When I was trained in an apprenticeship, we used eccentric overload the following way. You would take a weight close to or slightly above your 1rm. And resist it slowly for 6-10 secs. IMMEDIATELY a spotter either raised the weight back up for you or (if you were doing eccentric overload chins for example) you stepped yourself up with your legs and the began to resist again. For 8-10 repetitions. I would be curious to see you try it that way with an eccentric overload chin for a few months and see your results.
I am pretty reluctant at this point to try more overloaded eccentrics after seeing how it went with the incline bench press. However though, I consider this - one never knowns how it will work for different muscles.
Agree with you on this, I get better results not training to failure than otherwise. How about the overcoming isometrics, do you think they are a better method for strength development??? Maybe you should try it for some weeks and report to us.
Even though isometrics are usually divided into *_overcoming isometrics_* and *_yielding Isometrics,_* I am not totally sure these two categories are categorially different, since in some instances they unite. *For example consider this:* your rolling thunders 1RM is 50 kg, and you load 45 kg on the rolling thunder and proceed to do repetitions with it until you can't get the weight of the floor anymore. Note now that all the repetitions you were able to do were yielding Isometrics where as the final attempt to get the weight off the floor is overcoming isometrics, since you fail to get the weight off the floor. *Now the question:* would it make sense to proceed to do overcoming isometrics after this since you already did a overcoming isometrics lift as the final failed attempt in the yielding Isometrics rolling thunder set? *By answer:* I really don't see it would make sense, since you already did an overcoming isometrics as the final failed attempt. *Consider this also:* Your rolling thunders 1RM is 50 kg, and you load 50 kg on the rolling thunder and proceed in attempting to lift it, in which you barely succeed. After this you attach your rolling thunder to the actual floor and put a grain scale between the handle and the floor attachment, so that there is no way you can lift it but nevertheless you get a reading what your force output was. After this you proceed to attempt to put all your force into lifting it and you get a reading of 50 kg on the grain scale. *Now the question:* Can your body know the difference was the handle attached to the grain scale or to the 50 kg weight stack? In both instances your fingers produced 50 kg of static force output. *By answer:* To me there doesn't seem to be a meaningful difference between these two ways of training, and hence the difference between *_overcoming isometrics_* and *_yielding Isometrics_* doesn't really seem to be a categorical difference, but merely a methodological difference, meaning that they are different ways to accomplish the same thing, which is either to max out your static strength or to hold a submaximal weight staticky a certain time.
![OsamaSon - ik what you did last summer [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4DIQDnu3mr4/mqdefault.jpg)
When I was trained in an apprenticeship, we used eccentric overload the following way.
You would take a weight close to or slightly above your 1rm.
And resist it slowly for 6-10 secs.
IMMEDIATELY a spotter either raised the weight back up for you or (if you were doing eccentric overload chins for example) you stepped yourself up with your legs and the began to resist again. For 8-10 repetitions.
I would be curious to see you try it that way with an eccentric overload chin for a few months and see your results.
I am pretty reluctant at this point to try more overloaded eccentrics after seeing how it went with the incline bench press. However though, I consider this - one never knowns how it will work for different muscles.
When you upload a new video, I know that I will learn a new thing. Thx. 👍
NinjaTyler legacy
Agree with you on this, I get better results not training to failure than otherwise. How about the overcoming isometrics, do you think they are a better method for strength development??? Maybe you should try it for some weeks and report to us.
Even though isometrics are usually divided into *_overcoming isometrics_* and *_yielding Isometrics,_* I am not totally sure these two categories are categorially different, since in some instances they unite.
*For example consider this:*
your rolling thunders 1RM is 50 kg, and you load 45 kg on the rolling thunder and proceed to do repetitions with it until you can't get the weight of the floor anymore. Note now that all the repetitions you were able to do were yielding Isometrics where as the final attempt to get the weight off the floor is overcoming isometrics, since you fail to get the weight off the floor.
*Now the question:*
would it make sense to proceed to do overcoming isometrics after this since you already did a overcoming isometrics lift as the final failed attempt in the yielding Isometrics rolling thunder set?
*By answer:*
I really don't see it would make sense, since you already did an overcoming isometrics as the final failed attempt.
*Consider this also:*
Your rolling thunders 1RM is 50 kg, and you load 50 kg on the rolling thunder and proceed in attempting to lift it, in which you barely succeed.
After this you attach your rolling thunder to the actual floor and put a grain scale between the handle and the floor attachment, so that there is no way you can lift it but nevertheless you get a reading what your force output was. After this you proceed to attempt to put all your force into lifting it and you get a reading of 50 kg on the grain scale.
*Now the question:*
Can your body know the difference was the handle attached to the grain scale or to the 50 kg weight stack? In both instances your fingers produced 50 kg of static force output.
*By answer:*
To me there doesn't seem to be a meaningful difference between these two ways of training, and hence the difference between *_overcoming isometrics_* and *_yielding Isometrics_* doesn't really seem to be a categorical difference, but merely a methodological difference, meaning that they are different ways to accomplish the same thing, which is either to max out your static strength or to hold a submaximal weight staticky a certain time.
Thanks for the explanation, I never thought about it in this way@@T12J7
Tehokas keino nuo staattiset pidot
.