Update since, say, 2003

In the mid '90s, we had creatine (successful), and then in the late '90s we
had prohormones (which flopped generally). During that time a lot of
excellent (generally old) routines became better known (Westside, Korte's
5x5 routine, Dr. Squat's routine, and 20 rep squats come to mind), but by
about 2003 I haven't been in the game, or nothing promising seems to have
surfaced.

So, what are some scientific theories/studies that have surfaced over the
past 3 or 4 years?

Thanks!

Regards,
Lester

"Lester Long" <long5@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:VVKah.3903$ql2.563@newsread3.news.pas.earthli nk.net...
> In the mid '90s, we had creatine (successful), and then in the late '90s
> we had prohormones (which flopped generally). During that time a lot of
> excellent (generally old) routines became better known (Westside, Korte's
> 5x5 routine, Dr. Squat's routine, and 20 rep squats come to mind), but by
> about 2003 I haven't been in the game, or nothing promising seems to have
> surfaced.
>
> So, what are some scientific theories/studies that have surfaced over the
> past 3 or 4 years?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Regards,
> Lester
>
Check out JMW's recent post regarding whey and creatine pre and post
workout. Not a new concept, but some confirming evidence.

www.crossfit.com has a lot of high rep, high intensity routines which might
be useful depending on your goals. Tabata interval training is worth looking
into.

"Lester Long" <long5@ix.netcom.com> wrote
> In the mid '90s, we had creatine (successful), and then in the late '90s
> we had prohormones (which flopped generally). During that time a lot of
> excellent (generally old) routines became better known (Westside, Korte's
> 5x5 routine, Dr. Squat's routine, and 20 rep squats come to mind), but by
> about 2003 I haven't been in the game, or nothing promising seems to have
> surfaced.
>
> So, what are some scientific theories/studies that have surfaced over the
> past 3 or 4 years?

Jason Earl and I have decided that the ROM Machine www.fastexercise.com is
the greatest exercise machine ever invented, and a great value, as well.

David

Lifting heavy still works.


Lester Long ha escrito:

> In the mid '90s, we had creatine (successful), and then in the late '90s we
> had prohormones (which flopped generally). During that time a lot of
> excellent (generally old) routines became better known (Westside, Korte's
> 5x5 routine, Dr. Squat's routine, and 20 rep squats come to mind), but by
> about 2003 I haven't been in the game, or nothing promising seems to have
> surfaced.
>
> So, what are some scientific theories/studies that have surfaced over the
> past 3 or 4 years?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Regards,
> Lester

In article <VVKah.3903$ql2.563@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.n et>,
"Lester Long" <long5@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> In the mid '90s, we had creatine (successful), and then in the late '90s we
> had prohormones (which flopped generally). During that time a lot of
> excellent (generally old) routines became better known (Westside, Korte's
> 5x5 routine, Dr. Squat's routine, and 20 rep squats come to mind), but by
> about 2003 I haven't been in the game, or nothing promising seems to have
> surfaced.
>
> So, what are some scientific theories/studies that have surfaced over the
> past 3 or 4 years?

Tabata intervals are a hot one. Interval training in general.

Specificity is big, but most people confuse specificity and mimicry. So
they call a partial back squat a specific movement for jumping, for
example, because the movement apprears to mimic jumping. In reality the
movement is greatly different - you are slowing down near full extension
with a squat and speeding up with a jump - and there is little
specificity in terms of movement speed - too darn slow. Movement speed
is a critical specificity that is lost on many.

Unilateral and assymetrical loading. Primitive implements.

See http://www.crossfit.com/cf-info/excercise.html

Nice to hear from you!

--
Keith

Hobbes wrote:
> In article <VVKah.3903$ql2.563@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.n et>,
> "Lester Long" <long5@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>> In the mid '90s, we had creatine (successful), and then in the late
>> '90s we had prohormones (which flopped generally). During that time
>> a lot of excellent (generally old) routines became better known
>> (Westside, Korte's 5x5 routine, Dr. Squat's routine, and 20 rep
>> squats come to mind), but by about 2003 I haven't been in the game,
>> or nothing promising seems to have surfaced.
>>
>> So, what are some scientific theories/studies that have surfaced
>> over the past 3 or 4 years?
>
> Tabata intervals are a hot one. Interval training in general.
>
> Specificity is big, but most people confuse specificity and mimicry.
> So they call a partial back squat a specific movement for jumping, for
> example, because the movement apprears to mimic jumping. In reality
> the movement is greatly different - you are slowing down near full
> extension with a squat and speeding up with a jump - and there is
> little specificity in terms of movement speed - too darn slow.
> Movement speed is a critical specificity that is lost on many.
>
> Unilateral and assymetrical loading. Primitive implements.
>
> See http://www.crossfit.com/cf-info/excercise.html
>
> Nice to hear from you!

Also, if I were coaching the squat I would likely emphasis that the weight
should be going through the heel, whereas with a jump I believe it is
preferable to have the weight on the ball of the foot?

--
Bully
Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't
matter, and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

In article <4t333eF11j484U1@mid.individual.net>,
"Bully" <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok> wrote:

> Hobbes wrote:
> > In article <VVKah.3903$ql2.563@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.n et>,
> > "Lester Long" <long5@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >
> >> In the mid '90s, we had creatine (successful), and then in the late
> >> '90s we had prohormones (which flopped generally). During that time
> >> a lot of excellent (generally old) routines became better known
> >> (Westside, Korte's 5x5 routine, Dr. Squat's routine, and 20 rep
> >> squats come to mind), but by about 2003 I haven't been in the game,
> >> or nothing promising seems to have surfaced.
> >>
> >> So, what are some scientific theories/studies that have surfaced
> >> over the past 3 or 4 years?
> >
> > Tabata intervals are a hot one. Interval training in general.
> >
> > Specificity is big, but most people confuse specificity and mimicry.
> > So they call a partial back squat a specific movement for jumping, for
> > example, because the movement apprears to mimic jumping. In reality
> > the movement is greatly different - you are slowing down near full
> > extension with a squat and speeding up with a jump - and there is
> > little specificity in terms of movement speed - too darn slow.
> > Movement speed is a critical specificity that is lost on many.
> >
> > Unilateral and assymetrical loading. Primitive implements.
> >
> > See http://www.crossfit.com/cf-info/excercise.html
> >
> > Nice to hear from you!
>
> Also, if I were coaching the squat I would likely emphasis that the weight
> should be going through the heel, whereas with a jump I believe it is
> preferable to have the weight on the ball of the foot?

True. Interesting that Tommy Kono prefers the weight to be on the ball
of the foot for both front and back squats in olympic lifting training -
within what he calls 'the center of balance'. Of course his rationale
is that you have to have some leeway in the catch of the clean and
snatch.

--
Keith

"ATP*" <waxwingslain@azurepane.com> wrote in message
news:5qOah.110$Gk5.7@newsfe12.lga...
>
> "Lester Long" <long5@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> news:VVKah.3903$ql2.563@newsread3.news.pas.earthli nk.net...
>> In the mid '90s, we had creatine (successful), and then in the late '90s
>> we had prohormones (which flopped generally). During that time a lot of
>> excellent (generally old) routines became better known (Westside, Korte's
>> 5x5 routine, Dr. Squat's routine, and 20 rep squats come to mind), but by
>> about 2003 I haven't been in the game, or nothing promising seems to have
>> surfaced.
>>
>> So, what are some scientific theories/studies that have surfaced over the
>> past 3 or 4 years?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Regards,
>> Lester
>>
> Check out JMW's recent post regarding whey and creatine pre and post
> workout. Not a new concept, but some confirming evidence.
>
> www.crossfit.com has a lot of high rep, high intensity routines which
> might be useful depending on your goals. Tabata interval training is worth
> looking into.

Really interesting site. Thanks!

(Wasn't able to find JMW's post, but it was an interesting thread)

-Lester

"David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:dZPah.4013$sf5.2823@newsread4.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
> "Lester Long" <long5@ix.netcom.com> wrote
>> In the mid '90s, we had creatine (successful), and then in the late '90s
>> we had prohormones (which flopped generally). During that time a lot of
>> excellent (generally old) routines became better known (Westside, Korte's
>> 5x5 routine, Dr. Squat's routine, and 20 rep squats come to mind), but by
>> about 2003 I haven't been in the game, or nothing promising seems to have
>> surfaced.
>>
>> So, what are some scientific theories/studies that have surfaced over the
>> past 3 or 4 years?
>
> Jason Earl and I have decided that the ROM Machine www.fastexercise.com is
> the greatest exercise machine ever invented, and a great value, as well.
>
> David

LOL.....good to "see" you again David.....I've been away too long, and no
real excuse for it.

Regards,
Lester

"Hobbes" <khobman800@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:khobman800-EFC56C.08235428112006@sn-ip.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net...
> In article <VVKah.3903$ql2.563@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.n et>,
> "Lester Long" <long5@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>> In the mid '90s, we had creatine (successful), and then in the late '90s
>> we
>> had prohormones (which flopped generally). During that time a lot of
>> excellent (generally old) routines became better known (Westside, Korte's
>> 5x5 routine, Dr. Squat's routine, and 20 rep squats come to mind), but by
>> about 2003 I haven't been in the game, or nothing promising seems to have
>> surfaced.
>>
>> So, what are some scientific theories/studies that have surfaced over the
>> past 3 or 4 years?
>
> Tabata intervals are a hot one. Interval training in general.
>
> Specificity is big, but most people confuse specificity and mimicry. So
> they call a partial back squat a specific movement for jumping, for
> example, because the movement apprears to mimic jumping. In reality the
> movement is greatly different - you are slowing down near full extension
> with a squat and speeding up with a jump - and there is little
> specificity in terms of movement speed - too darn slow. Movement speed
> is a critical specificity that is lost on many.
>
> Unilateral and assymetrical loading. Primitive implements.
>
> See http://www.crossfit.com/cf-info/excercise.html
>
> Nice to hear from you!
>
> --
> Keith

Thanks Keith! Always a pleasure to return and find a place where everybody
knows your name. I'm still getting used to the permanent trolling, but if
it hasn't made you guys leave, I won't let it bother me either!

I'll check out that site!

-Lester

"Lester Long" <long5@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:HKpbh.5464$1s6.4231@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
> "ATP*" <waxwingslain@azurepane.com> wrote in message
> news:5qOah.110$Gk5.7@newsfe12.lga...
>>
>> "Lester Long" <long5@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
>> news:VVKah.3903$ql2.563@newsread3.news.pas.earthli nk.net...
>>> In the mid '90s, we had creatine (successful), and then in the late '90s
>>> we had prohormones (which flopped generally). During that time a lot of
>>> excellent (generally old) routines became better known (Westside,
>>> Korte's 5x5 routine, Dr. Squat's routine, and 20 rep squats come to
>>> mind), but by about 2003 I haven't been in the game, or nothing
>>> promising seems to have surfaced.
>>>
>>> So, what are some scientific theories/studies that have surfaced over
>>> the past 3 or 4 years?
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Lester
>>>
>> Check out JMW's recent post regarding whey and creatine pre and post
>> workout. Not a new concept, but some confirming evidence.
>>
>> www.crossfit.com has a lot of high rep, high intensity routines which
>> might be useful depending on your goals. Tabata interval training is
>> worth looking into.
>
> Really interesting site. Thanks!
>
> (Wasn't able to find JMW's post, but it was an interesting thread)
>
> -Lester
>
Here you go- (and welcome back)

(JMW)
"For several years now, I have posted the results of a growing number
of studies which have shown that consumption of quickly absorbed
protein and highly glycemic carbohydrates near the time of heavy
resistance training will substantially increase muscle protein
synthesis. However, some folks have pissed and moaned that adequate
daily protein intake, whenever you want to consume it, will do the
same damn thing, and that studies of acute responses prove nothing.

Fine. Now we have at least one well-designed long-term (10 week)
study[1] which establishes exactly what I've been saying all along.

Subjects: 23 males, all "recreational" bodybuilders. All had trained
consistently (3-5 days/week) for at least six months. And just to be
sure the subjects were well trained, they participated in 8-12 weeks
of structured training before beginning the supplementation trial.
The subjects were matched for maximal bench press, squat, and
deadlift, then randomly assigned to two groups.

Supplement: A mix of 40g of whey, 43g of glucose, and 7g of creatine
monohydrate was used. Each subject got two doses per day of the mix,
in the amount of 1g/kg of body weight. One group (MORN-EVE) consumed
it in the morning and evening of each training day, at least five
hours away from training; the other group (PRE-POST) consumed it
immediately before and after training.

Diet: All subjects kept diet records. The total dietary consumption
of the two groups was pretty consistent (no significant differences)
as to total calories, carbohydrates, and protein, except that it's
worthwhile to note that the MORN-EVE group consumed about 10% *more*
total protein than the PRE-POST group.

Exercise Protocol: 4 times/week for 10 weeks. High intensity training
consisting primarily of compound lifts (bench press, squat, and
deadlift) with a lot of assistance/isolation exercises, mostly using
free weights.[2]

RESULTS

Body Composition: The PRE-POST group gained 2.3-3.0kg of lean body
mass and lost a few ounces of fat mass, whereas the MORN-EVE group
gained only 1.0-1.5kg of lean body mass, as well as gaining of a few
ounces of fat mass. Overall, the MORN-EVE group had an insignificant
reduction in body fat percentage, while the PRE-POST group had a
reduction in body fat of more than 1%.

Strength: The PRE-POST group gained about 12kg in 1RM bench press,
20kg in 1RM squat, and 18kg in deadlift. The MORN-EVE group gained
only about 8kg in 1RM bench press, 16kg in 1RM squat, and 15kg in
deadlift.

Muscle Composition: The PRE-POST group had increases in
cross-sectional area of type IIa and IIx (fast twitch) fibers of 25.0%
and 25.3%, respectively, as well as a 49.5% increase in contractile
proteins. The MORN-EVE group had increases in cross-sectional area of
type IIa and IIx fibers of only 17.0% and 17.7%, respectively, and a
26.3% increase in contractile proteins.

I think those are reasonably substantial numbers in support of timing
the intake of whey protein, highly glycemic carbohydrates, and
creatine.

[1] Cribb PJ, Hayes A. Effects of supplement timing and resistance
exercise on skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006
Nov;38(11):1918-25.

[2] Cribb PJ, Williams AD, Carey MF, Hayes A. The effect of whey
isolate and resistance training on strength, body composition, and
plasma glutamine. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2006 Oct;16:494-508"

"ATP*" <waxwingslain@azurepane.com> wrote in message
news:Yxzbh.326$hE2.157@newsfe11.lga...
>
> Here you go- (and welcome back)
>
> (JMW)
> "For several years now, I have posted the results of a growing number
> of studies which have shown that consumption of quickly absorbed
> protein and highly glycemic carbohydrates near the time of heavy
> resistance training will substantially increase muscle protein
> synthesis. However, some folks have pissed and moaned that adequate
> daily protein intake, whenever you want to consume it, will do the
> same damn thing, and that studies of acute responses prove nothing.
>
> Fine. Now we have at least one well-designed long-term (10 week)
> study[1] which establishes exactly what I've been saying all along.
>
> Subjects: 23 males, all "recreational" bodybuilders. All had trained
> consistently (3-5 days/week) for at least six months. And just to be
> sure the subjects were well trained, they participated in 8-12 weeks
> of structured training before beginning the supplementation trial.
> The subjects were matched for maximal bench press, squat, and
> deadlift, then randomly assigned to two groups.
>
> Supplement: A mix of 40g of whey, 43g of glucose, and 7g of creatine
> monohydrate was used. Each subject got two doses per day of the mix,
> in the amount of 1g/kg of body weight. One group (MORN-EVE) consumed
> it in the morning and evening of each training day, at least five
> hours away from training; the other group (PRE-POST) consumed it
> immediately before and after training.
>
> Diet: All subjects kept diet records. The total dietary consumption
> of the two groups was pretty consistent (no significant differences)
> as to total calories, carbohydrates, and protein, except that it's
> worthwhile to note that the MORN-EVE group consumed about 10% *more*
> total protein than the PRE-POST group.
>
> Exercise Protocol: 4 times/week for 10 weeks. High intensity training
> consisting primarily of compound lifts (bench press, squat, and
> deadlift) with a lot of assistance/isolation exercises, mostly using
> free weights.[2]
>
> RESULTS
>
> Body Composition: The PRE-POST group gained 2.3-3.0kg of lean body
> mass and lost a few ounces of fat mass, whereas the MORN-EVE group
> gained only 1.0-1.5kg of lean body mass, as well as gaining of a few
> ounces of fat mass. Overall, the MORN-EVE group had an insignificant
> reduction in body fat percentage, while the PRE-POST group had a
> reduction in body fat of more than 1%.
>
> Strength: The PRE-POST group gained about 12kg in 1RM bench press,
> 20kg in 1RM squat, and 18kg in deadlift. The MORN-EVE group gained
> only about 8kg in 1RM bench press, 16kg in 1RM squat, and 15kg in
> deadlift.
>
> Muscle Composition: The PRE-POST group had increases in
> cross-sectional area of type IIa and IIx (fast twitch) fibers of 25.0%
> and 25.3%, respectively, as well as a 49.5% increase in contractile
> proteins. The MORN-EVE group had increases in cross-sectional area of
> type IIa and IIx fibers of only 17.0% and 17.7%, respectively, and a
> 26.3% increase in contractile proteins.
>
> I think those are reasonably substantial numbers in support of timing
> the intake of whey protein, highly glycemic carbohydrates, and
> creatine.
>
> [1] Cribb PJ, Hayes A. Effects of supplement timing and resistance
> exercise on skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006
> Nov;38(11):1918-25.
>
> [2] Cribb PJ, Williams AD, Carey MF, Hayes A. The effect of whey
> isolate and resistance training on strength, body composition, and
> plasma glutamine. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2006 Oct;16:494-508"
>
>
>

Nice!

Thanks bro....hopefully I get back into the shape I was at.

-Lester