Author: Sorting Last Post on Top Message:
SERGEANTMAJOR Posts: 6,467
11/14/12 9:59 P


I f against an immovable object or holding a contraction it is still by definition an isometric contraction. The technique is another one of the rediscovered old school techniques. Yes it does work as do most of the old school techniques.


It is called WORK-ing out for a reason.

I said getting fit was simple, I did not say it was easy.

Cardio burns calories, strength work burns fat.

Eat well to lose weight, exercise to get fit

You can not build a six pack using twelve packs


Often when we seek a magic bullet for fitness we end up shooting ourselves in the foot.

"I think calories are little germs in food that all moms are afraid of" Dennis the Menace

ITSCHUCK Posts: 15
11/14/12 4:47 P

This method is a bit different. It's been around in its current form for a few decades (I think that's right.)

It involves lifting very heavy weights through a small range of motion and holding in for at least 5 seconds.

So for example, I can do a full range leg press with about 360 LBS for 8-12 reps.

In a static contraction rep I push 930 LBS through about 2-3 inches of motion (without locking out) and hold the weight in place as long as I can. (If you can hold it for more than 10 seconds you go up on the weight.) There are a couple of e-books on the routine.

I can certainly see a difference no only in the increasing weights on the partial reps, but on the normal full range rep exercises as well.

For example I could do 110 LBS for 8-12 reps on a regular bench press before I started SCT.

I did the SCT routine through four sequences of the 10 exercises prescribed and then tested the full range exercise again (without doing the full range exercise during that month long period.)

Now I can do 140 LBS for 8-12 reps.

I was just wondering if anyone else has tried this.

I'm an engineer by training so I'm tracking my progress. I'll report back again (if anybody's interested.)

Chuck

01/05/14 - 192 @ 32.0%
01/12/14 - 191 @ 27.1%
01/19/14 - 188 @ 23.5%
01/26/14 - 188 @ 22.4%
03/16/14 - 188 @ irgggg.....
SERGEANTMAJOR Posts: 6,467
11/13/12 1:36 P


So called "static contraction training" is nothing new or innovative it was the basis for the very old Charles Atlas training programmes advertised on the back of comic books when I was young. The ads were based on the motto "I no longer get sand kicked in my face".
The proper name for it in physical education departments is isometric contraction I first learned about isometric contraction when I was 20, I am now 75 so I would suggest it is not a new innovation in physical training.

. It is a well researched method of physical training however the research shows that it has a definite end point at which progress will end. Google isometric contraction to find the research on the method.




It is called WORK-ing out for a reason.

I said getting fit was simple, I did not say it was easy.

Cardio burns calories, strength work burns fat.

Eat well to lose weight, exercise to get fit

You can not build a six pack using twelve packs


Often when we seek a magic bullet for fitness we end up shooting ourselves in the foot.

"I think calories are little germs in food that all moms are afraid of" Dennis the Menace

ITSCHUCK Posts: 15
11/13/12 10:19 A

Anyone else tried Static Contracton Training?

I'm on my 5th workout sequence and so far I'm pretty impressed with the progress.

Just wondering if anyone else has success with this program?

Chuck

01/05/14 - 192 @ 32.0%
01/12/14 - 191 @ 27.1%
01/19/14 - 188 @ 23.5%
01/26/14 - 188 @ 22.4%
03/16/14 - 188 @ irgggg.....
Page: 1 of (1)  




Other Fitness and Exercise Topics:

Topics: Last Post:
Anyone Run/Walk? 7/14/2014 7:20:34 AM
Beginner 5k in Cinci/NKY area 3/8/2014 4:20:29 PM
anyone in Lexington,Ky? 5/8/2014 8:32:44 AM
Can too much muscle be a problem 5/10/2014 8:09:04 PM
Walk/Run or just RUN? 5/9/2014 1:35:00 PM