J-Reps results?

<div>
(Aaron_F @ Aug. 03 2006,05:15)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
(robefc @ Aug. 03 2006,10:01)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">If dave gulledge can do it then so can I!</div>
Do you have the sources he has?</div>
ah, I didn't realise dave had more 'support' than I did, b*gger!

I saw the pictures of tate on lyle's board too, beast of a man!

you ever fancy taking a break and dieting down aaron or would the possibility of losing strength stop you?

cheers

rob
 
<div>
(AShortt @ Aug. 03 2006,10:30)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I don’t think bulking is a good idea for natural trainee’s I mean going up to 15% bodyfat is fine but more than that can be detrimental long term.

The more time you spend at a fatter state the more natural this becomes for your body. The bodies main concern is homeostasis. You may well find that too much bulking and cutting and you cannot get really lean without losing ALL the muscle massed gained. That said, you would have been far better advised to stay at a lower bodyfat % and put on the muscle slower but steady and not lose it in a cut. You know like the turtle and the hair.

Regards,
Andrew
www.zone-training.net</div>
Well, I think the 15% rule will work a lot better for most than trying to stay too lean while gaining mass (e.g. ~10% bodyfat).
 
I would seriously disagree with the thought that &quot;you cannot get really lean without losing ALL the muscle massed gained&quot; because that isn't true. Given average genetics,. I and many others have successfully cut down from 15% to 10% or lower without losing much lean mass at all. In fact, people do it all the time. Unless you diet and train like a moron, it isn't that hard.
 
<div>
(Totentanz @ Aug. 03 2006,14:08)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I would seriously disagree with the thought that &quot;you cannot get really lean without losing ALL the muscle massed gained&quot; because that isn't true. Given average genetics,. I and many others have successfully cut down from 15% to 10% or lower without losing much lean mass at all. In fact, people do it all the time. Unless you diet and train like a moron, it isn't that hard.</div>
I sure get the impression that you don’t even read my posts you just scan them. I am saying that 15% is likely ok as opposed to above that. I stay at around 10% most of the time but here and there I go much lower or up to about 13%.

Regards,
net Andrew
www.zone-training.
 
You clearly said &quot;You may well find that too much bulking and cutting and you cannot get really lean without losing ALL the muscle massed gained. That said, you would have been far better advised to stay at a lower bodyfat % and put on the muscle slower but steady and not lose it in a cut. &quot;

You said that 15% might be okay, but you then basically argue that it is not okay and you should try to remain lean while you bulk, which is going to result in crappy gains unless you are genetically gifted or on drugs. You do realize it is possible to cut down from 15% or even above without losing muscle mass, right?
In fact, you are LESS likely to lose muscle mass if you are cutting down from somewhere above 15%, which is pretty much the opposite of what you said above.
 
<div>
(Totentanz @ Aug. 03 2006,15:19)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">You clearly said &quot;You may well find that too much bulking and cutting and you cannot get really lean without losing ALL the muscle massed gained. That said, you would have been far better advised to stay at a lower bodyfat % and put on the muscle slower but steady and not lose it in a cut. &quot;

You said that 15% might be okay, but you then basically argue that it is not okay and you should try to remain lean while you bulk, which is going to result in crappy gains unless you are genetically gifted or on drugs. You do realize it is possible to cut down from 15% or even above without losing muscle mass, right?
In fact, you are LESS likely to lose muscle mass if you are cutting down from somewhere above 15%, which is pretty much the opposite of what you said above.</div>
That isn’t what I, my clients or countless folks I have discussed training with have experienced, thus you are wrong and don’t know what you are talking about...right !?

It is easier to maintain the muscle gained from not going higher than around 15% because every pound you of fat you lose comes with it some muscle or the great risk of muscle loss. If you cannot gain appreciable muscle without being above 15% bodyfat then you actually don’t know what you are doing period. There is nothing magical about being fat.

What I said was: “I don’t think bulking is a good idea for natural trainee’s I mean going up to 15% bodyfat is fine but more than that can be detrimental long term”. In other words I think you may addmore muscle a bit quicker at a slightly higher B.F. % but that more than 15% is not a good idea. Why? Well you missed that part I suppose.

Going from a fit 10% to 15% is bulking in a mild sense but going over board is just dumb. I say all this because time and time again I run into people at around 15% bodyfat (a male average) who think they are more muscular than they actually are. They lean down and think they have lost tons of muscle however this isn't the case. We carry fat all over the surface of our body and thus if we don't get too fat we tend to look more muscular in everyday surroundings at around 15% than 10%. The opposite is true in pictures.

Regards,
Andrew
www.zone-training.net
 
<div>
(monkeyarms @ Aug. 03 2006,18:33)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">So the take home lesson is that fat to ripped works great, if you have good drugs?</div>
everything is better with good drugs
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">
And if so, does that mean you like slow and steady bulk and cut for naturals? Something like &quot;never go over 15% BF?&quot;</div>

for somebody who is naturally around 10-12%, somewhere around 10-14% would work pretty well
 
<div>
(AShortt @ Aug. 04 2006,04:30)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I don’t think bulking is a good idea for natural trainee’s I mean going up to 15% bodyfat is fine but more than that can be detrimental long term.</div>
absolute rubbish
 
<div>
(robefc @ Aug. 04 2006,06:29)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">you ever fancy taking a break and dieting down aaron or would the possibility of losing strength stop you?</div>
I am cutting, but not for any major changes at this stage.

One day, but at the moment - not even worried about abs
 
<div>
(Aaron_F @ Aug. 04 2006,04:31)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
(AShortt @ Aug. 04 2006,04:30)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I don’t think bulking is a good idea for natural trainee’s I mean going up to 15% bodyfat is fine but more than that can be detrimental long term.</div>
absolute rubbish</div>
You just said as much in your previous post.

Regards,
Andrew
www.zone-training.net
 
I may be over 15%, I don't know. But it isn't FAT that's given me around a 30% strength increase. And I've tried to bulk/cut at maintenance cals for too many years without results, including doing your &quot;J&quot; reps, if they're the 21's, and many other shock techniques.
The thing that made me big is food and HST. That's all the results I need when people have stopped asking me if I work out and now ask me if I'm on steroids.

End of discussion here.
 
<div>
(AShortt @ Aug. 05 2006,04:13)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
(Aaron_F @ Aug. 04 2006,04:31)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
(AShortt @ Aug. 04 2006,04:30)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I don’t think bulking is a good idea for natural trainee’s I mean going up to 15% bodyfat is fine but more than that can be detrimental long term.</div>
absolute rubbish</div>
You just said as much in your previous post.

Regards,
Andrew
www.zone-training.net</div>
No, I said a range would be fine, which is a complete and utterly different thing than saying that gaining more is detrimental long term, which is absolutely garbage.
 
<div>
(quadancer @ Aug. 05 2006,04:27)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I may be over 15%, I don't know. But it isn't FAT that's given me around a 30% strength increase. And I've tried to bulk/cut at maintenance cals for too many years without results, including doing your &quot;J&quot; reps, if they're the 21's, and many other shock techniques.
The thing that made me big is food and HST. That's all the results I need when people have stopped asking me if I work out and now ask me if I'm on steroids.

End of discussion here.</div>
Whoa, no end of discussion ;^), JReps aren;t 21's or Stage Reps, or inside sets or partials and you don'r even know your bodyfat %. If you are happy being smooth and taking up more space fine and dandy.

Regards,
Andrew
www.zone-training.net
 
<div>
(Aaron_F @ Aug. 05 2006,04:38)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">No, I said a range would be fine, which is a complete and utterly different thing than saying that gaining more is detrimental long term, which is absolutely garbage.</div>
Garbage ay!? How scientific...are you saying that higher than 14% would be better?

Why does everyone want to be so chubby around here? I know that sounds like a totally loaded jab but I am serious. Don't you folks want to look fit, see cuts, abs etc? Sure sounds like &quot;sick of small guy syndrome&quot; to me.

Smells like a bunch of really good targets for supplement sales.

Regards,
Andrew
www.zone-training.net
 
Four pages and no description of what a Jrep is and how it's done.

So what is it and how can I do one?

And please, I'm not asking for a rant on how great it is or what it is not.
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">
Four pages and no description of what a Jrep is and how it's done.

So what is it and how can I do one?

And please, I'm not asking for a rant on how great it is or what it is not.</div>
It's copyrighted. We have to respect that, regardless of whether we feel it does or doesn't work excellently.

You'll have to buy the book or go to IART if you want to hear the details from them.

This &quot;why can't you just tell me&quot; thing has already happened before, with the founder, Brian D Johnston himself (he has an account here), naturally refusing to disclose details in this board. That's his right. You can't expect Mr. Shortt to violate that. Not only would that expose him to legal action, but that would also be highly unethical for him as he is certified by IART.

We don't have to like that, that's just how some things are.
 
Or, alternatively, a &quot;blowreps&quot; (c/o Mikeynov) search here.

If you can afford it, just so you can see/hear both sides of the equation/discussion, you should also check out their book.

I'm just trying to be impartial. We believe fully in HST, and we use science. They also believe fully in their product, and they also use science. The issue really isn't which one has more scientific backing or which is &quot;more&quot; correct. If we disagree, then that's ok, but as long as they don't disrespect us, then no reason for us to act like we were bitten by a rabid dog, too, as that would be poor advertisement for our community.
 
<div>
(monkeyarms @ Aug. 05 2006,11:55)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">A search for &quot;jreps&quot; at http://bodyrecomposition.com/forums/ has proven to be enlightening.</div>
Look Here.

This is an older thread from earlier this year in which some of what J-Reps is or isn't was discussed or wasn't (because of BDJ). The discussions also lead to a few emails to me from BDJ, not entirely pleasant either but oh well, life goes on.
rock.gif
 

So as JV pointed out to truly know one would need to acquire the book. I believe BDJ also released a companion book (or is getting ready too) saying it's the more advanced insights, calling it &quot;zone training&quot; or something to that effect.

I believe MikeyNov (Blownpanis) also pointed to this thread at BR.com which also eventually got &quot;edited&quot; as well.
 
<div>
(Dan Moore @ Aug. 05 2006,10:16)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Here.

This is an older thread from earlier this year in which some of what J-Reps is or isn't was discussed or wasn't (because of BDJ). The discussions also lead to a few emails to me from BDJ, not entirely pleasant either but oh well, life goes on.
rock.gif


So as JV pointed out to truly know one would need to acquire the book. I believe BDJ also released a companion book (or is getting ready too) saying it's the more advanced insights, calling it &quot;zone training&quot; or something to that effect.

I believe MikeyNov (Blownpanis) also pointed to this thread at BR.com which also eventually got &quot;edited&quot; as well.</div>
Wow, BDJ is a piece of work. Being an ass is bad business.

No way I'd give that guy my money. I'll just wait for his ebooks to hit the torrents.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top