Anyone ever heard of the Colorado Experiment

Discussion in 'Basic Training Principles and Methods' started by imported_dxwallace, May 20, 2008.

  1. Has anyone ever heard of the Colorado experiment.

    http://www.bodybuildingfanatic.com/coloradoexperiment.htm

    In my quest in this "holy graile" of the art of bulking up I ran across it.  Although it took place back in the 70's it seemed revolutionary. The guys worked out once every other day with great results. Unfourtunately they don't specify any specifics of the training routines. I read in one of Bryan's posts that many and most programs touch upon some part of the HST elephant, although none of them encompass the whole thing.  I went from looking into the Colorado Experiment into HIT style training, which got me ripped, but I actually lost 10 pounds.

    Now here I am, and I think im in the right place
     
  2. stingblood

    stingblood New Member

    <div>
    (dxwallace @ May 20 2008,11:00)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Has anyone ever heard of the Colorado experiment.

    http://www.bodybuildingfanatic.com/coloradoexperiment.htm

    In my quest in this &quot;holy graile&quot; of the art of bulking up I ran across it.  Although it took place back in the 70's it seemed revolutionary. The guys worked out once every other day with great results. Unfourtunately they don't specify any specifics of the training routines. I read in one of Bryan's posts that many and most programs touch upon some part of the HST elephant, although none of them encompass the whole thing.  I went from looking into the Colorado Experiment into HIT style training, which got me ripped, but I actually lost 10 pounds.

    Now here I am, and I think im in the right place</div>
    Man! This is crazy!

    I mean is the nautilus equipment that is bringing these gains or is the way of training (whihc doesn't seem to be so revolutionary)....

    Dan where are you?

    How is that possible to gain so much size in that time?!

    I don't understand well the explanation the range of motion and flexibility are the keys and how free weight training limits this and Nautilus equipment is better at this?
    Quoted:

    Conventional forms of exercise provide none of these requirements; the results being that . . . muscles are not worked throughout a full range of possible movement . . . resistance is limited to an amount that can be moved in the weakest position . . . little or nothing is done in the way of improving flexibility, since there is no resistance in the fully extended position . . . and no resistance is provided in the fully contracted position.

    Only Nautilus equipment was used in the Colorado Experiment; equipment designed to provide all of the requirements for full range, rotary form, automatically variable, direct resistance.


    Does that mean that when I do barbell curls with the EZ bar at the end of contraction there is no more resistance applied to my biceps and that the most weight I can put on the bar is the one I can lift at the start of the lift (hence at the full extended position) and that it limits the weight I can put on the bar finally???....any thoughts guy here??

    It seems to make sense to me that if we have resistance during the full ROM than we will grow better
     
  3. Totentanz

    Totentanz Super Moderator Staff Member

    This has been discussed ad nauseum. Use the search button, you'll find a lot.

    Don't worry, you'll never be able to reproduce these results.
     
  4. I hear you fellows............
     
  5. stingblood

    stingblood New Member

    <div>
    (Totentanz @ May 21 2008,7:22)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">This has been discussed ad nauseum.  Use the search button, you'll find a lot.

    Don't worry, you'll never be able to reproduce these results.</div>
    Why can't we reproduce these results? Could you explain?
     
  6. leegee38

    leegee38 Member

    <div>
    (stingblood @ May 21 2008,10:11)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Why can't we reproduce these results? Could you explain?</div>
    1. Casey Viator is a genetic freak.

    2.  He had weighed a lean 210+ previously, so he was re-gaining muscle, not putting it on for the first time.

    3.  He is a genetic freak.

    4.  He got sick after an allergic reaction to a shot he received after an accident at work.

    5.  He is a genetic freak

    6.  He purposely dieted down further after getting sick.

    7.  He is a genetic freak

    8.  He stuffed himself with about 12,000 calories per day during the experiment and flatly says he never felt closer to death than during that month.

    9.  Did I mention Casey is a genetic freak?
     
  7. Totentanz

    Totentanz Super Moderator Staff Member

    Yeah, all that.

    On top of that, he was probably using a boatload of drugs, despite the fact that they deny this. He was obviously a previous drug user at the very least.

    This was a very, very special circumstance used dishonestly by Arthur Jones to try and prove that this stuff works. Strange that no one has been able to reproduce the results since.
     
  8. Bulldog

    Bulldog Active Member

    <div>
    (Totentanz @ May 21 2008,12:53)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Strange that no one has been able to reproduce the results since.</div>
    Not really. [​IMG]
     
  9. Lol

    Lol Super Moderator Staff Member

    Stingblood, Darden's use of this example in a lot of his writing espousing the virtues of HIT is what made me think it was genuine when I first asked about it here a few years ago. I should have known better. I expect he has raised the hopes of a lot of young, inexperienced trainees this way. You live and learn, as they say. Thankfully, you found this site and now you can learn without a lot of the BS that abounds elsewhere.
     
  10. Yeah you live and learn. I think I have the gift of moving towards the right information, weeding out good-sounding nonsence. It has really paid off from the nutritional side of things.

    The Colorado Experiment and HIT got me thinking that there must be something to this concep of training freqently.

    When I got to this site I could see why my frequent High intensity , but short, training sessions didn't work.

    When you jump into something there is nothing you can do but see what happens.  Like I said before I got my waist back down to 30&quot; from 32.5&quot; and looking pretty cut for a 46 year old. Being tall and slim however, I am the opposite of most people who can't get the bodyfat off. But  I calculate 10 pounds of bodyfat lost and my weight went from 203 down to 189 with HIT training. The funny thing is I'm stronger though.

    I sense that HST will be the missing link for me because of how in tune I am with working out and nutrition. I just never how the muscle mechanism really worked. After one last desparate attempt to find how to bulk up, I found this site my googling hypertrophy.

    Can't wait to see how it works out.

    I love it when people do unbiased serious research on a subject, thanks Blade, Bryan
     
  11. redrooster

    redrooster New Member

    Most of what said here is quite correct.

    Viator had an accident and could not lift so he had lost alot of his muscle mass. Additionally Jones had him diet down to the point where was eating a ridiculously small amount of calories a day. When the experiment was started he had lost 33 pounds from his previous weight.

    So while his stats are still astounding its not too hard to believe one could potentially gain back their 33 lbs plus another 12 inside a month, particularly if all you did was workout, eat and sleep.

    I dont really believe Viator was on steroids. Jones would have killed him as it would have negated the entire point of the experiment. Additionally when you understand the affect of gaining back lost muscle its really not needed.

    Some unscrupulous people have used this routine etc... as a means to sell the public something it was not- the holy grail of workouts. Easy way to make a quick buck...

    The experiment was set up by Jones as an experiment in muscle memory proving that muscle gain quickly getting back to where they were before, something we all know to be true. This seems to go unoticed or unblished. Jones did use his equipment and that was always part of the equation but he was a man of science and was proving something larger than marketing his machines. Many if not most of the exercises used were total negatives which Jones had a penchant for, not nautilus equipment.

    What most dont know is that Jones too was a participant in this experiment and gained a great deal, the exact amount of lean gain escapes me but it was either 18 or 28 lbs lean muscle gain.

    The bottom line with this type of thing &quot;get big fast&quot; mentality is that it is not tenable to keep gaining at this pace and in fact this quick gaining will lead to overtraining quickly. So dont look for the maximum gain in the shortest time, look for the best sustainable gains you can achieve. look for optimal over maximal.

    RR
     
  12. Totentanz

    Totentanz Super Moderator Staff Member

    I don't want to open a can of worms or anything, but... you can believe that Viator was not a steroid user if you want, however I have never seen a true natural reach his size. If you look up any of his pictures on google, you'll see that he is clearly not a natural. It's possible that he didn't use anything during the colorado experiment, but I'd be extremely skeptical. Further, Jones position that steroids are actually bad for muscle growth was obviously retarded and probably just a spin to keep people from believing that steroids were involved in any of his training.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  13. redrooster

    redrooster New Member

    Let me rephrase that.

    I dont think he was using during the experiment.

    Before and again after -  yes.

    That back pose is awesome. To me this era was the best in terms of size and symetry.

    A little deca 'll do ya.

    And as far as steroids and Jones are concerned your probably right. He had to know his guys were using, as you point out naturals dont get that big. Jones was many things but stupid wasnt one of them.

    In Jones own lingo &quot;only a fool or a fraud&quot; would deny these guys were using.

    RR
     
  14. adb1x1

    adb1x1 Member

    Interestingly, Mike Mentzer said that he was using steroids during this 'experiment'.

    It was in one of his later books. Can't remember the name of it at the moment.
     
  15. redrooster

    redrooster New Member

    Its possible, Mike might have been in a position to know.

    Mike got REAAAALLLYY weird there for awhile.

    He began insisting that Arthur Jones was God- literally ,and that he was his &quot;son&quot;.

    He was kicked off nautilus grounds at the gate claiming to be Arthur Jones Jr.

    Im not sure what Ayn Rand would say about that....

    RR
     
  16. dkm1987

    dkm1987 New Member

    So many problems with that &quot;Experiment&quot; it amazes me people even read it.
     

Share This Page