I did the following workout on Sunday morning at 6am before work:
Lumbar Extension on SuperSlow Systems Pulldown (as pre-exhaust for)
MedX Leg Press-done RenEx style with end-stop technique
SuperSlow Systems Neck Flexion/Extension
Calf Exercise on the MedX Leg Press
In the days following this workout, I was impressed by 2 things. First, the split workout left me feeling much better in terms of systemic recovery and seemed to positively affect the non-worked body parts in terms of appearance. Second, the lumbar extension seemed to have a better effect on my entire back than the portion of the split that is actually devoted to the back. I feel that the ability of the muscles that run from the sacrum to the base of the skull to fully contract seems to be a pre-condition for aggressive recruitment of the back muscles that are smaller or do not cross multiple joints or body segments. If anyone else has had similar experience, I would appreciate your input.
Friday March 2nd’s workout was as follows:
Infimetric lateral raise- used a nylon strap about 30 inches long with handles on either end.
Infimetric bent raise (rear delts)- used same strap.
Infimetric biceps curl- done using a parallel grip pulldown bar that was about 34″ wide. Arms overhead and used the rigid bar to transmit force from one side to the other.
Infimetric triceps extension- same bar and position as biceps, except flipped grip so palms faced out.
Power grip position finger flexion/extension for forearms (hat tip to Bill De Simone)
My approach to infimetrics was to just try to do whatever seemed to produce the greatest tension and effort at any given moment in the set. This was truly educational. In general, the pattern for me seemed to be as follows: On the first rep of each side a 10-12 second cadence with full range of motion seemed best. On the next excursion I felt the need to increase cadence slightly and felt the tension fall off at the outer limits of the ROM. Next I began to speed up more as I truncated the ROM. Next the ROM was restricted to the middle 1/3rd with a quick cadence that deteriorated back to slow movement. Lastly there was minimal quick movement at the midpoint of the ROM that quickly degenerated to a pulsed static, then a couple of seconds of pure static. Set duration seemed quite short, perhaps 1:00 to 1:20.
I did some experimenting during the workout and had some observations. First, inroad was incredibly deep. After lateral raises, I could not abduct my arms further than about 15 degrees. Any further and the lever effect of my own arm produced too much force for my delts to handle. At the conclusion of my workout, I could not get more than a couple of repetitions of lateral raise with 5 pound dumbells. Second, as fatigue accumulates during the set, everything changes. Cam effects seem to change. Range of motion to produce optimal tension changes. Requirements for cadence that produces optimal tension changes. The implement you are using can become an impediment as fatigue accumulates. As an example, the pulldown bar was too heavy to hold overhead for biceps….I had to sit on the floor and rest the backs of my arms on a bench behind me in order to take the load off the deltoids. Inroad is so aggressive, I can see a need for your force transmitting implement to be as light as possible.
After my workout I played around with some of the free weights and machines at the Fike Recreation Center. As I did so, I came to realize that infimetrics are a great teaching tool. It points out in bold relief the limitations of any equipment or protocol and what is needed to milk the most from what you have at hand. I must admit that I always felt a little baffled when advocates of different protocols used descriptions of how to best access their protocol. When the RenEx guys said “find your low gear”, or when Brian Johnston or Andrew Short talked of “adjusting zones on the fly” or when John Little described how Max Pyramid could produce inroad throughout numerous muscle groups without movment, I only felt like I “kind of” understood what they meant. After you do infimetrics, you can find your low gear on the proper movements/equipment, you can adjust zones on the fly with less than optimal movements or equipment, and you can learn how to recruit deeply when you are not even moving. I think some of us are just better at feeling that muscular loading is an “intrinsic” process. Even if infimetrics do not turn out to be THE protocol, they at least can teach the less gifted among us the skill of tapping into the intrinsic nature of the stimulus. With this final thought in mind, I offer up the following article from PubMed:
Human exercise-mediated skeletal muscle hypertrophy is an intrinsic process.
Source
Exercise Metabolism Research Group, Department of Kinesiology, McMaster University, Canada.
Abstract
Muscle cells (fibres) are post-mitotic and thus undergo changes in phenotype by modifying their existing structure. Hypertrophy is a hallmark change that occurs in response to increased loading and can be achieved in humans through repeated bouts of resistance exercise (i.e., training). In resistance exercise, contractions are initiated by neural drive leading to immediate perturbations such as calcium influx, cross-bridge cycling and tension/stress on the cytoskeleton, sarcolemma and extracellular matrix, as well as more delayed cellular events such as the production/release of potential local growth factors (e.g., IGF-1). Resistance exercise can also elevate the systemic concentration of certain hormones (growth hormone, testosterone, IGF-1) that are hypothesized to drive hypertrophy. However, while these hormones are clearly anabolic during childhood and puberty, or when given at supraphysiological exogenous doses, the transient post-exercise elevations in hormone concentration are of little consequence to the either the acute protein synthetic response or to a hypertrophic phenotype after resistance training. Thus, the acute post-exercise increases in systemic hormones are in no way a proxy marker for anabolism since they do not underpin the capacity of the muscle to hypertrophy in any measurable way. In contrast, the acute activation of intrinsically located signalling proteins such as p70(S6K) and the acute elevation of muscleprotein synthesis are more reflective of the potential to increase in muscle mass with resistance training. Ultimately, local mechanisms are activated by the stress imposed by muscle loading and prime the muscle for protein accretion. Membrane-derived molecules and tension-sensing pathways are two intrinsic mechanisms implicated in upregulating the synthesis and incorporation of muscle proteins into the myofibre in response to mechanical stress derived from loaded contractions.
Post your WOW’s and your thoughts.