Anybody else relatively "jacked" but not "ripped"?

[blue]

I'll be the first to raise my hand. Trying to do something about it just to see what it would look like to be both. Reading "The P:E Diet". The workout section is interesting. Do less, get more kind of approach like the old "Body by Science", which I really wasn't a fan of. But this one I am a fan of so far.

[Dru Edwards]

I'm not sure what "jacked" means ... do you mean physically fit but not with the "ripped" muscles or does "jacked" mean enthusiasm? "When it comes to "Do less, get more" I'm always a little wary regardless of the application.

Regardless, dedication can make anymore reach their goals.

[blue]

Originally Posted by Dru Edwards

I'm not sure what "jacked" means ... do you mean physically fit but not with the "ripped" muscles or does "jacked" mean enthusiasm? "When it comes to "Do less, get more" I'm always a little wary regardless of the application.

Regardless, dedication can make anymore reach their goals.

Jacked = Lots of muscular development

Ripped = Low body fat/lots of muscular definition

"do less get more" really works if you truly work to failure. Let's say you can do 25 pushups with perfect form. And there is no way physically to do 26. You worked to failure which sent certain messages to your body that say "better get stronger or we may die next time". In this scenario the pushups that mattered were the ones that were at the tail end. 22 (or whatever weren't challenging) of the 25 did nothing for your progress.

Now say you do pushups where you count to 10 on the way down, hold it at the bottom for a 10 count, and then push up for a 10 count. Now you can only do 3 (or whatever it is you can do) pushups. And there is no way physically to do 4. You send the same message of "better get stronger or we may die next time". but you sent a stronger message with 3 pushups. And you sent that messages for a longer period of time.

There's more to it obviously. That's the view from 30,000 feet. Essentially doing a lot of mostly non-challenging exercise is less valuable than doing a small amount to failure.

The only part of a workout that forces your body to adapt is the challenging part. Think about an average 1 hour gym workout. How much time is really spent in "failure mode"?

If you can get that same amount of "failure mode" time in an 8 minute workout, which is my average resistance training workout, why spend an hour.

[Mr. Jelly]

To me jacked means you've been partying and ripped means you partied to much. At least that was the 60s version.

[tinnitus]

Certainly not in reference to me... I hear the muscle term "Yoked" a lot too. Regional thing?

[hairpuller]

If I was jacked and ripped, it means not only did someone steal my car, but took my cash, too!

scott

[woodbox]

Hey blue,
although there was a time I was ripped, that is not the case any more.
Instead, Im a happily retired guy (12 yrs now) who reads till nap time, wakes up for lunch, then reads til second nap time.
Life is luxuriously decadent with 20 lbs I didn’t have when I was working.
Muscle definition is noticeably reduced at 66.

Although I read with interest your description of exercising to failure .. I get it, but had never heard that terminology .. it leaves me with a question:

Jacked or Ripped...
Why do you ask?

[rokdog49]

“Jacked” means muscled up.
It also means the pump you get after resistance training.
When one is over 60, you can still get jacked but you won’t be ripped and jacked.
It isn’t in the cards. That’s usually reserved for the twenty-somethings.

[rokdog49]

Originally Posted by blue

Jacked = Lots of muscular development

Ripped = Low body fat/lots of muscular definition

"do less get more" really works if you truly work to failure. Let's say you can do 25 pushups with perfect form. And there is no way physically to do 26. You worked to failure which sent certain messages to your body that say "better get stronger or we may die next time". In this scenario the pushups that mattered were the ones that were at the tail end. 22 (or whatever weren't challenging) of the 25 did nothing for your progress.

Now say you do pushups where you count to 10 on the way down, hold it at the bottom for a 10 count, and then push up for a 10 count. Now you can only do 3 (or whatever it is you can do) pushups. And there is no way physically to do 4. You send the same message of "better get stronger or we may die next time". but you sent a stronger message with 3 pushups. And you sent that messages for a longer period of time.

There's more to it obviously. That's the view from 30,000 feet. Essentially doing a lot of mostly non-challenging exercise is less valuable than doing a small amount to failure.

The only part of a workout that forces your body to adapt is the challenging part. Think about an average 1 hour gym workout. How much time is really spent in "failure mode"?

If you can get that same amount of "failure mode" time in an 8 minute workout, which is my average resistance training workout, why spend an hour.

This is all true.
I’ve been resistance training hard for about the past 18 months and the “training to failure” of which you speak works. I’ve put on some significant muscle, even at age 70, but it also depends on your goals.
You can’t build much muscle training to failure in eight minutes even if you are working say, just your biceps. It’s a bit more complicated than that.
The amount of rest between sets and the number of sets plus the resistance all factor in.
As a former amateur bodybuilder, the amount of time and dedication it takes is enormous.

[blue]

Originally Posted by rokdog49

This is all true.
I’ve been resistance training hard for about the past 18 months and the “training to failure” of which you speak works. I’ve put on some significant muscle, even at age 70, but it also depends on your goals.
You can’t build much muscle training to failure in eight minutes even if you are working say, just your biceps. It’s a bit more complicated than that.
The amount of rest between sets and the number of sets plus the resistance all factor in.
As a former amateur bodybuilder, the amount of time and dedication it takes is enormous.

I respectfully disagree. Former Football Lineman (college) and Wrestler (only High School). I am doing it at 57, and have been for the last 9 months. Noticeable/Measurable increase in muscle size and strength. I am also pretty high protein (somewhere around 175 grams a day)and low carb and fat though. I am a type 2 diabetic, but control it with diet. Been off meds just about a year, since eating this way. Remission? Cured? I don't care. I don't have to deal with big pharma is all I know.

Here are a couple vids from the guy who wrote the P:E diet book. He is in my region so I sought him out, and he is now my primary MD. I did this because my MD wanted to put me on statins because diabetics "need" to be on Statins even if they are completely control of blood sugar without meds.

So yeah. You can add muscle even in your late 50's with very little work but, and it's a big but Simone (Peewee Herman joke), You have to eat to support it.

The first vid is a workout, the second is the "science" behind it. I couldn't link the workout vid so I put down the url

[rokdog49]

I’m very familiar with what he is explaining.
I don’t disagree with you on this. In fact we mostly agree. I am trying to put on a lot more mass.
In order to do that, training to failure as you progressively increase the resistance is the main way to do that, but you have to attack the muscles every which way you can. At 57 and with all due respect, you have no idea what it takes to build muscle mass at 70. The difference in our ages means I have to train much harder to have appreciable gains.

I also eat a ton of protein and limit my carbs and fats. I’m taking Creatine as well.

[fitness1]

In the late 80's I was attending Hammer Strength/Nautilus seminars at the Kong Room in Cincinnati where Arthur Jones son Gary did all his research.

He used several of the Bengals football players (one being Reggie Williams) and some regional body builders to carry out his research on the types of resistance, and the effects of super high intensity training in very brief training sessions.

This was going on early on in his development of his line of iso-lateral, plate loaded machines, and the Kong Room was full of them.

Some of the methods being employed were negative only resistance, staged repetitions, 1 1/4's, and super slow. These are all EXTREMELY effective if you know what you are doing, and I still incorporate these into my training, and many of my clients who I find they are appropriate for.

One of the large benefits of these types of training is they (for the most part) force you to use less weight than traditional training - providing incredible amounts of stress to the muscles, while not stressing the joints nearly as much. Because of the super high intensity, you can reduce sets and reps as well as the number of exercises in each session (as long as you keep it balanced) and the number of sessions each week.

I've been training consistently for 40 years - I don't consider myself ripped or jacked, but that's never been my goal either. I've wanted to remain as athletic as possible and injury free - which has worked incredibly well. I'm a lot stronger than most 180 lb guys and certainly those who are over 50 (I'll be 58 in a couple weeks)

Another concern of mine is to maintain very high levels of cardio vascular health. The reduced time with the lifting regimen provides more time for cardio work.

My strength routine is typically twice a week, 9 or 10 muscle groups, one set to complete failure. Maybe 45 seconds to one minute between exercises dependent on the amount of muscle being trained. I do at least 20 minute cardio warmup before the session to reduce the chance of injury during the high intensity work.

In the late 80's I started a class at the health club I was training out of - there were several guys that wanted to push the envelope and try some of these methods out. The first week there were 12 of us, by about the 4th week we were down to three. The general consensus was those who dropped out didn't want to work that hard.

High Intensity training and brief workout sessions are nothing new at all, but it's certainly very effective.

[fitness1]

Originally Posted by rokdog49

I also eat a ton of protein and limit my carbs and fats. I’m taking Creatine as well.

Be careful with the protein thing - 1 gram per kilogram of body weight is safe and healthy. More than that can strip you body of it's calcium and excess amounts are also stored in fat cells.

[blue]

Originally Posted by rokdog49

I’m very familiar with what he is explaining.
I don’t disagree with you on this. In fact we mostly agree. I am trying to put on a lot more mass.
In order to do that, training to failure as you progressively increase the resistance is the main way to do that, but you have to attack the muscles every which way you can. At 57 and with all due respect, you have no idea what it takes to build muscle mass at 70. The difference in our ages means I have to train much harder to have appreciable gains.

I also eat a ton of protein and limit my carbs and fats. I’m taking Creatine as well.

Do you know specifically how many protein grams you are eating? Not attacking. trying to help.

[blue]

Originally Posted by fitness1

My strength routine is typically twice a week, 9 or 10 muscle groups, one set to complete failure. Maybe 45 seconds to one minute between exercises dependent on the amount of muscle being trained. I do at least 20 minute cardio warmup before the session to reduce the chance of injury during the high intensity work.

High Intensity training and brief workout sessions are nothing new at all, but it's certainly very effective.

Yup. Not new. But it flies in the face of the serious enthusiasts like cross fit or other Gym Rats.

My primary workout, which I do daily, is, not counting legs, Pushups, rows, shoulder presses (in the form of the pike position pushup) and Pullups, all done on a TRX. Legs are either going to be kettlebell (less leg but great for anterior) or one legged squats, again with TRX because I don't have that kind of balance or strength.

I do the presses and pulls super slow to failure, hold the failure point until I can't, and slowly drop down and hold that isometrically. I then give a twenty second rest, and repeat the exercise two more times. Of course if I did 6 the first time, it's 3 the second, and maybe 1 full one the third.

I do this daily. To be completely honest I don't count the legs when I say it takes 8 minutes.

For Cardio I either do a 30 second full out sprint at high tension on the spin bike, 2 minute rest, repeat 4 to 5 times. Or when weather permits, I run up the hill I live on, as fast as I can, walk back down, and repeat. It's about a 1/4 mile. My recovery time on stress tests is great. I do cardio typically every other day.