תמליצו לי על תוכנית מסה חדשה? אני אחרי חצי שנה בלי

[zidan]

פורסם במקור על ידי איתן הסוס

חחח סבבה... אני רוצה לנסות את זה אם יצא לי לנוח תקופה...

תודה :] וסליחה שהייתי קרצייה...:emb2:

למה קרציה זה כיף הדיונים האלה..

ואם אני חושב על זה,אז הייתי עושה מה שאמרת אבל לא עם 15 חזרות בהתחלה,עם פחות.

[Yoshi-Moto]

פורסם במקור על ידי zidan

למה קרציה זה כיף הדיונים האלה..

ואם אני חושב על זה,אז הייתי עושה מה שאמרת אבל לא עם 15 חזרות בהתחלה,עם פחות.

סבבה..
10 לדוגמא?

[הזברה]

הבעיה העיקרית שאני רואה במתחיל או באדם שחזר להתאמן ורוצה להתאמן בhst היא שצריך לבחור תרגילים מורכבים שלרוב לוקח לגוף זמן להתרגל אליהם ובאמת יכולה לצוץ בעיה בעלייה במשקלים כשהם נמוכים מידי(אי אפשר להעלות קילו או חצי כל אימון).

בכל אופן איתן, כל תוכנית אימונים טובה, צריכה לשלב איכשהו עלייה במשקלי עבודה לאורך זמן וכן הגישה הזאת לדעתי טובה. ככה גם אני ממליץ תמיד לאנשים שחזרו מהפסקה לעבוד.

לי אין הסתייגות מכך שגם בתוכנית של מתחיל, האדם יעלה בהדרגה במשקלים במקום להפציץ, למרות שעד כמה שידוע לי , היחידים שבאמת מוכח עליהם שעבודה על כשל ועל משקלים מקסימליים עוזרת להם במשהו הם מתחילים דווקא.

[zidan]

כן 10 זה סבבה..

[Yoshi-Moto]

פורסם במקור על ידי הזברה

היחידים שבאמת מוכח עליהם שעבודה על כשל ועל משקלים מקסימליים עוזרת להם במשהו הם מתחילים דווקא.

ברצינות?
איפה ראית את זה?

[הזברה]

בריאן הייקוק כתב את זה כששאלו אותו אם להגיע לכשל בhst...

[Yoshi-Moto]

פורסם במקור על ידי הזברה

בריאן הייקוק כתב את זה כששאלו אותו אם להגיע לכשל בhst...

אבל למתחילים לא כדאי להגיע לכשל כי מערכות העצבים שלהם לא מוכנות והכל לא?

שני הדברים סוטרים אחד את השני.
מצד אחת להגיע לכשל פוגע להם בגוף ובמערכות העצבים.
מצד שני הם גודלים מזה הכי טוב.

אז כשבן אדם מתחיל מה עדיף לו?

[הזברה]

כזכור לי הוא לא התכוון מבחינת מסה אלה מבחינת כוח, מבחינת מסה אני מניח שקצת קשה למדוד את ההבדלים. חוץ מזה, כמעט כל דבר עובד טוב בשביל מתחיל, ככה שיש ספק...

בכל זאת ,לדעתי אף אחד לא צריך לעבוד לכשל על בסיס קבוע ,בעיקר בתוכניות עם תדירות גבוהה כמו שלרוב מתחילים עושים כאן בארץ.

[Yoshi-Moto]

פורסם במקור על ידי הזברה

כזכור לי הוא לא התכוון מבחינת מסה אלה מבחינת כוח, מבחינת מסה אני מניח שקצת קשה למדוד את ההבדלים. חוץ מזה, כמעט כל דבר עובד טוב בשביל מתחיל, ככה שיש ספק...

בכל זאת ,לדעתי אף אחד לא צריך לעבוד לכשל על בסיס קבוע ,בעיקר בתוכניות עם תדירות גבוהה כמו שלרוב מתחילים עושים כאן בארץ.

אז מה דעתך?
בן אדם מתחיל, לא התאמן בחיים שלו...
איך הוא אמור להתאמן?
באופן רגיל ולהגיע 1 ל3 אימונים לכשל? או מה?

[הזברה]

פורסם במקור על ידי הזברה

בכל אופן איתן, כל תוכנית אימונים טובה, צריכה לשלב איכשהו עלייה במשקלי עבודה לאורך זמן וכן הגישה הזאת לדעתי טובה. ככה גם אני ממליץ תמיד לאנשים שחזרו מהפסקה לעבוד.
.

הכוונה לגישה שנתת, היא לדעתי חינוך טוב לעתיד.

לדעתי ,כל תוכנית שתשלב תנועות במשקל לאורך תקופות ככה שהוא ישתקם מהר היא טובה. עלייה הדרגתית כמו שנתת, אימון קל, בינוני,קשה(לא כשל אבל נניח 2-3 חזרות לפני) ,גם כל רעיון אחר שלא יתיש אותם או יסכן בפציעה.
למתחילים או לאנשים שחזרו אחרי תקופה ארוכה מאוד, זה לא אמור לשנות כלכך ,כי לרוב הם מתקדמים מהר מאוד בכל דרך...

[Yoshi-Moto]

פורסם במקור על ידי הזברה

בכל אופן ,כל תוכנית שתשלב תנועות במשקל לאורך תקופות ככה שהוא ישתקם מהר היא טובה. עלייה הדרגתית כמו שנתת, אימון קל, בינוני,קשה(לא כשל אבל נניח 2-3 חזרות לפני) ,גם כל דבר אחר שלא יתיש אותם או יסכן בפציעה.
למתחילים או לאנשים שחזרו אחרי תקופה ארוכה מאוד, זה לא אמור לשנות כלכך ,כי לרוב הם מתקדמים מהר מאוד בכל דרך...

סבבה... אז יצא שהטעיתי שתי חברים שלי שאמרתי להם לא להתקרב אפילו לכשל כמתחילים...
לא נורא, סך הכל שבוע עבדו עם משקלים קלים... אני אגיד להם להגביר הילוך.

תודה רבה, היה דיון ברמה טובה.
לילה טוב.

[הזברה]

לא הטעת ,כי זה לא כלכך משנה.

מעניין אם למישהו שיקרא פה יש קישור למחקר לגבי אימון לכשל, סתם כדי לתרום לדיון...

[הזברה]

http://www.geocities.com/alanmcclure3/hst_faq.html
מצאתי את ההקשר מהדברים של הייקוק...
Should I go to failure?

In one word--no. The keys to hypertrophy in HST do not include going to failure. However, a few trainees do go to failure on the last set of each microcycle although it is not necessary for growth. The reason that going to failure at each workout or set is contra-indicated is because:

"Neurological exhaustion isn't necessary for hypertrophy. [Although,] It may.... help build strength in undertrained individuals. On the last workout of each two week block an individual should be training at their [pre-figured] maximum for that rep range. Lots of people like to slow the tempo of the sets during the preceding workouts in order to make the last few reps more difficult. This is just fine because it is not the fatigue that is important (stopping short of forced reps of course). It is the mechanical load that is important. How heavy it is, not how heavy it feels."(Bryan Haycock, Thinkmuscle.com, Forum-- "going to failure once every two weeks?")

Since going to failure presents us with the problem of "neurological eshaustion," we would like to avoid failure and hence the overtraining that could occur with its use.

Back

[Yoshi-Moto]

סבבה אני הולך לישון, אני אקרא ואגיב מחר.

לילה טוב.

[Yoshi-Moto]

קראתי והשכלתי.
תודה.

[zidan]

הנה מאמר על כשל(ממה שהספקתי לקרוא לא ראיתי שם מחקרים או משהו כזה),קראתי ברפרוף,לא חידש הרבה אבל אני יקרא את זה לעומק שיהיה לי זמן,מי שיקרא את זה שיגיד אם יש שם משהו מעניין..
זה לקוח מBB.COM




have counseled the practice of going to failure as a means to ensure muscle growth stimulation. (Failure refers to performing a set until the point of being unable to complete one more rep, despite all effort you "fail" to complete the last rep.) But over the years much confusion has developed regarding the use of this principle. Having a clear understanding of the failure principle will save you wasted effort and prevent you from accepting what has become dogma as scientific fact. Over the last thirty years a great deal has been written about going to failure during weightlifting exercises. Like nearly every other aspect of bodybuilding, the concept of failure is one that has fallen victim to misapplication, misunderstanding and improper logic. Used properly, failure can serve as a useful tool in guiding progress. However, there is no valid reason for its near mythic importance to some bodybuilders who believe that progress cannot be made without employing this principle. In point of fact, exercising to momentary muscular failure is not, and never has been, a requirement of stimulating muscle growth.
The fact is, outside of a gym, there is virtually no human activity that involves going to failure. For example, a person who makes his living by digging with a shovel would never dig to the point where he could not lift one more shovel of dirt. He would never swing a pick ax until he could no longer lift it to complete one more "repetition". And yet, people who perform such manual labor can develop tremendous muscularity. How is it that they can develop above average muscularity without ever, in their entire life, going to failure? Similarly, sprinters are distinguished by tremendous hamstring and quadriceps muscles compared to the nominal muscularity of a distance runner. This is because sprinting requires a great amount of muscular work in a unit of time. But who sprints to failure? Who crosses the finish line and cannot take one more step? Indeed, you might even find a weight lifter in your own gym who made great progress in his size and strength gains without ever exercising on a program that prescribed sets to failure. All of these people have the ability to stimulate new muscle growth without every going to "failure". So how can anyone characterize failure as an indispensable requirement of stimulating muscle growth? All the evidence - not just some evidence - but all evidence goes against that assertion.
The human body operates by complex mechanisms that are always taking averages into account. In a normal day your body is adjusted to accept "x" amount of sunshine, "y" amount of temperature variation, "z" amount of humidity, etc. for hundreds of different environmental and biological variables. For every variable the body makes complex calculations and adjustment to characteristics like our blood viscosity, hormone levels, degree of skin tanning and muscle growth. If, on average, you are exposed to the same amount of sunlight every day of the year, your skin will darken to the point where it has sufficient protection from that average level of sunlight, but no more. Similarly, if you lift weights on a regular basis with the same amount of intensity every workout your muscles will develop to a point where they can comfortably handle the intensity of lifting that they are, on average, subjected to, without unduly depleting its recovery resources.
In order to increase the thickness or viscosity of your blood it is not necessary to subject your body to the absolute coldest temperature that it can withstand before losing consciousness. Nor, if you want to increase the darkness of your tan, is it necessary to subject your skin to the most intense sunlight it can withstand up to the moment before blistering. Muscle growth stimulation operates on the same principle. Consequently it is not necessary to operate a muscle to its absolute limit of muscular failure in order to stimulate new muscle growth.
You may have seen a new product on the market that utilizes a wristwatch style device to use while sun bathing. It is designed to monitor and measure the intensity of sunlight that your skin is subjected to and compare that intensity to user-provided information like color of skin and the SPF of the sunscreen being used. The device calculates the safe interval of sun intensity and rings an alarm when limits have been reached. Bodybuilders would greatly benefit from the same style of device if it could be adapted to measure the intensity of muscular output. Leaving aside the technicalities of measuring the intensity of muscle groups, imagine if you could wear a wristwatch style device that monitored and measured your average muscular intensity throughout the day.
Suppose at the end of the day the device indicated your average muscular output was one hundred pounds per minute. Let's call that your baseline muscular intensity. If every day for the next six months you engaged in an amount of muscular activity that caused the device to register a one hundred pounds per minute average, you would not increase in your muscle mass because there would be no reason (no requirement) for your body to grow new muscle.
Now suppose that each day you engaged in an amount of muscular activity that caused the average intensity to rise by 5%. (i.e. 100, 105, 110, 116, 122, etc.) At the end of thirty days, if you were able to sustain such a steady increase, your wrist monitor would indicate 412 pounds per minute of average muscular intensity. You can see that in order to safely cope with 412 pounds per minute of muscular output your body would have to make itself substantially more muscular that it has to be to cope with one hundred pounds per minute of muscular output.
Using Power Factor principles, if you were to construct a month worth of bench press exercise routines you could begin by establishing baseline Power Factor and Power Index numbers that represent a measurement of the muscular intensity that you are capable of generating in that exercise. You could then engineer a number of workouts to perform over the next month ensuring that each had intensity 5% higher than the last. That progressive increase in muscular intensity would be all that is required to ensure steady increases in muscularity. It would not be necessary to go to failure, it would not be "necessary" to perform one set only, two sets only, three sets only, eight reps per set, twelve reps per set or any of the other so-called "requirements" for growth. It would also not be necessary to perform four different exercises in addition to the bench press, it would not be necessary to "periodize" your workouts by including several workouts at twenty to thirty percent below your baseline intensity, it would not be necessary to stop all aerobic exercise for a month. It would not be necessary to work out three days per week. It would only be necessary to increase the intensity of that exercise on a workout to workout basis.

[zidan]

While failure is a crude gauge, it can be used as an effective tool in finding your baseline of intensity. For example, if you are performing three sets of fifteen reps with 200 pounds and during your first set you perform fifteen, your second set you perform fifteen but on your third set (to failure) you perform twenty six reps it is an indication that your first two sets were at sub maximal intensity and that you should be using a heavier weight or performing more reps. The limitation here should be obvious. How much lower was your intensity compared to what it could be? What are the units of measurement? How high is high? How low is low? When you use Power Factor and Power Index numbers in place of these vagaries your training is imbued with a precision behooving a proper science. Furthermore, if you are seriously overtrained you will reach failure at a point lower than the progressive intensity that you require in order to stimulate new muscle growth. For example, suppose that you started with a baseline intensity of one hundred pounds per minute and a few sessions later your intensity is 160 pounds per minute in the same exercise. At this point you become overtrained and next time in the gym you go to "failure" at 140 pounds per minute of muscular intensity. There is no possible way that can stimulate new muscle growth despite going to failure. Why? Because going to failure is not a requisite of muscle growth stimulation. Progressive intensity is!
To exaggerate the point, consider what your strength is when you are recovering from a serious bout of flu or perhaps a stay in the hospital. You can return to the gym and take every set to failure but the intensity will be so low that it cannot stimulate new muscle growth. That's the reason why some people can train to failure on every exercise for month after month and never show any sign of progress while they are convinced they are going all out and delivering 100% of momentary muscular effort. It's irrelevant, since what matters is a tangible progression of overload intensity. Since the Power Factor and Index measurements exist there is no excuse for a rational person not to employ these more precise measurements of muscular intensity into his or her workouts. No reason except blinkered dogmatism and a blind adherence to tradition and "the way its always been done".

Advocates of training to failure, particularly those who adhere to the Arthur Jones model of only one set to failure, believe that the last rep is the most productive rep of the set. As the rational goes, the first reps takes very little of your effort, the second, third and forth reps take corresponding more effort until you reach that last rep which requires all the effort you can muster and yet can not be completed. This most difficult rep is considered by some to be the most productive rep in the set as it is the one that triggers muscle growth stimulation. However, as we have already discussed, it is the progressive increase in intensity that triggers muscle growth and since that increase can be reached without ever going to failure, the last rep (as it's described as being impossible to complete) can be entirely unnecessary. For example, if the required increase in intensity would have been reached at the sixth rep of that set then the sixth rep is the one that triggers growth. The reps beyond the sixth were not even necessary to perform. If you have a baseline intensity of one hundred pounds per minute and you have set a goal intensity of 110 pounds per minute then the moment you reach 110 pounds per minute of intensity you can stop the exercise even if you've only completed five and a half reps. The number of reps is irrelevant, failure is irrelevant, it is the amount of intensity generated that is the only relevant factor.
And how does a scientific mind measure intensity? With a mathematical Power Factor and Power Index. How does the unscientific mind measure intensity? By feel, by perceived effort, by burn, by pump, by soreness, by failure, by rep count, by set count, by vague, non-specific, irrelevant intangibles that are not indispensable conditions of growth stimulation.
In science we measure the intensity of light, not by squint factor, or headache potential but by Lumens and Candle Power. We measure the intensity of sound not by ear pain or stomach vibration but by Decibels - precisely defined measurements that can be compared mathematically and used to discover other properties of the science. Anyone who claims there is a "science" of bodybuilding but rejects an objective measure of muscular intensity is a poseur and a dogmatist.

[zidan]

הנה עוד מאמר קטן,קצת שונה ולא קשור,אבל מעניין..הוא פותח במין מחקר של מייק מנצר לגבי כשל,והוא משווה את עיקרון הכשל לחיים שלנו,בקיצור לא יודע איך להסביר,תיקראו.
זה PDF למי שיותר נוח לקרוא: http://www.trendfollowing.com/whitep...teenbarger.pdf


Becoming the Person You Know You Can Be
Brett N. Steenbarger, Ph.D.
www.brettsteenbarger.com

Note: A version of this article appeared on the Trading Markets site the week of
10/3/05.

This is one of my shortest articles, and it may be one of my most important.
In bodybuilding, there is a principle known as "train-to-failure" (TTF). The idea is that
you lift that amount of weight that permits you at least ten repetitions, but continue the
lifting to the point of failure: the point at which you can no longer sustain the repetitions.
Such a heavy-duty program, as outlined by the late Michael Mentzer, is low force (to
minimize injuries) and high intensity (drawing upon the body's full reserves). This
program also contradicts usual practice, which has athletes lifting every day. Mentzer, a
world class bodybuilder, found that a limited number of repetitions to failure were
sufficient to stimulate muscle growth, as long as there was an adequate period of
recovery following the training stimulus. When first espoused, the idea of doing a
limited number of intense repetitions and then staying out of the gym during the recovery
phase was heretical. Now it is the backbone of many successful approaches to
bodybuilding and strength training.
As Mentzer noted, the idea of TTF is itself a reflection of a principle in exercise
physiology called SAID: Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demands. The body, according
to SAID, will develop along the lines of the demands imposed upon it. If you impose
intensive demands upon a muscle set, that set will develop more than others that have not
been challenged. The opposite of SAID is deconditioning: the absence of demand upon
the musculoskeletal system. Astronauts in space for a considerable period of
weightlessness lose body mass due to deconditioning and, at times, have had to be carried
from their spacecrafts due to a loss of strength. Their bodies adapted to the absence of
demand.
The vast majority of people live their lives the way uninformed athletes train: they take
on too many demands, none of which are sufficiently intense to take them to failure.
Theirs is the equivalent of lifting a twenty-pound barbell for hours on end. They become
tired, but not strong. By the time they get old, they are chronically tired, and then retire
from all demands. For many, retirement is an exercise in mental, physical, and spiritual
deconditioning.

Truly great people live their lives on a TTF basis. They challenge themselves until they
fail, and that provides new challenges. They ultimately succeed, because the challenges
that produce failure also build their adaptive capacity. Their minds and their personalities
exhibit SAID: they adapt to imposed demands.
Now ask yourself: If you trained in the weight room as hard and as smart as you train for
trading success, how strong would you be?
The reality is that few traders train at all, and those that do rarely impose demands on
themselves that require growth and adaptation. The bodybuilder knows that effort is a
friend, a stimulus to development. You push yourself to your limits, and then you adapt
to those imposed demands. In simulated trading--and in the practice that comes from
trading small size--it is not enough to concentrate and focus: you develop the capacity to
operate in "the zone" by testing the limits of your mental stamina. Similarly, don't just
follow your trading ideas; test them until they break. Then you'll be able to figure out
where they are weak and how you can fix them. We cannot know our limits unless we
are willing to venture beyond them.
Mentzer realized that, to become the person you know you can be, you have to do more
than you think you can do. Paradoxically, you will find your greatest freedom, in the
gym and in life, in the imposition of your most stringent demands.

[NOS]

תודה

[NOS]

התחלתי אם HST '
אני מתחיל מבלוק השני של 10 חזרות.. וכל אימון מעלה במשקל פה ושם.
אז כן להגיעה לכשל או לא ?

ד"א מישהו יכול להביא לי תמונה של התרגילים האלה או סרטונים ?

LEG CURL
CHIN
DELTS ׂ(rear
shrags
calves
dips

תודה!