I've mentioned watching the most massive bodybuilders explode with heavy weights. That puzzled me for a long time. They weren't getting full contractions, and they weren't keeping resistance on the target muscle through the full range of motion due to momentum. Why in the heck were they growing? Okay, many were on steroids, but it had to be more than that because the way they were training appeared to do little for total-muscle stimulation.

After thinking it through, I realized that by exploding to get a heavy weight up, they automatically create more overload on the negative--the lowering, or eccentric, part of every rep. They lifted more, so they had to lower more. That had to be the key. Sure, their control was minimal, but maybe having to fight, even a little, to slow down that heavy weight so it didn't rip muscles and joints was the key. After all, scientists have often said that the negative part of a rep is the most important.

If my thinking was correct, heavy negative-only training should produce outstanding results in size and strength. Nope. The studies comparing heavy negative-only sets to standard positive/negative work don't show much difference in results. The spectacular size and strength increases from heavy negative-only training just don't happen.

So how about when researchers compared positive-only (concentric) sets--only raising the weight--to regular positive/negative work? Standard positive/negative work won every time. Very mysterious: From the first studies it looks like negative work is nothing special. But when negative work is missing, gains are near zero. Why? Let's look at the clues:

1) Standard positive/negative work = average size and strength gains.
2) Heavier negative-only work = average size and strength gains.
3) Positive-only work (no negative) = almost zero gains.

You can see why most scientists believe that negative work is most important for muscle and strength: If it's missing, as in number 3, not much happens. So they're right--in a sense. I say "in a sense" because it's not that negative work is more important than positive work; it's just necessary to trigger more growth than positive-only work. Why? Because the most important point in many exercises (but not all) is near the turnaround, when you shift from negative to positive. With positive-only work there is no overload at the turnaround--no semistretch shock, like when you reverse the weight at the bottom of an incline press. It's that critical directional shift that's missing.

But hold on! Heavy negative-only work doesn't include a turnaround either--you just lower a heavy weight. So shouldn't it produce the same meager results as positive-only work since there's no directional shift?

No, because overload at the turnaround point is not missing from heavy negative-only work. Think about it: You're much stronger during the negative phase of a rep than the positive. So negative-only sets require you to use much more weight than in a standard set--usually more than your one-rep max, in fact. That means you do overload the turnaround point with a much heavier weight--there is semistretch shock. You don't reverse the movement, but you do slow it down (at least you'd better! That weight is heavy!). That's why you get about the same average blips in size and strength from heavy negative-only work as you get from standard positive/negative sets.

That's all fine and dandy and underscores the importance of the turnaround, but who the heck wants only average blips in size and strength?! If you're like me, you want the fastest gains possible--above and beyond negative-only training and standard positive/negative sets. To achieve that, you need a way to seriously jack up the overload near that key turnaround point.

So that's why the biggest bodybuilders get so huge exploding on almost every rep--that overloads the critical turnaround point. Should you follow their lead? Heck no! You'd get injured sooner or later. Bodybuilders who explode to overload are on growth hormone, which supersizes muscle attachments, or they simply have genetically superior joints, ligaments and tendons (or they get injured a lot). If you're not in one of those camps--GH user and/or injury-proof superman--forget exploding with heavy weights. A better solution is X Reps.

If you've been reading the past few newsletters, you know that X Reps are power partials at the end of a set near the turnaround point (although that key point depends on the exercise). They severely overload the target muscle, usually near the critical semistretch position, for an X-ponential increase in growth stimulation--safely and efficiently. One X Rep set is about equal to three standard sets, so X Reps can maximize your muscle mass in minimal time in a big way. (Hey, what about X Reps at the end of a pure-negative set--like near the bottom of each heavy dip? Hmm, now there's something worth X-perimenting with!)

Start using X Reps now, and you can reduce your time in the gym for more recovery and also take full advantage of your higher-calorie intake during winter--with less fat and more muscle. That's possible because the muscle burn X Reps produce kick up your growth hormone output, and that means more fat burning along with anabolic hormone synergy. Just imagine what you can look like by spring with that incredible combo--you'll get bigger and leaner with fewer sets in the gym! (For a sample upper-chest routine featuring X Reps, see the November 13 e-zine.)

The X-Files are not intended as training advice for everyone. You must consult your physician before beginning any diet or training program.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
If you know someone who would benefit from Supplement
Updates, Diet Tips and Special Offers from the IRON MAN Magazine Online Newsletter, forward them this page
or tell them to sign up for the Free Training Newsletter at the IRON MAN Magazine Homepage.

(Click Here to Order Now)

You will need Adobe Acrobat reader available for free here: