|
This is a horrible article for athletes to follow. Not only does it not provide any in-depth explanation for the methods used, there is no scientific basis or goals mentioned. There is a vaguely worded goal in the title, strength I guess, but how do we do this when the recommendations include 8-20 rep sets and circuit training? What kind of strength is worked on with this type of routine? A few more things wrong with the article:
- 1-3 sets per exercise, 10-15 exercises per workout. That is definitely in the realm of bodybuilding instead of "strength", especially when you are going anywhere from 8-20 reps per set. This is not an introduction to strength, but rather an introduction to overtraining and frying of the CNS.
-Going to muscular failure. Why is this method touted as a means of strength? This is a bodybuilding type of method, with a means of gaining hypertrophy. Not Strength. There are many other methods of lifting, such as max effort and dynamic. Not too mention many other varieties which don't include going to failure.
-"reaching muscle fatigue prior to 6 repetitions means the resistance is "too heavy" and increases orthopedic stress", Wow I almost fell out of my chair after reading this one. I guess strength traniners all over the world, including such greats like Christian Thibaudeau, Ian King, Mel Siff, Joe Defranco, and many NCAA strength coaches are all insane for inducing too much "orthopedic stress". Yep, those guys who train the best athletes in their respective sports and constantly stand above the competition are really digging themselves into a hole.
-In your exercise selection, you recommend body parts instead of actual exercises. Can you get any more bodybuilding-minded? Not to mention the blatant use of machines, even though the best strength coaches in the world advocate against the uses of machines, except in case of injury.
-I find your guideline #8 funny, "Do not Overtrain" when you are advocating an average of 30-45 sets per workout, with 8-20 reps per set. Are you basing these guidelines off of chemically enhanced individuals, or are you just pulling these numbers out of your ass?
Sorry, but I can't stand ignorance in training articles. This belongs in one of the bodybuilding mags, not an athletic training article.
__________________
6'1" 195 lbs.
[url]http://www.athletes.com/fun/brad.htm[/url]
[url]http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascitystar/living/people/teens/11327805.htm[/url]
Current Program:
In-season program
|
Linear Mode
