Fadi
...
Would you stop what’s been working for you for years based on some new scientific study? Personally, I wouldn’t. If something has been working, it does not stop working because some scientist somewhere has “proved” to the contrary.
A case in point here would be the application of the pre-exhaust method by bodybuilders. Bodybuilders are not scientists, but through trial and error have built a very solid base of what works and what doesn’t (both in the exercise and nutritional fields).
It seems that there are some “professional” trainers out there, in addition to many popular bodybuilding and fitness forums, who’ve decided to jump on that scientific bandwagon, forgoing their trusted and evident results, in exchange of said “scientific evidence” speaking against the pre-exhaust method as a viable way to building muscles.
Unfortunately, someone forgot to inform those scientists of the purpose behind applying the pre-exhaust method into one’s training program. Hence, the scientist began with a false premise, which could only lead to a false conclusion, and that’s exactly what happened.
My beef is with the bodybuilding community who has chosen to close their minds to the blatantly obvious blunder that was committed by the scientists in question.
If I ask any member of the Ausbb Team as to the purpose of using the pre-exhaust method, I would expect to receive the same reply to my inquiry. That is, we use it to pre-exhaust a larger muscle in favour of a smaller one. Or put another way, we use it to increase fatigue in a particular muscle whilst leaving another muscle fresh.
What the scientists found upon their completion of the experiment, was that the larger muscle, the pectorals/chest in this case, had less activity than the front deltoids and triceps, which had a lot more activity going on.Therefore they (falsely) concluded, that using the pre-exhaust method did not enhance muscle activity during multi-joint exercises (such as the bench press) when compared with regular training, i.e. when going straight into performing the bench press.
But hey wait a minute! The reason behind bodybuilders using the pre-exhaust was not to increase activity in the targeted muscle (the chest), but rather to increase fatigue in that muscle instead!
So their scientific finding proves and validates what the bodybuilding community has been saying and practicing since Arnold’s days, that a decrease in muscle activity (in the targeted muscle/the chest) during pre-exhaust proves that this method actually works! When you exhaust/fatigue a particular muscle, you would expect its activity to decrease, plain and simple.
Take home message: trust in what’s working and what has been working for you irrespective of what any Tom Dick and Jane, be they from the scientific community or not, might say or present you with as evidence for their claims.
http://www.seannal.com/articles/training/pre-exhaust-training.php
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18076251
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/5772811_Effects_of_exercise_order_on_upper-body_muscle_activation_and_exercise_performance
A case in point here would be the application of the pre-exhaust method by bodybuilders. Bodybuilders are not scientists, but through trial and error have built a very solid base of what works and what doesn’t (both in the exercise and nutritional fields).
It seems that there are some “professional” trainers out there, in addition to many popular bodybuilding and fitness forums, who’ve decided to jump on that scientific bandwagon, forgoing their trusted and evident results, in exchange of said “scientific evidence” speaking against the pre-exhaust method as a viable way to building muscles.
Unfortunately, someone forgot to inform those scientists of the purpose behind applying the pre-exhaust method into one’s training program. Hence, the scientist began with a false premise, which could only lead to a false conclusion, and that’s exactly what happened.
My beef is with the bodybuilding community who has chosen to close their minds to the blatantly obvious blunder that was committed by the scientists in question.
If I ask any member of the Ausbb Team as to the purpose of using the pre-exhaust method, I would expect to receive the same reply to my inquiry. That is, we use it to pre-exhaust a larger muscle in favour of a smaller one. Or put another way, we use it to increase fatigue in a particular muscle whilst leaving another muscle fresh.
What the scientists found upon their completion of the experiment, was that the larger muscle, the pectorals/chest in this case, had less activity than the front deltoids and triceps, which had a lot more activity going on.Therefore they (falsely) concluded, that using the pre-exhaust method did not enhance muscle activity during multi-joint exercises (such as the bench press) when compared with regular training, i.e. when going straight into performing the bench press.
But hey wait a minute! The reason behind bodybuilders using the pre-exhaust was not to increase activity in the targeted muscle (the chest), but rather to increase fatigue in that muscle instead!
So their scientific finding proves and validates what the bodybuilding community has been saying and practicing since Arnold’s days, that a decrease in muscle activity (in the targeted muscle/the chest) during pre-exhaust proves that this method actually works! When you exhaust/fatigue a particular muscle, you would expect its activity to decrease, plain and simple.
Take home message: trust in what’s working and what has been working for you irrespective of what any Tom Dick and Jane, be they from the scientific community or not, might say or present you with as evidence for their claims.
http://www.seannal.com/articles/training/pre-exhaust-training.php
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18076251
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/5772811_Effects_of_exercise_order_on_upper-body_muscle_activation_and_exercise_performance
Last edited:
