Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a1ec5/a1ec560d31997acb7dd2692b78e6ce4e8bb54cba" alt="2 stars" Summary: Partial Reps, Partial Results Review: From the same school as the flawed H.I.T. training developed by Mike Metzler and Arthur Jones, inventor of Nautilus. This book is well written and the authors do a great job of selling you on their technique which is probably why there are actually good reviews here. However, the bottom line is that it has not proven to be an effective method on its own. No current champion bodybuilders have solely used this technique to build their championship physiques for the simple reason that it cannot work as the authors say (for reasons described by well know exercise physiologists noted at the bottom of this review). I went through the training religiously as described in the book doing only partial reps for exercises, and several things occurred: 1)My "strong range of motion" did indeed get stronger, but when I occasionally tested my full range of motion strength it was noticably weaker!!! This was tested on several intervals even as the "strong range" increased 150 lbs with 25 reps. 2)As I took more time off as the weights got heavier, I trained my anaerobic energy systems less, and thus, I lost my overall conditioning and anaerobic (ATP/CP energy systems)endurance. I found out that a certain level of anaerobic endurance/conditionaing is needed to sustain a long enough workout to stimulate adaptive response and growth. This conditioning phase is completely ignored. The authors suggest that training in cycles is not needed as you get stronger and simply take more time to recover due to the amazing heavy weights you will be using. Because I was taking longer and longer to "recover" and doing nothing in between, I lost energy, gained fat and did not increase my muscle size or full rep strength as described above. I believe the book has some limited value--partial rep training should be done as a component in training (at the end of a muscle group exercise) when you are training your "strong range" which indeed needs more weight than the full range. It is good for powerlifting when you are training your body to handle heavier weights, however, it is not effective as described in this book. Do not waist your Money on Power Factor Training!! The book "Serious Strength Training" by Tudor O. Bompa and DiPasquale addresses the claims by the H.I.T. crowd and explain why the authors are seriously flawed on some of their theories. I used the periodization techniques and had far better results in just two months of following their explanations and training "phase" examples.
Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c4286/c4286d28ba026fc2ee53b3aeb4c0d32e0527fd1c" alt="4 stars" Summary: Two variations on strength training Review: Weight training is discipline in which just about anyone who conscientiously follows just about any program will make progress. But if constancy generally brings results there are numerous theories expressed in a multitude of books on how to do it faster, easier, or to develop a particular quality such as bodybuilding or faster running speed. The promises tend to the grandiose but it wouldn't be the iron game if the dust jacket didn't promise to cure everything from constipation to memory lost all while making one stronger, larger, and more attractive to the opposite sex. These two books (Power Factor Training by Peter Sisco and John Little and Power to the People - Russian Strength Secrets for every American by Pavel Tsatsouline ) are at the fringes. On the fringes, one frequently finds exaggeration and unsubstantiated claims.One can also find superior insight and wisdom, particularly if one knows what to look for. Thus, as one who is interested in new theories the advertising in Amazon seemed to warrant the modest risk of purchasing copies. Both books contribute by laying out for the reader easy to follow systems of weight training. Each of those systems is rather at odds with the conventional wisdom in the field. The Power Factor book emphasizes lifting of much heavier loads through limited ranges of motions and doing so quickly. One measures both the total load and the time needed to lift it. The author also emphasizes the need for long rest periods between sessions to ensure complete recovery of not only muscles but also internal organs. In my short experience with this system it works. My strength is up both through limited and full ranges of motion. Also, as an older athlete (age 62) with knees that creak as they approach 90 degrees under load the limited range of motion protocol is of genuine benefit. I suspect others with similar infirmities will find comparable benefits. I am less certain that a baseball pitcher hoping to add 5mph to his fastball will achieve the results he seeks. The Tsatsouline system is similar in its emphasis on heavier loads but recommends limiting the number of reps substantially. The author also believes two exercises and two sets per sessions is sufficient. The number of sessions can reach five in a week. The book provides excellent descriptions of how to do the dead lift and the one armed press. Equally beneficial is his outline of three easy to follow training cycle systems. Less helpful is the lack of explanations of what causes the benefits. For example, if one is to eschew warming up, a recommendation of the author, one probably wants to know the basis for the recommendation. In most cases, the author advises his next book will provide the explanation. Good economics perhaps but not useful to the reader. The Power Factor is the better book and will be of interest to experienced weight trainers. One puts up with more breathless prose and flamboyant claims in the Power to the People book but it too may be of benefit. Particularly if one has an experimental inclination. To those just getting started in lifting there are a number of superior volumes on the market such as A Practical Approach to Strength Training by Matt Brzycki.
Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c4286/c4286d28ba026fc2ee53b3aeb4c0d32e0527fd1c" alt="4 stars" Summary: Scientific bodybuilding Review: This bodybuilding system by John Little and Peter Sisco is a very interesting one, and it is explained in scientific detail. The idea is to overload muscles by doing partial strong-range reps, and the effectiveness of a workout is not determined solely by reps and weight used. The time that takes to complete the workout affects on the effectiveness, as well. The authors explain that in physics, the amount of work is not derived from just the weight moved, but time has an effect also. So, if you move the same weigth two times, when the first time you use 5 seconds and the second time you require only 3 seconds, you are doing more work the second time (you are moving more pounds per minute). To fully benefit from Power factor training (PFT), you have to keep detailed training log, and you have to review it regularily. So it takes more bookkeeping than regular trainig methods, but at the same time it is very easy to keep track of your progress. On the other hand, the inclusion of time to the equation makes is very hard to see during the workout how you are doing. On the traditional workout programs you can easily see that if you can manage certain amount of reps, you are progressing from your previous workout. On PFT, you don't know how you are improving before you make the calculations to determine your Power factor and Power index for the workout. Using this book is not as easy to use as you might want. The contents of the book are not arranged logically, and in some cases you have to search hard to find a certain thing you are looking for. This does not make it difficult to read the book though, but if you are just looking for certain information, it can take some time to find it. There is also some conflicting advise in the book, mainly concerning the number of reps and sets you should use. On the other hand, the authors advise that there should be no "cookie cutter" routines - preset number of sets and reps to complete in a workout. Rather, you should experiment to find your "sweet spot" - the weight and number of reps and sets which give you the biggest Power factors (the sweet spot is different from person to person). This in turn creates a new problem, because it takes commitment to start the PFT program, because you have to experiment for a while before you can fully benefit from it after finding the sweet spot. And the sweet spot doesn't stay the same, as it moves around as you became stronger. So clearly this is not a program for beginners. The inclusion of time into the equation is totally new concept in weight training, but the theory doesn't seem to be watertight. Even the authors warn you not to look blindly at the numbers, as you could fool yourself by making one or two quick reps in couple of seconds, and get huge Power factors. Secondly, the authors advise you to utilise Preacher curls for biceps for example, even when you can get bigger Power factors by doing barbell curls. This advise doesn't seem very logical concirering that you are advised to constantly strive to improve your Power factor and Power index. But the main thing is: Is PFT any good? Oh yes it is, as long as you keep detailed workout log, and keep on searching that elusive sweet spot. And be advised that you need a power rack, or Smith machine at the least to utilize the program. When you realize the limitations of the program, you can gain hugely from it. If nothing else, it teaches you to keep an accurate training log.
Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c4286/c4286d28ba026fc2ee53b3aeb4c0d32e0527fd1c" alt="4 stars" Summary: some good principles Review: I've read other reviews and I agree mostly with what people are saying. There's alot of good principles here that people can apply to their workout. I've given up full range reps for most of my exercises, I also don't even touch free weights any more because of the overloading principle. To start off this programme it'll be a bit tricky as in the book they state that the weight you do and the number of reps are going to vary from person to person. I also found it to much bother trying to calculate the power index, I keep track of the weight and reps though. Just make sure you keep your workouts under an hour, you have enough days off between workouts and you keep increasing the weight over time, and you will grow, there's no hard math about it.
Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/dae3c/dae3c7fd7de59568b3091e83eae9660af0b48a4b" alt="3 stars" Summary: Stolen ideas that need some tweaking Review: The idea of overloading the musculature with partial reps has been around for ages and has been used with considerable success. Cisco and Little's contention to exclude all full-range movement appears to be the error. It should be used as an adjunct to full-range training, not at the exclusion of ---- (but never on the same day) ---- to increase the intensity of a given workout. In addition, their Power Index and Power Factor calculations are useless. The authors have also stolen Mentzer's theories on brief and infrequent workouts, but at least those are valid principles. Best to occassionally substitute either the Deadlift, Squat or Bench Press in strongest-range fashion. The other main problem I see is that trainees are choosing weights that are far too light. Your weights should be at 200-400 pounds beyond your full range. For instance, right now I'm capable of full-range Squatting 505 for 6-8 reps, today with partials I used a 4-to-6-inch movement and handled 895 for 20 reps. Deads 505 for 6 full, 895 for 18 partials, Bench 365 for 6 full, 660 for 12 partials. There's nothing magical about this training, just another way to up your intensity, which is always the bottom line. Worth a try, but make the necessary adjustments(1 intense set to failure, never more than 3 total sets per workout) and you will experience "carryover" to your full-range power movements as well as increased muscle mass.
Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c4286/c4286d28ba026fc2ee53b3aeb4c0d32e0527fd1c" alt="4 stars" Summary: I smell a rat... Review: my primary reason for writing this review is not to promote the efficacy of this program so much as to point out that most of the negative reviewers here and on the static contraction page are full of BS, or haven't the slightest idea what they're doing. Case in point: one reviewer says he went from 205 to 191 in 4 weeks. This is all well and good, except for the fact that muscle does not EVEN BEGIN to deteriorate for 6 weeks or more of no activity, assuming you're eating enough to maintain your size. You can look this up if you would like (www.ultimate-exercise.com), but I speak from experience. My guess is that most of these people who made no gains were either not eating enough, overtraining, physically ill, not lifting even close to adequate amounts of weight to stimulate growth, or some combination thereof. Of course, there's also the possibility that they work for a muscle mag or supplement co., or are simply defending the bodybuilding orthodoxy dogmatically due to the amount of time they've invested using those ridiculous routines. Bottom line: check out PFT, SCT , or Mike Mentzer's work for yourself, and then make a decision. P.S.One criticism I do have of Sisco's, Little's, and Mentzer's work is that they over simplify and inadequately explain proper nutrition. I mean, how are you supposed to grow if you don't supply the material to build muscle? proper eating frequency, protein/carb/fat ratios and caloric intake are essential knowledge if one wants to succeed in building mass.
Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/dae3c/dae3c7fd7de59568b3091e83eae9660af0b48a4b" alt="3 stars" Summary: a good alternative;can be unsafe,impractical Review: The formulas provide an attempt to quantify progress,but there are too many variables which cannot be accounted for by the system.As a general rule,strong-range partials do not increase one's strength for full range lifts.Doing a slow full range negative is important in most standard muscle building movements,although not in Olympic type lifts.However, the heavy partials are a good plateau buster and good for variety.Two safety notes-not everyone can handle heavy rack work,esp. on deadlifts,and the 45 degree leg press machine is dangerous and should be avoided.BE SURE TO WEAR A PROFESSIONAL BELT.....I would consider the possiblity of using HAMMER STRENGTH machines instead,and only for upper body.I echo the sentiments of other balanced reviews-the book is not the Bible,but it provides an interesting alternative.There is also the practical matter of having unlimited access to a power rack and to a large number of 45-pound plates.Overal,Mentzer is better
Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a1ec5/a1ec560d31997acb7dd2692b78e6ce4e8bb54cba" alt="2 stars" Summary: Don't throw away your money! Review: This book was an absolute waste of money. I don't understand how all these people are giving this book good ratings. I've been bodybuilding for a number of years, and I am also a certified personal trainer. I'll just ask you one question, does only making little 2 inch movements instead of a full range of motion sound normal to you? This is supose to "strengthen" your tendons. Give me a break.
Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/10911/10911432439c1322df126b9387cb51b9bd272377" alt="5 stars" Summary: Good Approach Review: Very interesting approach. It will save you time.
Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/dae3c/dae3c7fd7de59568b3091e83eae9660af0b48a4b" alt="3 stars" Summary: Bad physics, but interesting read Review: This book is not without its flaws. It makes a number of simple errors with respect to basic physics. The first that is somewhat questionable, and central to the book, is using sustained power output as a performance metric. Trying to identify and use performance metrics is a good idea, but the ones proposed in PFT aren't all that useful. One produces sustained power output over periods of an hour by riding a bicycle, not lifting weights. They compensate by weighting the power output by the weight used. This approach still has problems, because you can't change any exercises in the workout and compare the power outputs of those workouts (you'll produce more power on the benchpress than on an incline press, for example) It also doesn't work well if you have to wait for equipment at your gym. The other problem with the book is confusing poundages used with workout intensity. The poundages used in an exercise are partly determined by mechanical advantage, which the authors consistently confuse with "force" on the muscles, which is further confused with, "overload" and "intensity". With all the above cautionary notes, PFT does make an interesting read. Doing heavy partials is a worthwhile training technique, if not the best thing since sliced bread. The performance metrics proposed in PFT could possibly be used to measure progress over a 6 week or so interval (in which the workout is unchanged), with more robust metrics (12RM) used less frequently. I found the book an eye opener, though it's an exaggeration to call it "the science" of bodybuilding.
|