Where you at?
appreciate it very much.
You kick ass my man. respect [url]http://forums.rxmuscle.com/showthread.php?t=33455[/url]
cool, man. nice chattin.
you reminded me of how the evolution of training programs are deterred by tradition, drugs, and applications from science. tradition is incredibly controlling. we can never look beyond well-held beliefs. e.g., weider principles. drugs have ruined the evolution and understanding or training because we know that no matter what training program you subscribe to- everything works with aas. lastly, science is hard. the application of it in the real world is friggin hard. how do you use 'power' in your training program?
yes. these tweaks likely changes the 'label' of the training program. thats my point. maybe the labels arent what is important but the principles and the procedures that derive from the principles. an obvious element that is valid of dc is importance of progressive loads. but, most training programs include progressive loads so dc wouldnt be anything novel comparatively. and using frequent use reps to failiure is misapplication of progressive loads. notice how advanced trainees will stay on set loads/weights forever believing one day with failure they will garner enough strength for 1 or 2 more reps.
No, according to Dante and others these tweaks are enough to not call it DC. I did follow the thread about fascia stretching. The other thread had a good article by Jones that I missed,thanks for that. Dc is by no means close to being a perfect system,but in my opinion has certain obvious/not so obvious elements that are very effective. The hst thread also closes with a comment from you regarding power/acceleration,this is in my opinion also a very neglected aspect of training which could have a drastic effect on muscle size.
thanks for the feedback. if we take out some key features of dc, then is it dc? failure can be productive ,but must be cycled systematically. did you catch the following threads: [URL]http://forums.rxmuscle.com/showthread.php?t=26828&highlight=hypertrophy+specific+training[/URL] [URL]http://forums.rxmuscle.com/showthread.php?t=23221[/URL] just realized that ive interacted with homonculus. anyway, im open to investigate dc further.
Well,first off I tend to agree with what you said about the stretching part. Anecdotally I can say I have not experienced any significant effect from it,other then the first weeks. Second of all on the going to failure part,I also agree that going to complete failure like the system states,is actually counterproductive in the long run. The cruise periods on DC are not enough to aid the problem on the long run by a long shot. But I do have to be honest in that it did give me good gains,I still prefer to train in a similair fashion (without the stretches,and without going to complete failure,and some other minor tweaks) On a side note I think people need to adjust to the system to make it work for them and this might take awhile neurologically and physiologically to adapt. Just my two cents,but please dont take me for one of those mindless skinnyfat dc parrots from that board. Thats one of the reasons I got here in the first place.
whats up, abraxas. i have multiple issues with doggcrapp and ill just speak to a couple. the program seems to to based on strength-based training not hypertrophy. e.g., reps to failure or fatigue. of course id critic hd/hit for this as well. then all the fascia stretching. i can go on and on about this. its a misapplication of basic research that cannot be applied to the real world. well at least how its presented by doggcrapp. of course i can critic fst7 for similar errors. whats your take on doggcrapp?