Everyday Systems

[oolala53]

There is a theory of exercise promoted by a guy named Ken Hutchins that says that exercise moves done slowly with heavy weight ( enough to get to failure in 4-6 reps) is the most efficient in building muscle and fitness. I found it wasn't very fun but I have used it as a routine alternative to higher, faster reps on machines or with free weights. Anyone ever experiment with varying the speed of the moves with Shovelglove? BTW, the usual protocol in SS is to use a 20-second cycle-out and in, up and down, etc. and to hold for 10 seconds at failure.
_________________
Count plates, not calories. Three a day. 8 years & counting
Age 64
SBMI Jan/10-30.8
Jan/12-26.8
Mar/13-24.9 Stayed at +/- 8-lb. for three years Sept/17 22.8 (but more fluctuation)
Mar/18 22.2

There is no S better than Vanilla No S.

[reinhard]

I actually tried superslow years ago before coming up with shovelglove! I have the (extremely boring) book on my shelves.

The appeal is that it's (supposedly) tremendously efficient in terms of building muscle in a very small amount of time.

The downside (as you've experienced) is that it is literally torture. It's like you're strapping yourself to the rack. I thought "hey, I can put up with brief torture sessions if they'll get me results fast."

Well, I couldn't and they didn't. Not sure which way around.

Shovelglove was not only a million times more fun, but about as time efficient, I found (maybe more, since I never actually got any results from my superslow torture sessions).

The shovelglove movements, with their throwing and catching of the weight are almost the opposite of superslow.

It also looks like the science behind superslow is extremely controversial. Not that there's any science that I know of behind shovelglove, but where torture is involved, one wants VERY good reasons.

That being said, if you want to hedge your exercise bets and do both in alternation, it would be a highly uncorrelated way to bet.

Reinhard

[Ray E.]

I tried it too and agree with what Reinhard wrote. One other point, it's virtually impossible to get the results they advertise without having a workout partner pushing you beyond the point of exhaustion. If you workout alone, you'll stop well short of this point because it is extremely painful.

That said, if you stick with it, enjoy it and see improvement, then it beats doing nothing. JMO.

Ray

[storm fox]

Thumbs down on SuperSlow from me. Tried it, but never liked it, and never got results. What about shovelglove, kettlebells, or crossfit?

[phayze]

I've never tried it, but I've read about. Personally, I lack the disciple to go super-slow and I don't think it's conducive to "functional strength"/useful movement.

I prefer this: lift heavy, lift fast, go home early.
_________________
1 Picture = 1,000 words
0:01s Video = 30 pictures
therefore, 0:01s Video = 30,000 words

[Y Goddodin]

You answered your own question with the "it isn't fun" bit. If something isn't fun then you wont stay at it long.... Now I'm not adverse to making myself 'hurt' in the name of fun, but physical pain + boredom simultaneously is unnecessary in the pursuit of getting fit.

If you like some of their ideas why not do a more standard HIT style workout and add a move or 2 SS style? That's what I did about 10 years ago when I tried it out.