINING RESPONSE THAT WILL INCREASE YOR FORCE OTPUT. WE CAN'T RECRUIT 100% OF THE FIBERS AS THE MUSCLE WOULD TEAR OF THE BONE, IT'S A PROTECTIVE MECHANISM. THE ONLY THING GENETIC IS THE PERCENTAGE OF FIBER DISPLACEMENT WE'RE BORN WITH. TRAINING ALLOWS US TO BE ABLE TO RECRUIT MORE OF THE FIBERS WE HAVE. HOW IS IT POSSIBLE YOU DON'T KNOW THIS???

But hey, we have nothing to talk about right? As you have yet to answer or challenge any of my questions, now I wonder why that is.........hmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

NOW MAKE UP YOUR MIND, IS STRENGTH, STRENGTH OR ARE THERE ENDLESS VARIATIONS AND HOW YOU TRAIN DOESN’T MATTER. SINCE YOU LIKE CHALLENGES…

 

[xtraflossy]

I'm not getting picky I'm stating physiological facts, as for plyometrics, again this is a concept born out of fallcys and mis truths.

Plyometrics simply improves the SPECIFIC skills of the jump etc which is being PRACTICED, so to become better at jumping onto a box of a certain height one must practise the specific motor SKILLS of jumping onto a box of a SPECFIC height, the motor skills of said movement does not transfer over to other movements of a similar nature ie: they do not make you more explosive or improve your explosive squatting strength.

This is based on the PRINCIPLE of SPECIFITY and plyometrics flys in the face of this.

As I stated fast twitch fibers are recruited as per load and force requirements, this does not imply that high force rates need to be applied as lifting weights with a relative slow speed with sufficient loads and taken to momentary muscular failure will do everything possible to recruit the maximum amount of muscle fibers available.

Again, answer my question if lifting fast will make you more "explosive" (which you have yet to define) then does lifting slow make you more slow? As I've done superslow with heavy weights but can run just as fast as before. If I become stronger, then my ability to produce force is increased which means I can generate more power, but nothing indicates that I have to lift fast to do this.


Also if lifting weights fast makes you faster, then logic must therefore dictate that lifting without weights will make you even more explosive as one can lift faster without weights than with?


Again with regards to rep ranges the above post does not account for rep cadence, there are numerous studies which indictate for hypertrophy sets should last between 30-90 seconds with 60 being the optimum.

I could go on and on but I've argued this positon too many times before and it seems the same old mistruths regarding explosive lifting still prevail. I've stated my case and I'll leave it at that.

I always beleived that "explosive" was the maximum speed in which you could move a given mass... regaurdless of resistance.
I thought it had to do just as much with the CNS then it did specific fibers. And training that exceleration or explosiveness of the weights was pushing the limits of how fast (Im really tring not to use the word "force" here ) you can move a given weight..

 

[CRUNCH]

I agree Flossy, it does have as much to do with the CNS as the muscles themselves. When sprinting, it's not only the amount of power the athlete can produce, but how fast they can contract, relax, and contract again the muscle that propel them forward.

Plyometrics (which marso thinks are bunk) train the nerves as much as they train the muscles. The faster a muscle can be contracted, the more force it can produce.

 

[xtraflossy]

The studies are not made up but are often done in support of the method in which is being studied. The reality is studies prove nothing, as I can found countless studies by well renowned strength coaches and exercise scientists which support the notion that plyometrics flys in the face of the principle of specificity a well documented and accepted principle of exercise science, not to mention the increased risk of injury through high rates of force

If indeed Dr Donald Chu promotes the principle of plyometrics and "explosive" strength then yes he is wrong and indeed knows nothing of value regarding exercise science.

As is the law of identity, A can only be A, and nothing else, therefore strength is strength, it is not made up of different entities which must be trained separately.

As I stated and which you STILL haven't answered, if lifting weights fast makes you faster, then lifting without weights would make you even faster, and lifting with weights slowly will therefore (based on your logic and the logic of plyometrics) make you slower? Nothing else is possible, as per the law of identity. Follow me so far? Good, then explain to me then how this is physiologically possible? is there then such a thing as "slow speed" strength, as there is "explosive" strength?

What about "intermediate" speed strength? I could think of endless variations of the concept of strength does each and every one have to trained separately?

Explosive strength or more correctly the ability to recruit a large percentage of your available muscle fibers (neurological efficiency) is determined at birth and CANNOT be changed through exercise. People who are explosive, are born that way...period.

But hey, we have nothing to talk about right? As you have yet to answer or challenge any of my questions, now I wonder why that is.........hmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

Not tring to stir the pot, ... just tring to get something out of all this,..
but is the wrod PERCENTAGE, when used here, exactly what it should be?
If a large percent of fubers could be called to work, then wouldn't you make new neural connections, or something like that when the "demand" increased?
Also, can't the actual type of muscle fiber change over your lifetime as well? Say I started running long distances for a few years, aside from my muscle fibers adapting from being used for strength into endurence type, wouldn't there be neurological changes there as well?
I don't buy into that "your born with it ...period." thing. And as unpopular as it might be, I also beleive this to apply to hyperplasia too.
Why would the body always adapt to everything, with these few exceptions (when talking about muscle tissue specificly in this case)?

 

[TeamSavage]

Again, answer my question if lifting fast will make you more "explosive" (which you have yet to define) then does lifting slow make you more slow?

No. You can always do something as slowly as you want. The limit to slowness is no movement, which even a baby can achieve. But we are limited by how fast we can go, so it makes sense that practicing explosiveness would make one faster, regardless of the physiological mechanism.

 

[CRUNCH]

Not tring to stir the pot, ... just tring to get something out of all this,..
but is the wrod PERCENTAGE, when used here, exactly what it should be?
If a large percent of fubers could be called to work, then wouldn't you make new neural connections, or something like that when the "demand" increased?
Also, can't the actual type of muscle fiber change over your lifetime as well? Say I started running long distances for a few years, aside from my muscle fibers adapting from being used for strength into endurence type, wouldn't there be neurological changes there as well?
I don't buy into that "your born with it ...period." thing. And as unpopular as it might be, I also beleive this to apply to hyperplasia too.
Why would the body always adapt to everything, with these few exceptions (when talking about muscle tissue specificly in this case)?

Marso started stirring the pot a while ago!

Good point about the body changing to the stresses we put on it, like running long distances. We'll one day be able to prove hyperplasia as well as other possible adaptations. Our bodies are amazing things.

Right now the only way to prove much of this is through dissection. We'd need identical twins, run one through a certain training program for many years, then cut them both up (sick...I know), and see what kinds of changes the trained one had vs the untrained. Would be interesting, that's for sure!!

edit: I'd hit ya with some reps again Flossy, but it says I gotta spread some around!