@fergus 1357 wrote:
I forget where I heard it first, but I think it was some reputable (otherwise I would have ignored it) German literature which suggested that all athletic S&C programs should be 70:20:10 Concentric:Eccentric:Isometric.
I think it’s a very interesting concept and there is a place for Eccentrics and Isometrics in some cases – but again it all has to be fitted into a general program.
I’m not sure if I agree that eccentrics necessarily give the most hypertrophy Tom – but perhaps you mean that increasing eccentric component and therefore TUT is useful?
fergus,
i agree with what you’re saying. in my (admittedly limited!) experience i find that people tend to rush through sets and focus on the concentric aspect of lifting and therefore miss out on sufficient TUT to stimulate muscle growth.
however the other reason i mention eccentrics is for the micro-trauma it induces and the subsequent muscle adaptation that this trauma signals. but just to be clear, i’m not advocating a hypertrophy phase in a traditional periodisation sense or a bodybuilding program: i’d include a small amount within a power-orientated, conjugate programme.
i also feel that while the ability to produce force is paramount, the ability to reduce force is often under-valued in many strength training programmes.
just my thoughts. id’ be interested to hear what you (or anyone else) thinks.
cheers!
tom