Estimons que Dx est une grosse faignasse qui aime en faire le moins possible pour le plaisir, son but est-il d'ignorer tous les calculs possibles pour en faire encore moins?Peter Pan a écrit:Estimons que nous faisons de la musculation pour la plaisir le but est il de se faire chier a faire des calculs?
C'est quoi? un poisson tropical?Peter Pan en a remis une couche et a écrit:le vogelpick
Comme quand on c pas quoi repondre à un QCM
Dx2jc a écrit:Non la vitesse n'entraine pas l'hypertrophie, mais l'hypertrophie entraine la vitesse, car comme la charge devient proportionnellement plus légère avec la prise de masse/force, la vitesse augmente, c'est un indice très fiable.
Merci ... à moins que ça soit ironique .Seb33(export) a écrit:j'adore tes posts DX
c'est peut-être là le succès de mon training bourrin et lourd .
Le chercheur ne parle des résultats de ses études que lorsqu'il les a obtenus.
Pour l'instant la recherche est en cours... = Do Not Disturb
Merci ... à moins que ça soit ironique .
The thing is that even though some routines may be better than others there is some new interesting ideas that are coming out of the scientific community. One of the main ideas today is tension and it is tension that produces the most hypertrophy. This is a primary principle of several training programs.
One question that has begun to be looked at in terms of tension, is it truly whole muscle tension or more reliant upon tension time integral? For instance a recent work by Bowtell et al (Stimulation of human quadriceps protein synthesis after strenuous exercise: no effects of varying intensity between 60 and 90% of one repetition maximum (1RM). J Physiol 547.P, P16.) shows that even in the face of differing intensity PS elevated to roughly the same amounts as long as TTI was constant and recruitment was full. This study also points to the fact that once recruitment is high and tension is roughly about 65% further increases in tension do not produce changes in the FSR of proteins. Expanding further upon this brings to light other items dealing with the differences in Myofibrilar vs. Sarcoplasmic elevations in PS. Looking at this work and references show that both muscle proteins are elevated. There is a marked increase in myofibrilar vs. sarcoplasmic (~2-5 vs ~1-3 fold) no matter which intensity 60 or 90% as in the study cited above or even 75% as int he study by Louis et al 2003. Further making the argument that "Hypertrophy" training vs. "Strength" training is unwarranted in terms of PS.
Newer work by Rennie looking at myofibrilar, tendon and ECM protein and collagen turnover also shows a strong correlation to TTI rather than peak tension and calls into question as to whether or not damage is necessary (J Physiol. 2005 Jul 7; [Epub ahead of print]).
In a recent correspondence I had with Dr. Rennie I asked him about damage and it's impact, his response was that even though damage would upregulate PS, damage itself wasn't necessary to see similar increases and that he didn't absolutely agree with the damage BEFORE hypertrophy hypothesis.
This doesn't even get to other recent work looking at MAPK activation (Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 288: C824–C830, 2005.) which calls into question the earlier work of Martineau et al and Bopart et al., tension's impact on P38s.
So bottom line appears to be that TTI, time tension integral is beginning to look like a very key player.
As a side note I also asked him about RBE "repeated bout effect" and the currently seen timecourse as in the studies by Nosaka et al and McHugh et al. Although he do not greatly ellaborate on the issue he did mention that the time course of this phenomena needs to be re-evaluated. But that is a different discussion.
on nous disait
Let′s take it logically...
If effort is the same, then the CNS factors are the same
If effort is the same, then the muscle fibers feel the same activity and tension
What could be different between 1RM and 6RM...
Connective tissues. They are not an active tissue so cannot fire or not fire. They feel the whole muscle tension. There are studies showing trauma and recovery rates for intra-muscular connective tissues as well as tendons, etc. These take longer to recover than muscle, we know this. So this perfectly fits the model. 1RM takes longer since the connective tissues take so long to heal...
And before you ask.. "Why am I weaker?" Muscle afferent fibers and the golgi tendon organ could inhibit the force you can generate until the tissue is healed. Thus making you wait longer to train even though the muscles are recovered!
(this could mean slower gains if the weights are too heavy!!)
Now the very important and interesting point I am going to make is in the study I refered too in the Tension/Tetany thread both sarcoplasmic and myofibrilar protein was influenced positively during both the 60% and 90% RM, that alone should tell anyone that the mythic beast known as "Body Building Type Training" is just that, a myth.
Je viens de parler a MDG d'electro encore. Si tu mets l'electro a la fin d'une série sur la fréquence que le CNS à l'habitude d'envoyer soir 65 Hz, le muscle se contracte comme s'il était neuf !
As those fibers experience fatigue and show less force, more
fibers are called upon to 'help'. Once all fibers are contracting, there
are, obviously, no more to call upon. Force will continue to drop, 'rate
coding' and 'synchonization' are then employed for added force. What this
means, is that the MU's receive the 'contraction' pulses at a faster rate
and are called upon in a more 'coordinated' fashion. This optimizes the
force they are applying.
Incidently, if you start a set with 80% or more of your 1RM, all
voluntarilly contractable fibers are called upon right from the first
rep, rate coding and synchronization would begin immediately for added
force.
Moi, je pense que le rate coding n'augmente pas au fur et a mesure que la série se prolonge mais que des Ums de plus en plus grosses sont recrutées jusqu'à l'arrêt de la série du a de multiples raisons ( Cf log de Dx ).
The subject contracts a small muscle of the thumb repeatedly until the force produced is reduced to half, which takes a few minutes. Then the ulnar nerve, which supplies the muscle and lies just under the skin, is stimulated with external electrodes. If fatigue were in the brain or spinal cord, it should be possible to overcome it by stimulating the motor nerve – in practice, however, nerve stimulation usually has little effect on the force produced.
Je te parle d'un vécu de MDG avec l'électro, un truc facilement vérifiable montrant qu'Enoka se gourre, ou plutot que Ron lit en diagonale ( ce qui me semble plus proche de la vérité haha :-) )
Je ne parle pas de développer plus de force avec l'electro la, seulement une fréquence d'impulsions que tu es capable de faire en début de série.
Pour moi, il n'y a jamais 100% des fibres recrutées ( Cf Force absolue ). Sur un 85%, tu dois être capable de faire 5 rep en forcant.
Retourner vers Entraînement Musculation
Utilisateurs parcourant ce forum: aucun utilisateur enregistré et 45 invités