Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Less gym time, same results: Why ‘lowering’ weights is all you need to do

ecu.edu.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 219 posts

Re: Less gym time, same results: Why ‘lowering’ weights is all you need to do

#71

Post by jimt1234 »

humanlion87 wrote: post #45
Octabrain wrote: post #40

From my personal experience, for the majority of people, I would recommend to stay away from classic body building weight trainning. I trainned that way for several years in my early twenties (back then, I was even a certified body bulding trainner) and the overload in my joints was a recipe for disaster + the kind of body I developed was disfunctional for activities other than weights themselves. The excercises I've…

May I know what you are referring to as the "classic body building" exercises. To me the classic ones are squat, bench and deadlift. I am curious why you think it's a disaster.

Those are powerlifting exercises. In fact, that's the exact order of events in most powerlifting competitions.

I competed in powerlifting in my 20s; my life revolved around squat/bench/deadlift. I enjoyed it, but yeah, he's right: training like that is very specific, like anything else, I suppose. I could squat, bench and deadlift a ton, but literally anyone could beat me walking up the stairs, or even arm-wrestling. The first time I tried CrossFit, it nearly killed me. And yeah, powerlifting tore my body to shit. Back then, the only time I wasn't in pain, was when I was lifting.

Re: Less gym time, same results: Why ‘lowering’ weights is all you need to do

#72

Post by trentgreene »

Hi, worth mentioning that you should explicitly ignore this advice if you’re lifting heavy deadlifts. Eventually you will get to a point on that exercise where your concentric pull can put up vastly more weight than you can safely lower to the ground in a slow manner. Above 3-4 plates and you probably should be dropping the weight. Maybe even less. Your lumbar will thank you.

Re: Less gym time, same results: Why ‘lowering’ weights is all you need to do

#73

Post by temprose »

stavros wrote: post #60
mrob wrote: post #15

I used eccentric muscle contractions to gain enough strength to do pull-ups when I was too weak to do even one. I stood on a chair to get into the top position, then lowered myself as slowly as I could. The exercise was effective, and after a few weeks I could do full pull-ups without the chair.

The best thing I did for my pullups was lose weight. It's amazing what a difference losing 20 lbs will do for your ability to do pullups.

For me it's the reverse, I gained weight and noticed how much harder it is. Used to be able to do like 5-6 unassisted pullups and now that I've been bulking and gained like 20 lbs, it's a bit harder. Too be honest, most of my weight gain is probably creatine lol.

Re: Less gym time, same results: Why ‘lowering’ weights is all you need to do

#74

Post by stavros »

temprose wrote: post #73
stavros wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best thing I did for my pullups was lose weight. It's amazing what a difference losing 20 lbs will do for your ability to do pullups.

For me it's the reverse, I gained weight and noticed how much harder it is. Used to be able to do like 5-6 unassisted pullups and now that I've been bulking and gained like 20 lbs, it's a bit harder. Too be honest, most of my weight gain is probably creatine lol.

To be honest, that's what actually happened to me too, though with me it's fat.

Re: Less gym time, same results: Why ‘lowering’ weights is all you need to do

#76

Post by wnolens »

nordsieck wrote: post #48
malshe wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for this tip! I am trying to build upper body strength and pull-ups kill me

> I am trying to build upper body strength and pull-ups kill me IMO, the best thing is if you have access to an assisted pull up machine or lat pull down. Bands can work alright (and they're cheap!), but assisted pull ups and/or lat pull down allow you finely tune your progressive overload. The general problem with bands (and spring type resistance in general) is that the non-linear resistance makes it more difficult…

I'd have to disagree. To me a negative is worth more than an assisted rep because you get to practice the real range of motion and activate all muscles (incl. stabilizers).

Assisted forms ultimately "assist" you at some fixed point which alters the path you would take if hanging, often removing your core entirely.

Also, I'd take the non-linear resistance of bands over the absence of core activation from a pull-up machine or the very different lat pulldown motion.

Re: Less gym time, same results: Why ‘lowering’ weights is all you need to do

#79

Post by glfharris »

runnerup wrote: post #50
humanlion87 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

May I know what you are referring to as the "classic body building" exercises. To me the classic ones are squat, bench and deadlift. I am curious why you think it's a disaster.

Those aren’t very classic for bodybuilding, rather they are the ones for powerlifting. Bodybuilding uses a very wide variety of movements incorporating dumbbells, barbells, and machines to train every single muscle periodically (even focusing on little tiny ones no one else would care about). Here’s a good example of a bodybuilding training routine: https://thinksteroids.com/community/threads/first-bodybuildi... That…

I'm not sure linking to a post detailing the PEDs alongside their routine is typical of the average person who does bodybuilding style training.

Re: Less gym time, same results: Why ‘lowering’ weights is all you need to do

#80

Post by eggsmediumrare »

robomartin wrote: post #34

Yeah, well. Here's a concept: Every single researcher who wants to conduct these kinds of experiments needs to, as a prerequisite, read Starting Strength [0] and then go to a certified gym for a year or more before even remotely being able to say anything useful about the subject. Yes, sure, Starting Strength isn't perfect. I am not presenting it as the sum of all knowledge and the one-and-only true anything. However…

Starting Strength is fine, but would be even better if it was a shorthand in your comment for "training intelligently," as this would then include any progressive program involving compound resistance training and conditioning.

Not sure wtf I'd do with 120s. Too heavy to put overhead for much more than a rep or two unless you're an absolute animal. Too light for anything else, other than maybe bench I guess?

Post reply on HN