I like that the author stressed avoiding failure/fatigue -- because fatigue is ruinous to one's health (it puts good health at risk). And I like that he clarified his fast training as being done with proper form.
I don't like that he dismissed slow-training as muscle-magazine garbage. I disagree. His comparing of walking & jumping as being a primary difference of speed I believe is also incorrect (as in my opinion the primary difference between walking & jumping isn't speed, but rather workload).
Static/"isometric" training also leaves one feeling fresh & like a spring.
I still believe that a variety of ways are good to practice. For instance, fast training is ballistic in its nature (momentum lessening the workload throughout much of each rep) & while this has the benefit of developing nerves & promoting power, muscle-strength & growth, it has some failings: "sticking-point" & possibly tendon-strength deficiencies.
Sticking points (points in a lift where lifters tend to stop, unable to continue lifting X-amount of weight without great strain or a break in form) have been overcome with "isometrics" &/or holding a substantial weight at these weak-points for 7-to-12 seconds each (static exercise).
Tendons have been built-up using light weights with a few very-slow reps, or without weights by using "dynamic-tension," or with very-light weights using fast-but-controlled super-high reps (16-to-100 reps -- or until comfortably tired, not fatigued... be careful not to overdo here... build-up to the higher reps... & always avoid fatigue)... muscles also benefit from these exercises, though they might not hypertrophy as quickly as with some other methods (note that the sticking-point counter above has been known to pack on pounds of lean-muscle quickly while working tendons fairly-well too).
This "new way" seems fine, & feels good (so far). I like it, but it's no reason to toss out these older ways, unless you can convince me that there's harm in doing them.
Well that's my current opinion.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
As for my opinion on the website in general: it too had folks promoting a wide array of techniques (high-rep, low-rep, HIT, etc.). Again, there's no agreement on an absolute best one-way... so one is left to chose/experiment
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
P.S.: Fast-Up/Slow-Down has been around since at least the 70's -- it's not a new technique
P.S.S.: Maybe I'm a dinosaur & I just don't realize it... decide for yourselves
I don't like that he dismissed slow-training as muscle-magazine garbage. I disagree. His comparing of walking & jumping as being a primary difference of speed I believe is also incorrect (as in my opinion the primary difference between walking & jumping isn't speed, but rather workload).
Static/"isometric" training also leaves one feeling fresh & like a spring.
I still believe that a variety of ways are good to practice. For instance, fast training is ballistic in its nature (momentum lessening the workload throughout much of each rep) & while this has the benefit of developing nerves & promoting power, muscle-strength & growth, it has some failings: "sticking-point" & possibly tendon-strength deficiencies.
Sticking points (points in a lift where lifters tend to stop, unable to continue lifting X-amount of weight without great strain or a break in form) have been overcome with "isometrics" &/or holding a substantial weight at these weak-points for 7-to-12 seconds each (static exercise).
Tendons have been built-up using light weights with a few very-slow reps, or without weights by using "dynamic-tension," or with very-light weights using fast-but-controlled super-high reps (16-to-100 reps -- or until comfortably tired, not fatigued... be careful not to overdo here... build-up to the higher reps... & always avoid fatigue)... muscles also benefit from these exercises, though they might not hypertrophy as quickly as with some other methods (note that the sticking-point counter above has been known to pack on pounds of lean-muscle quickly while working tendons fairly-well too).
This "new way" seems fine, & feels good (so far). I like it, but it's no reason to toss out these older ways, unless you can convince me that there's harm in doing them.
Well that's my current opinion.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
As for my opinion on the website in general: it too had folks promoting a wide array of techniques (high-rep, low-rep, HIT, etc.). Again, there's no agreement on an absolute best one-way... so one is left to chose/experiment
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
P.S.: Fast-Up/Slow-Down has been around since at least the 70's -- it's not a new technique
P.S.S.: Maybe I'm a dinosaur & I just don't realize it... decide for yourselves
Last edited: