Is This True?

[Spartan]

Some guy at my gym told me today that if you do your reps very slowly, than you will build more muscle than if you do them at a normal pace. Is that true?

[Rizzle]

Not exactly, what I've done and noticed to work is when you bench press for example, you want to go down slowly and in a controlled manner, then press back up fast. My strength coach for football said that is the perfect form.

[Wooks]

From what I understand, doing them slower puts more stress on your muscles because they are working for a more longer and more constant time, which i think would help muscle growth.

I wouldn't do them super slow though, but in a controlled manner, like Rizzle said.

Correct me if I'm wrong though.

[PineRichlandLAX]

I had a personal trainer over the summer, and he stressed having proper form. What alot of people tend to do is try and rush through their reps, which is not nearly as effective as going slowly. I have the timing down from practice, but if I remember correctly, he said to have 2 second reps. I don't know he or you consider "very slow" or "normal" but watching alot of people in the gym, they have half of a second reps. Those reps are not nearly as effective as 2 second ones.

[Lax4life528]

I heard doing reps fast helps build explosion. But doing them slow builds the stabilizing muscles

[SeattleKiwi]

I generally go with a Alywn Cosgrove approach of: If 6 REPS, 311 (in seconds); 3 REPS, 321; 12 REPS, 301). Lift, Pause, Drop. I hope this helps. It works great for me. You should check out New Rules of Lifting by Alywn Cosgrove and Lou Schuler. I've had great success with it. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1583332383/ref=s9_asin_title_1/002-2674463-2345615?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-2&pf_rd_r=1P9X22908C0VX6ANXZ5P&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=278240301&pf_rd_i=507846

[Coach MacLax]

This link has good info -
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/weight-training/SM00028

I have always believed and taught that too many people neglect the negative rep (the downward movement). So upward movement should be for two or three seconds but so should downward movement. And on about 25% of your reps you downward movement should be as long as four or five seconds.

[LiquidMercury16]

Time under tension is what you are all talking about. There are some people for it some people against it. I personally am not a huge fan due to the stress it places on joints/ligaments. I would rather increase volume via sets or reps if I'm trying to increase time under tension.

[brickwall500]

Some guy at my gym told me today that if you do your reps very slowly, than you will build more muscle than if you do them at a normal pace. Is that true?

yes like on bench press 1 sec up 2 seconds down youll get stronger faster-

[the wister]

Hmmmmmm, that is a very subjective question. The best way to find out is the same way you find out if anything is true: try it and see if it works for you.

If nothing else, the one and only thing that I think applies to everyone is that you need to have proper form. Take care of that, and you should be able to figure the rest out by yourself. Cheers

[LiquidMercury16]

Hmmmmmm, that is a very subjective question. The best way to find out is the same way you find out if anything is true: try it and see if it works for you.

If nothing else, the one and only thing that I think applies to everyone is that you need to have proper form. Take care of that, and you should be able to figure the rest out by yourself. Cheers

So true. It may work for some, doesn't work for others. For me personally Time Under Tension training doesn't work very well. For others it does. I think one reason it does work for others is that it teaches good form because by going slow, people drop the ego's and lower the weight to something they can do with good form. Try it and if it works stick with it, if not find something else.

[bigDman]

No,

In fact it is the exact opposite. You want to lift all weights as fast as possible. When your muscles fire its a all or none prosses. And your muscles fire from the slowest weakest fibers (type 1) to the fastest stronger fibers (type 2)
The type 1 fibers always fire. The advocates for TUT say that the extra time allows all the type 1 fibers to fire, but if you lift heavy stuff or light stuff explosively all the type 1 fibers fire in order to get to the type 2 fibers. All this TUT stuff is a bunch of crap

[LiquidMercury16]

No,

In fact it is the exact opposite. You want to lift all weights as fast as possible. When your muscles fire its a all or none prosses. And your muscles fire from the slowest weakest fibers (type 1) to the fastest stronger fibers (type 2)
The type 1 fibers always fire. The advocates for TUT say that the extra time allows all the type 1 fibers to fire, but if you lift heavy stuff or light stuff explosively all the type 1 fibers fire in order to get to the type 2 fibers. All this TUT stuff is a bunch of crap

Although I DO agree with you bigD, I would say TUT has it's advantages which I outlined above, i.e. improved form because egomaniac kids aren't loading up the bar with weight they can't handle. In that sense they sometimes can see great gains just using proper form. Other then that though I would agree and say TUT is generally worthless and I am most definitely a proponent of explosive type training.

[bigDman]

Well proper form is a must. That should be learned before lifting heavier therefore that argument for TUT is out the window

[Wooks]

Idk if It's "a bunch of crap"

I've been using it for my shoulder exercises and my bench, and it seems to be helping a lot. I don't know if this is because of the whole TUT, or if it's simply improving my form (which it is).

Personally, TUT is working for me.

[the next 'one']

i was actually just talking to my lifting coach the other day about this, and he said that you want to go down slow and controlled, and push quick and explosively. the slow and controlled part helps build stabilizing muscles and muscle endurance and the quick explosive push helps build quickness and quick-time strength.

[Cburylax]

Time under tension is what you are all talking about. There are some people for it some people against it. I personally am not a huge fan due to the stress it places on joints/ligaments. I would rather increase volume via sets or reps if I'm trying to increase time under tension.

What is there to be against? Time under tension is a term used to describe the amount of time a muscle is under tension or resistance. It would make sense that the longer a muscle is under tension, the more stimulus it would receive which results in the hypertrophy adaptation.

It is also closely related to tempo. Lets say we do a bench press with a 2-0-2 tempo for 10 reps. That means each rep takes 4 seconds and each set takes 40 seconds. If we increase the tempo to 4-2-2, each rep will take 8 seconds and a set of 10 reps will take a 80 seconds, twice as long as and much much harder to accomplish with the same weight.

I would argue that the second example would increase hyptrophy while a 2-0-2 tempo, and even a 1-0-1 tempo should be used for power and strength.

Its also important to note that the longer tempo, particularly at the eccentric and isometric part of the movement, will cause the elastic energy stored in the tendon to dissipate, causing the muscle to activate more motor units to move the weight. This is why most novices to training use a very fast tempo, they need the elastic tension to help them move a weight that is too heavy for them to begin with. (Don't worry...I did it too).

No,

In fact it is the exact opposite. You want to lift all weights as fast as possible. When your muscles fire its a all or none prosses. And your muscles fire from the slowest weakest fibers (type 1) to the fastest stronger fibers (type 2)
The type 1 fibers always fire. The advocates for TUT say that the extra time allows all the type 1 fibers to fire, but if you lift heavy stuff or light stuff explosively all the type 1 fibers fire in order to get to the type 2 fibers. All this TUT stuff is a bunch of crap

I need some clarification on this statement, I dont understand what you're trying to say. I would also clarify what you mean when you say you "want to lift all weights as fast as possible". Surely you don't mean that literally?


Lastly, while increasing time under tension means performing a rep through its range of motion more slowly, it doesn't necesarily equate to better form. It is possible to use bad form and still increase your time under tension. I'd challenge anyone to use a 4-2-2 tempo with their current weights and see if you can make it through with the same sets and reps. Keep in mind your workout time could more than double.

[BrooklynLax13]

I need some clarification on this statement, I dont understand what you're trying to say. I would also clarify what you mean when you say you "want to lift all weights as fast as possible". Surely you don't mean that literally?


Lastly, while increasing time under tension means performing a rep through its range of motion more slowly, it doesn't necesarily equate to better form. It is possible to use bad form and still increase your time under tension. I'd challenge anyone to use a 4-2-2 tempo with their current weights and see if you can make it through with the same sets and reps. Keep in mind your workout time could more than double.

He was referring to Strength vs Power. Someone who lifts X lbs and explodes (as fast as possible) is putting more Power into their lifting than someone lifting X lbs at a 2 sec or 4 sec tempo.

LiquidMercury also addressed this in a different way, he said TUT could be done with a higher volume, meaning you can work at a higher Power output with the higher volume, rather than doing lower Power over the same time by exaggerating your tempo.

Clarification edit: You do have a point with the elastic tension, but having a second at the bottom of the exercise can dissipate that enough. I'm rushed so I might not have been clear, but I think what [bigDman] meant was the concentric should be as fast as possible for that Power output. You're saying you can lengthen the eccentric (I think from your examples) for TUT. So it looks like they are not mutually exclusive? Unless I interpreted both of your responses wrong.

[LiquidMercury16]

What is there to be against? Time under tension is a term used to describe the amount of time a muscle is under tension or resistance. It would make sense that the longer a muscle is under tension, the more stimulus it would receive which results in the hypertrophy adaptation.

It is also closely related to tempo. Lets say we do a bench press with a 2-0-2 tempo for 10 reps. That means each rep takes 4 seconds and each set takes 40 seconds. If we increase the tempo to 4-2-2, each rep will take 8 seconds and a set of 10 reps will take a 80 seconds, twice as long as and much much harder to accomplish with the same weight.

I would argue that the second example would increase hyptrophy while a 2-0-2 tempo, and even a 1-0-1 tempo should be used for power and strength.

Its also important to note that the longer tempo, particularly at the eccentric and isometric part of the movement, will cause the elastic energy stored in the tendon to dissipate, causing the muscle to activate more motor units to move the weight. This is why most novices to training use a very fast tempo, they need the elastic tension to help them move a weight that is too heavy for them to begin with. (Don't worry...I did it too).



I say I don't care for TUT training, not in the sense you are talking about in its literal definition but in the training cult sense. I have talked with many other trainers/coaches about TUT some for, some against the principal because now a days it seems that TUT automatically is consided slow negative/concentric training. Yes TUT could be explosive/fast but most people who are TUT practioners use a super slow time sequence. I do not like this in that I feel it does not recruit as much muscle fiber as does explosive lifting. More muscle fiber recruited is going to result in more hypertrophy/strength gains. If you are doing super slow training like TUT principals, then you may be just causing unnecessary damage to muscles that are already taxed. I agree with you that for novices they may see better recruitment under slow negatives/concentrics but in trained athletes I would like to think that they have taught their bodies to activate as many muscle fibers as possible whether they are lifting 100% 1RM or 60%. Maybe that's just me being an optomist.

Just because a muscle is under tension longer does not mean it is going to have more hypertrophy. If it's under tension too long you run the risk of overtraining or straining muscles.