*Official* Work Out Thread

[Rowand44]

And when that happens, what would be better(to do first at least)....Keep the same set up but increase the time, or do the squats/ropes/jj/ropes as a straight set then rest?

 

I'm new to this HIIT stuff.

Get to that point first man, it will take a minute.

 

 

[dasox24]

And when that happens, what would be better(to do first at least)....Keep the same set up but increase the time, or do the squats/ropes/jj/ropes as a straight set then rest?

 

I'm new to this HIIT stuff.

To be honest, I don't know too much about high intensity interval training. But I would think that you'd want to keep the same setup, but increase the time/reps. Of course, it probably wouldn't hurt to mix it up occasionally and do the straight circuit with no rest. Changing it up can shock the muscles and make sure you don't get too stagnant with the same old routine.

 

Edit: I realized I misunderstood your question with my first response.

Edited February 21, 2014 by dasox24

[Reddy]

Just grabbed X3,

 

but question - anyone ever read 4 Hour Body? It's.... intriguing to say the least

[Rowand44]

but question - anyone ever read 4 Hour Body? It's.... intriguing to say the least

Never heard of it, what's the gist?

[Reddy]

Never heard of it, what's the gist?

Basically that you can completely change your body (recomp, lose weight, build mass) in 4 hours a month total gym or workout time. I've never been one to look for shortcuts, but the science behind this is actually pretty compelling.

 

Essentially the idea is the Minimum Effective Dose of exercise to stimulate results since more =/= better when it comes to exercise. So for me looking to add mass, all I need to do is eat a lot and work out JUST ENOUGH to produce a growth response in my muscles - essentially ~30 minutes of heavy lifting to failure, twice a week. Since muscles grow at REST, you fatigue them just enough to create that chemical response in your body then you eat like crazy and rest more often than you work out. The author gained 34 pounds of muscle in 28 days without steroids or anything questionable.

 

I haven't read a lot of the other sections since I'm not personally interested in weight loss, and I know this post doesn't actually go in depth about the science, but if you wanna check it out it's written by Tim Ferriss, and while I was pretty skeptical when a buddy mentioned it to me, it really is pretty intriguing when you get into it.

[Y2HH]

Basically that you can completely change your body (recomp, lose weight, build mass) in 4 hours a month total gym or workout time. I've never been one to look for shortcuts, but the science behind this is actually pretty compelling.

 

Essentially the idea is the Minimum Effective Dose of exercise to stimulate results since more =/= better when it comes to exercise. So for me looking to add mass, all I need to do is eat a lot and work out JUST ENOUGH to produce a growth response in my muscles - essentially ~30 minutes of heavy lifting to failure, twice a week. Since muscles grow at REST, you fatigue them just enough to create that chemical response in your body then you eat like crazy and rest more often than you work out. The author gained 34 pounds of muscle in 28 days without steroids or anything questionable.

 

I haven't read a lot of the other sections since I'm not personally interested in weight loss, and I know this post doesn't actually go in depth about the science, but if you wanna check it out it's written by Tim Ferriss, and while I was pretty skeptical when a buddy mentioned it to me, it really is pretty intriguing when you get into it.

 

Gimmick.

 

This would require near perfect genetics and perfect eating habits to go with it, which negates 99% of the population.

 

Is it possible? Yes, with the perfect blend of genetics, etc. Is it probable? No.

 

You know what actually works? Working out and eating right and not looking for bulls*** shortcuts.

 

I don't need to read this to know 4 hours in the gym a month is compete bulls***.

Edited February 21, 2014 by Y2HH

[Reddy]

Gimmick.

 

This would require near perfect genetics and perfect eating habits to go with it, which negates 99% of the population.

 

Is it possible? Yes, with the perfect blend of genetics, etc. Is it probable? No.

 

You know what actually works? Working out and eating right and not looking for bulls*** shortcuts.

 

I don't need to read this to know 4 hours in the gym a month is compete bulls***.

 

why?

[Y2HH]

why?

 

Why do I know it's a gimmick? Because that's how gimmicks work. They sell you on an "easy/too good to be true" idea, backed by flimsy science, in order to get you to buy a book, or whatever it is they're selling you. In this case, it sounds like a book, but I bet there would be a lot more if I dug deeper.

 

Look no further than reality for the answer. If this wasn't a gimmick, and it actually worked -- EVERYONE WOULD f***ING DO IT, AND IT WOULDN'T BE A SECRET -- and that's how I know it's nothing more than vapor.

 

Give it a try and let me know how it works out, though.

 

Oh, experts also say it's complete bulls***: http://www.webmd.com/fitness-exercise/feat...iss-4-hour-body

 

Edited February 21, 2014 by Y2HH

[Reddy]

Why do I know it's a gimmick? Because that's how gimmicks work. They sell you on an "easy/too good to be true" idea, backed by flimsy science, in order to get you to buy a book, or whatever it is they're selling you. In this case, it sounds like a book, but I bet there would be a lot more if I dug deeper.

 

Look no further than reality for the answer. If this wasn't a gimmick, and it actually worked -- EVERYONE WOULD f***ING DO IT, AND IT WOULDN'T BE A SECRET -- and that's how I know it's nothing more than vapor.

 

Give it a try and let me know how it works out, though.

 

Oh, experts also say it's complete bulls***: http://www.webmd.com/fitness-exercise/feat...iss-4-hour-body

 

and this is where we'll never see eye to eye.

 

I put ZERO faith in MDs when it comes to health and nutrition. Their science is decades behind the actual science being done that doesn't have to stand up to US regulation.

 

[RockRaines]

Yeah but how ridiculous would your diet have to be for that philosophy to be true? That can't be healthy physically or mentally

[RockRaines]

Tim Ferriss is not a doctor, nutritionist, or scientist. He is a 33-year-old author and blogger. He has served as his own guinea pig since high school to develop the program he details in his new book. He did run many of his ideas by a panel of experts, including athletes and scientists, and urges people to see their doctor before following any of his advice.

 

 

Reading the details, it's no carb starvation. No thanks. It's not sustainable and would make everyone miserable.

Edited February 22, 2014 by RockRaines

[sircaffey]

why?

What the gimmick is is 34 lbs of muscle in 28 days. Lean muscle doesn't grow that fast on anyone, even Ronnie Coleman. Genetic freaks would struggle to put on much more than 6-7 lbs of lean muscle in a month. Maybe a newbie could experience some weird newbie gains, but 34 lbs is outrageous.

 

But I will say I don't think the 4 hours a month is really that much of a stretch. People "waste" so much time in the gym doing isolation exercises (not really waste, but if pure mass is your goal, then they aren't necessary). The most mass I have ever added when I was doing compound exercises exclusively 5x5, 3 times a week. I would be doing 3-4 exercises each workout, and I was out. If I didn't have to wait to use equipment, I would have been out under 30 minutes.

[Reddy]

Reading the details, it's no carb starvation. No thanks. It's not sustainable and would make everyone miserable.

Meh like I said I'm not familiar with the weight loss concepts as that's not what I'm looking for - but I wouldn't say it's no-carb starvation. It's similar to a paleo or any other no-grains diet.

 

The only thing I vehemently disagree with him on is fruit. Eat as much fruit as you damn well please.

[Reddy]

What the gimmick is is 34 lbs of muscle in 28 days. Lean muscle doesn't grow that fast on anyone, even Ronnie Coleman. Genetic freaks would struggle to put on much more than 6-7 lbs of lean muscle in a month. Maybe a newbie could experience some weird newbie gains, but 34 lbs is outrageous.

 

But I will say I don't think the 4 hours a month is really that much of a stretch. People "waste" so much time in the gym doing isolation exercises (not really waste, but if pure mass is your goal, then they aren't necessary). The most mass I have ever added when I was doing compound exercises exclusively 5x5, 3 times a week. I would be doing 3-4 exercises each workout, and I was out. If I didn't have to wait to use equipment, I would have been out under 30 minutes.

Right 34 is ridiculous and not likely for most people or even 99% of people.

 

That said, he used his program with Neil Strauss of "The Game" fame, and Neil is an ectomorph and was able to put on 10 pounds of MUSCLE in 4 weeks. I dunno. Just found it interesting as someone who has trouble putting on muscle/weight.

[Y2HH]

I repeat on this gimmick crap. Meh.

[Rowand44]

Think I'm just going to start doing all gimmick routines!

[sircaffey]

Does he give a lifting routine in this book? I'd be curious to see how fast he thinks is reasonable to get through everything he recommends.

[Reddy]

I repeat on this gimmick crap. Meh.

I wish you had a compelling reason for calling two 30-minute sessions of lifting to absolute failure per week, along with eating a ton a gimmick...

Edited February 22, 2014 by Reddy

[Reddy]

Does he give a lifting routine in this book? I'd be curious to see how fast he thinks is reasonable to get through everything he recommends.

yes - it's actually similar to what you mentioned. It's only a couple 5x5s per workout (5 seconds up, 5 down) to absolute failure (after using your first workout to figure out what your weight should be). 30 min max. Focusing primarily on things like Overhead Barbell Press, Squats, that kind of thing. Essentially one upper body move and one lower body move. He uses supplements of course - creatine etc - but nothing beyond what any of us already use.

[StrangeSox]

I wish you had a compelling reason for calling two 30-minute sessions of lifting to absolute failure per week, along with eating a ton a gimmick...

The outrageous claims are enough to let you know it's a gimmick. Legit things don't need fantastical claims.

[Y2HH]

I wish you had a compelling reason for calling two 30-minute sessions of lifting to absolute failure per week, along with eating a ton a gimmick...

 

It's called science, and almost all of his claims are counter too it. The body just doesn't work that way.

 

He also claims 15 minute orgasms, while loosely redefining what an orgasm actually is. This is pseudo science religion cult crap, nothing more.

 

But like I said, you do your 4 hours of lifting to failure per month and let's compare our progress later this summer.

[RockRaines]

The outrageous claims are enough to let you know it's a gimmick. Legit things don't need fantastical claims.

The plan is anorexia, no sleep and what little exercise you can do with no energy.

[Reddy]

Aight I really don't need to keep defending it since I'm not some brainwashed disciple - I merely thought the weight gain portion was intriguing. Again, not concerned with the 15 minute orgasms or the sleeping 2 hours a night thing. Both seem a tad ridiculous to me as well.

 

Guys you should know by now I'm not looking for shortcuts and that I'm not usually sucked up into fads quite this easily. (not that this even qualifies as a fad)

 

Regardless I'm gonna be doing X3 starting monday anyway, but if you'll notice, even that's been reduced to 30 minutes. Turns out that no one actually NEEDS 60 minutes a day, 6 days a week, so at least in that respect Ferriss is on point.

[RockRaines]

It's 30 min 7 days a week with less breaks. It's pretty similar.

[Reddy]

It's 30 min 7 days a week with less breaks. It's pretty similar.

 

1) i wont be doing 7 days a week

2) i wont be doing much of the cardio