max-stim

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I laughingly told a guy at the gym the other day that even the cows in the Chick-Fil-A ads are giving good bodybuilding advice for free. Each more chikin'</div>

Lol. That's hilarious. &quot;So you want advice on how to get big? How to get freaky big? Look to the Chic-fil-a sign. It will light your path.&quot; LOL.
 
<div>
(QuantumPositron @ Jan. 22 2008,00:53)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">MS does have the HST principles in it.

&lt;snip&gt;

What is important to understand about Max-Stim is its premise that muscular fatigue does not cause big muscles. Tension, not fatigue (or &quot;burn&quot; or &quot;pump&quot;), causes big muscles. This is why in Max-Stim you put the weight down after every rep. Doing so gives the muscle time to recover. As a result you can do more reps. More reps equals more tension. More tension equals more muscle growth. This is the essential theory behind Max-Stim and is what separates it from all other weight training systems, HST included.</div>
I have had a lot of luck using Max-Stim. I have found that it helps me to regulate fatigue. As a result I am able to do more reps, thus I get more Time Under Tension.

As QP points out, it is not fatigue, nor burn, nor pump, nor any other of the bro logic favorites that causes growth. Rather it is the Time Under Tension that does the trick. Max-Stim allows for significantly increased TUT.
 
<div>
(quadancer @ Jan. 21 2008,19:51)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Increased hypertrophy? Over what, HST? Show me where this is proven, even on the MS website. I just didn't see that question answered to my satisfaction yet.</div>
Ask Dan Moore, the man behind &quot;Hypertrophy Research&quot; and Max-Stimulation. Higher load doesn't always produce more hypertrophy. Look at Power Factor Training that works out using shorter ROM with partial reps. Max-Stim brings the same ROM into place and provides longer TUT.
 
<div>
(colby2152 @ Jan. 22 2008,14:41)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
(quadancer @ Jan. 21 2008,19:51)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Increased hypertrophy? Over what, HST? Show me where this is proven, even on the MS website. I just didn't see that question answered to my satisfaction yet.</div>
Ask Dan Moore, the man behind &quot;Hypertrophy Research&quot; and Max-Stimulation.  Higher load doesn't always produce more hypertrophy.  Look at Power Factor Training that works out using shorter ROM with partial reps.  Max-Stim brings the same ROM into place and provides longer TUT.</div>
First to address Quad, and he knows this already as he has been spending some time over at MS.

He is right there is not enough evidence (as in testimonials for MS). Could it be that it's too cumbersome? Maybe? Could be that human nature just doesn't allow us to work with any given plan of action for long enough? Could be? So until there are some users of MS who truly will stick with it long enough and also post their results I can surely see why Quad said what he did. Scientific Muscle aside of course as he has probably been the most dedicated to date.

Colby is absolutely correct, it's not only the load but the amount of work done with the load, both external work and internal, in fact internal is probably more important than external which is why occlusion is showing some of the changes in CSA it is but the jury is still out.

This is also why I don't recommend or see it useful to do 100% 1 RM singles. Granted the load is maximal but the risks associated, not only in injury potential but in some negative signalling as well, make this idea not the best for the needs of hypertrophy.
 
After arguing with my wife for half an hour over your experiment, let me get your back, Dan.
Dan is doing an experiment on himself to settle the issue for himself, although I'd tend to believe his results at large, since it goes like this:
One arm HST, Other arm MS, ten weeks was it?, same loads, but different principle only. Both arms get the same nutrition, sleep, external activity, and so forth, so I'd say this is a very fair way to assimilate things. Measurements and logs will be in a locked thread and discussions are allowed later. WAY cool.
cool.gif

The temptation to modify by cluster or M-times with MS is huge - moreso than HST I think, due to it's singular nature. Maybe we think &quot;how can anything that simple work?&quot;
...as the lightbulb comes on...
 
<div>
(Dan Moore @ Jan. 22 2008,06:59)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">This is also why I don't recommend or see it useful to do 100% 1 RM singles. Granted the load is maximal but the risks associated, not only in injury potential but in some negative signalling as well, make this idea not the best for the needs of hypertrophy.</div>
I 100% agree with you Dan.

And well you are way more respected than I on hypertrophy and training
biggrin.gif
....however I said this exact same statement a month or so ago and lots of people thought I was wrong talking about the risks vs return of singles
rock.gif
 
HST is a set of principles. Those principles can be applied to any training program. This fact is so easily dismissed and HST is so easily mistaken for just another rep scheme or just another exercise list. I wonder if it should be written in big bold letters on the front page. &quot;HST is misunderstood, aw shucks&quot; Max-Stim is a fatigue management technique. Combine the two and the application of HST principles is enhanced through the application of Max-Stim. Bear in mind that Max-Stim allows heavier loads, more reps or both which translates into more growth stimulus and a longer load progression and/or greater progression steps.

It's all good I say.
 
My as yet unanswered query is one for the labcoats: how much M-time is the maximum for recieving the benefits of hypertrophy? Could you say, put a minute between reps? Two? Ten or an hour? Or is the 50 minute protein synthesis still a limitation here?
I actually heard once of a guy who was doing a pullup every time he walked by the bar, and did curls and stuff all day. I never heard what happened from it though, or if he used progression and the things we know are necessary. I guess you could call that MAAAAAAAX Stim.
 
<div>
(Dan Moore @ Jan. 22 2008,18:59)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Scientific Muscle aside of course as he has probably been the most dedicated to date.</div>
Yeah, sorry I haven't been the best either, I am always screwing around with my routine and trying different stuff, bulking and cutting, etc.... its just my nature, if I had stuck with your original program from day one, god knows how big I'd be. But hey, that just me, the eternal lab-rat tweaker.
tounge.gif
 
Has anyone had the experience that Max Stim took the fun out of training? I need to say clearly here that I have not tried Max Stim seriously, having only played with it a little, but my 1st impression was that constantly racking &amp; unracking everything was cumbersome &amp; tedious. Anyone else found this, &amp; does it go away? Or maybe I'm flying solo on this one...
 
No, I'm in the same boat, but I have enough determination to work something for a while...once I'm motivated...and I'm watching to see who's getting results and how for just that reason. It's not time for me to do it, using a &quot;play&quot; gym at work mostly, but I'll give it a cycle someday. Otherwise, how will I ever know if my body likes it or not?
Sometimes we just have to grit our teeth and deal with stuff. If I can do pain, I guess I can do boredom.
laugh.gif
 
<div>
(quadancer @ Jan. 22 2008,21:54)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">My as yet unanswered query is one for the labcoats: how much M-time is the maximum for recieving the benefits of hypertrophy? Could you say, put a minute between reps? Two? Ten or an hour? Or is the 50 minute protein synthesis still a limitation here?
I actually heard once of a guy who was doing a pullup every time he walked by the bar, and did curls and stuff all day. I never heard what happened from it though, or if he used progression and the things we know are necessary. I guess you could call that MAAAAAAAX Stim.</div>
Sounds like the Poliquin One Day Arm Cure to me...
 
<div>
(quadancer @ Jan. 22 2008,19:16)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Dan is doing an experiment on himself to settle the issue for himself, although I'd tend to believe his results at large, since it goes like this:
One arm HST, Other arm MS, ten weeks was it?, same loads, but different principle only. Both arms get the same nutrition, sleep, external activity, and so forth, so I'd say this is a very fair way to assimilate things. Measurements and logs will be in a locked thread and discussions are allowed later.</div>
Lady-in-the-Water-20.jpg
 
<div>
(quadancer @ Jan. 22 2008,19:16)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">After arguing with my wife for half an hour over your experiment, let me get your back, Dan.
Dan is doing an experiment on himself to settle the issue for himself, although I'd tend to believe his results at large, since it goes like this:
One arm HST, Other arm MS, ten weeks was it?, same loads, but different principle only. Both arms get the same nutrition, sleep, external activity, and so forth, so I'd say this is a very fair way to assimilate things. Measurements and logs will be in a locked thread and discussions are allowed later. WAY cool.  
cool.gif

The temptation to modify by cluster or M-times with MS is huge - moreso than HST I think, due to it's singular nature. Maybe we think &quot;how can anything that simple work?&quot;
...as the lightbulb comes on...</div>
First, arguing with the wifey isn't good, you should know better
biggrin.gif
But I'm curious as to what the argument was?

Here is the post at my site and what I am going to be doing.

I am not trying to prove MS is more effective than anything else I am trying to show that fatigue accumulation is irrelevant though. And of course I know my N=1 is irrelevant so perhaps some other takers out there will do the same.

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Here's what I'm going to do. Since I constantly hear &quot;is MS as effective as HST?&quot; I'm doing this little experiment. My Right arm (dominant) I will do HST for 8 weeks. My left arm I will do MS. In essence I will match total reps in both arms.

So here is the plan

Concentration curls only. 3X week (Mon-Wens-Fri)

HST Arm
Weeks 1and 2 (2 sets): [15RM-25%]-[15Rm-20%]-[15Rm-15%]-[15Rm-10%]-[15Rm-5%]-[15Rm]
Weeks 3 and 4 (2 sets): [10RM-25%]-[10Rm-20%]-[10Rm-15%]-[10Rm-10%]-[10Rm-5%]-[10Rm]
Weeks 5and 6 (2 sets): [5RM-25%]-[5Rm-20%]-[5Rm-15%]-[5Rm-10%]-[5Rm-5%]-[5Rm]
Weeks 7and 8 (2 sets): [5RM]-[5Rm]-[5Rm]-[5Rm]-[5Rm]-[5Rm]

MS Arm -M-Time 10 to 20 secs
Weeks 1and 2 (20 reps): [10RM-25%]-[10Rm-25%]-[10Rm-25%]-[10Rm]-[10Rm]-[10rm]
Weeks 3 and 4 (20 reps): [10RM+5%]-[10Rm+5%]-[10Rm+5%]-[10Rm+10%]-[10Rm+10%]-[10rm+10%]
Weeks 5and 6 (10 reps): [5RM-25%]-[5Rm-25%]-[5Rm-25%]-[5Rm]-[5Rm]-[5Rm]
Weeks 7and 8 (10 reps): [5Rm+5%]-[5Rm+5%]-[5Rm+5%]-[5Rm+10%]-[5Rm+10%]-[5Rm+10%]

In MS I advocate starting at 75% of your 10RM and not use your 15RM at all so I am not doing the 15's in the MS Arm.</div>
 
<div>
(colby2152 @ Jan. 23 2008,10:21)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Are you already performing this experiment Dan?</div>
Testing maxes, tonight, tommorrow and friday, start monday.


Tunnelrat posted this on my site and I found it amazing so I'm sharing.

Watch the dude in the white sleeveless, he can't take his eyes off the dude.

Deadlift -- 405 x 30
 
Good stuff.. what do you think about his form. It looks like he has a slightly rounded back on the eccentric portion of the reps.
 
<div>
(colby2152 @ Jan. 23 2008,10:30)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Good stuff.. what do you think about his form.  It looks like he has a slightly rounded back on the eccentric portion of the reps.</div>
This guy is relatively tight comparitively. I've seen a lot worse rounded backs. Also remember MS doesn't prevent fatigue it only manages it, so I'm pretty sure by the 30th, he is zonked.
 
<div>
(quadancer @ Jan. 22 2008,21:54)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">My as yet unanswered query is one for the labcoats: how much M-time is the maximum for recieving the benefits of hypertrophy? Could you say, put a minute between reps? Two? Ten or an hour? Or is the 50 minute protein synthesis still a limitation here?
I actually heard once of a guy who was doing a pullup every time he walked by the bar, and did curls and stuff all day. I never heard what happened from it though, or if he used progression and the things we know are necessary. I guess you could call that MAAAAAAAX Stim.</div>
Even the labcoats don't know yet. Using inserted rest and it's implications is something that has not been well researched but it is beginning to be looked at. Unfortunately there are so many preconceived ideas that inserted rest goes against that many researchers are reluctant to look at it and I think it's going to take a well designed study that then introduces it as viable for others to begin to pick up on it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top