[Home] [Philosophy] [What's New] [Products] [FAQ] [Feedback] [Order]
[Editor: See notation at the end of this article, including updates, regarding additional article on this site.]
For several years we've been hearing about a form of lifting called "super slow," where each repetition is performed slowly (up 10 second, pause, down five seconds, for example). The basic concept - to place greater demand on the muscles by eliminating momentum - is not new. The difference is the extreme slowness of the reps and the claims by some that this is the best (and safest) way to train for size and strength - and some would even add aerobic fitness.
Until now, I haven't written about this subject, because there is no research published in peer reviewed journals comparing the efficacy of slow and fast lifting. (One unpublished study reported a 27 pound strength increase for slow training compared to 22 pounds for regular speed.) Frankly, lifting very slowly has never appealed to me. It sounds like a very hard and unpleasant way to train. Anything I wrote would simply be my opinion and, no doubt, reflect my personal prejudice. Nevertheless, interest in the concept is clearly growing; it's time to address the subject.
I decided the best way to proceed would be to have two experts make the case for their preferred form of lifting. My objective is to provide readers with information that will help them decide for themselves whether to lift slow or fast, or perhaps do both. With this in mind, I asked Richard Winett, Ph.D., Director of the Center for Research in Health Behavior at Virginia Tech and publisher of Master Trainer newsletter, to explain the advantages of lifting slowly. After a lifetime of doing mostly explosive reps, Dick turned to the slow protocol a few years ago after experiencing pain in his joints from lifting very heavy weights. The change has definitely agreed with him. "I actually find moving slowly more interesting, because it requires such unbelievable focus and intensity and, of course, it's different from all my past training," Dick told me. He actually claims to find it enjoyable. "But the biggest plus," Dick says, "is no joint inflammation."
For the other side, I turned to Dr. Patrick O'Shea, Professor Emeritus of exercise and sports science at Oregon State University. Also a lifetime lifter, Pat has among other things been an outstanding competitive Olympic lifter - at a body weight of 181, he did a 270 standing press, 276 snatch and 342 clean & jerk. Importantly, he has been a student of sports physiology for more than four decades. His textbook Scientific Principles and Methods of Strength Fitness, published in 1976, sold over 75,000 copies and was considered the bible of strength training. His book, Quantum Strength & Power Training (Gaining the Winning Edge) (1996), [now in its second edition call Quantum Strength Fitness II (Gaining The Winning Edge) (2000) is in my opinion the definitive work on athletic-type strength training. For athletes interested in strength training to improve performance in any sport, Quantum is the book to read and Pat is the man to see.
I believe you'll agree that Dick and Pat state their cases extremely well. Read, learn and enjoy. (I'll conclude with my own opinion.)
The Case for Training Using Slower Repetitions
by Richard A. Winett, Ph.D.
The Main Points: The case for training using slower repetitions revolves around a number of interrelated points: 1. the difference between demonstrating and building strength; 2. the role of intensity in building strength and muscle; 3. how muscle fibers respond to intensity; 4. how to increase intensity and, 5. specificity of training effects.
Demonstrating Versus Building Strength: Throughout the exercise field and for the lay public, there is confusion about the difference between demonstrating strength and building strength. We can use a weightlifter performing a clean and jerk as an example, although there are many examples that would suffice. Often the demonstration of strength also involves a demonstration of power. Power is defined as work per unit of time and given this definition, it is apparent that the quicker you move, for example, with a large weight on an Olympic bar, the more power you are demonstrating. But is this the best way - explosive lifting - to build strength?
The Olympic lifter is depending on technique and a good deal of momentum to hoist the weight off the floor and then once the weight is positioned on the shoulders, literally throwing the weight overhead. The more technique and momentum used the better the performance. In fact, the idea is to capitalize on technique, momentum, and neuromuscular learning and efficiency to make the lift easier.
To get an idea of how much technique and pure momentum are involved in doing the clean and jerk, try using just 100 lb. but take five or six seconds to hoist the bar from the ground to your chest, and then take another five to six seconds to slowly move the weight over your head. With the slower movement, momentum is sharply reduced, technique is quite different; primarily you are moving the bar with the strength of your muscles and not depending upon outside forces.
Thus, in the process of using technique and momentum, the lifter is not necessarily subjecting specific muscle groups to a high intensity stimulus. In fact, once technique and momentum are introduced into any movement, the effect is just the opposite - there is reduced intensity and muscle. Thus, an enormous weight may have been hoisted and thrown - enormous force (mass x acceleration) is involved - but this is not necessarily the same as an intense stimulus and high muscle tension. High force is not the same as high intensity.
The Role of Intensity: The exercise research literature points, through many different angles, to the key role of intensity in producing gains in strength and muscle mass. For example, the research suggests that neither frequency or volume (number of sets), or number of repetitions in a set is that critical as long as intensity is high. Thus, presuming that a person is training intensely, defined as reaching a state of momentary muscular fatigue, there does not appear to be much difference in outcome between training twice or three times per week, or perhaps even once; if one or three or five sets per movement are used; or if sets are done with six or 20 repetitions. If the training is done intensely, then the cardinal requirement has been met.
How Muscle Fibers Respond: One possible mechanism that explains these outcomes is found in the long established size principle. The size principle states that muscle fibers are activated in order of their size. To be simplistic, this means that the smaller slow-twitch fibers are activated before the larger fast-twitch fibers. As the smaller fibers fatigue, larger and larger fibers throughout the entire spectrum are activated. Once a fiber is activated, it remains activated (all or none principle) generating less and less force until the exercise is terminated.
The misconception is that speed of movement is the governing factor. The notion is that if you move slowly in training you only activate the slow-twitch fibers and if you move quickly, you will activate the fast-twitch fibers. This is part of the rationale for advising athletes to train with not just fast, but explosive movements. This intuitively obvious rationale is actually incorrect. It is one instance where "common sense" is wrong.
Muscle fibers are activated in order of their size, but the key stimulus determining how many fibers are activated and fatigued is intensity of effort. Thus, I could move very quickly using a moderately heavy resistance but this may not be a high intensity effort. Conversely, I could move very slowly with a resistance and reach a point of momentary muscular failure after five repetitions and one minute of "time under load". Such a degree of intensity likely equates to activating and fatiguing fast twitch fibers.
Notice that the discussion revolves around a paradigm that is concerned with intensity and tension within muscle groups. The mechanistic paradigm that simply equates force and power with the stimulus causing adaptations appears to be incorrect. Thus, the various derivatives of this paradigm such as developing programs based on percentages of maximum lifts or "total tonnage" lifted also appear incorrect. It's not that the calculations of these approaches are wrong but rather the approach is focusing on the wrong dimensions, weight lifted vs. intensity and muscle fatigue.
Gauging Intensity: Since it appears that higher intensities are required to fatigue both slow and fast twitch fibers, a problem that exists is to define the level of intensity which sufficiently fatigues muscles fibers to cause appropriate adaptations. Unfortunately, the threshold value of intensity is not known and even if it was known, presently there is no practical way to measure intensity within muscles and guide training. In cardiovascular training we can conveniently use heart rate as a guide to intensity of training, but we do not have a comparable measurement apparatus for intensity in resistance training. We do, however, know that when a point of momentary exhaustion is reached then training intensity is very high and a large percentage of muscle fibers have been activated and fatigued.
In practice, safety dictates that while certain movements such as machine curls can be trained to the point of momentary muscular failure, other movements such as free weight squats should not be performed to failure without reliable spotters. In most cases, without reliable spotters, an athlete should stop that movement for one or two repetitions short of failure, which represents somewhat less than 100% intensity.
Increasing Intensity: When most people consider methods to increase intensity and overload the targeted muscle groups, the primary and often only methods they consider is to increase resistance, repetitions, or both. Unfortunately, these increases may be accomplished by sacrificing form, introducing more momentum, and moving quicker. By simply equating the weight on the bar or the resistance on the machine with intensity, people have been shortchanging themselves in a number of ways. First, as has been noted, sacrificing form, using more momentum, and moving more quickly are actually ways to decrease intensity for the targeted muscles. The progress they are seeing then is basically an illusion. Second, sacrificing form and moving more quickly introduces acceleration. Some trainees will arrive at the point where they can handle more resistance in some movements when moving quickly then their musculoskeletal system can safely support. The result is predictable. The force "finds" the weak links, for example, the lower back, and promotes an acute, and possibly traumatic injury, or promotes a chronic condition.
Intensity, however, is not necessarily dependent upon high force, that is, high levels of resistance. By performing repetitions slowly, particularly with a slow concentric (positive) part of the repetition, at least initially less resistance is required, momentum is markedly reduced, and the degree of intensity for the targeted muscles may in fact be increased. This is the key to building strength and power.
Try squatting with a specific weight, first with a 2-second positive and then with an 8-second positive. Which one is the harder and more intense rep? Clearly, the rep with the 8-second positive. Which rep produces more power (work per unit of time)? Clearly, the 2-second positive rep. But which rep speed will produce greater adaptation, because it is more intense? It's the 8-second positive rep. So, it's apparent that traditional ways of measuring power are not relevant for effective training.
Moving more slowly, however, is only one tactic that can be employed. Shortening the time between sets is another tactic. If I take less time between sets involving the same muscle groups, fatigue is greater and intensity is higher. More resistance can be used for a second set with several minutes rest between sets compared to the resistance used with 30 seconds rest, but the intensity may be lower with long rest intervals.
Transfer of Training: Another important point of confusion involves specificity of training and transfer of training effects. A considerable amount of research literature suggests that training effects are specific to the movements done in training and that transfer of training effects is often minimal. Thus, a person who trains explosively as an Olympic lifter may over time be able to demonstrate more and more power in the lifts. However, there may be very little transfer to such movements as jumping, sprinting, let alone blocking or catching a football. A person primarily becomes better at the activities they do and unless other activities are very similar, the expectation is minimal transfer. Thus, the research literature suggests that the idea of training explosively in the weight room in order to be explosive on the athletic field is again an idea with great intuitive appeal but little scientific support.
Athletes should train in the safest and most efficient way and spend the rest of their time adapting their strength to their chosen sports. Thus, Olympic weight lifters need to practice Olympic lifts, football players need to practice football skills, wrestlers need to learn wrestling techniques, and tennis players need to practice serving and volleying. All are DEMONSTRATIONS of power for their given sport. But, what is the safest and most efficient way to build strength and power?
Building Strength and Power: From the prior points it becomes apparent that an athlete should train in efficient ways that maximize intensity. Thus, since there is virtually no evidence to support the added efficacy of multiple set training or very frequent training, an athlete simply desiring to increase strength and muscle for their designated sport should train by using slower repetitions and perhaps shorter rest periods between sets. (There are other methods for increasing intensity without increasing resistance, but they are beyond the scope of this article.) A serious athlete could probably do a twice per week whole body routine. Each workout could involve perhaps six to 10 movements and take no more than about 15 to 25 minutes. This quite interestingly would also be the case for the weightlifter. The weightlifter would build strength through such training and then specifically apply that strength and practice the specific movements involved in weightlifting.
Slower speed repetitions require an adjustment of the repetition range and appropriate time under load. For example, if a rep cadence of 8 seconds for the concentric (positive) part and 4 seconds for the eccentric (negative) part of the rep was used, the athlete could aim for five or six reps taking 60 to 72 seconds. If a slower cadence was used such as 10 for the positive and 5 for the negative then four or five reps may be used.
Not surprisingly, the exact same points that were made about resistance training for athletes apply to everyone interested in safely and efficiently improving strength and muscle mass.
The Case For Lifting Rapidly
by Patrick O'Shea, Ed.D
I agree with Dr.Winett that lifting rapidly can be counterproductive and dangerous, if done haphazardly and carelessly. Used properly, however, with adequate resistance and under controlled circumstances, explosive lifting is relatively safe and very productive.
As I wrote in Quantum Strength & Power Training, "One of the purposes of [rapid or] athletic-type lifting is to train and condition an athlete to generate maximum force at higher and higher movement speed. In competitive athletics, when all other factors are equal, power is the deciding factor between winning and losing."
Strength times speed equals power. The Force-Velocity Curve, taken from my book and shown below, illustrates the working relationship between strength and speed. In fact, the curve tells us everything we need to know about developing strength and power. The curve shows that neither lifting with great speed and little resistance, or maximum resistance with little or no speed, produces optimal strength and power. Only training intensity that shifts the middle portion of the curve to the right, by either increasing force (resistance) or speed or both, will increase strength and power - and most likely muscle size or hypertrophy. Factors influencing muscle hypertrophy are: type of training, intensity, nutrition and heredity.
Again, one of the main purposes of rapid or athletic-type lifting (snatches, cleans and related movements) it to train and condition an athlete to generate maximum muscular force at higher and higher movement speed. This is NOT going to be accomplished through slow lifting or powerlifting. This concept is illustrated in Quantum Strength by comparing the power values generated by a world record Olympic lift and a world record power lift, specifically Pisarenko's 585 pound clean and Kenady's 893 pound deadlift. (See photos below.) Without going through the precise computations in the book, the greater speed (.90 seconds) and distance (.90 meters) of Pisarenko's clean far exceeds the power output of the much heavier, but slower (2 seconds) and shorter (.40 meters) deadlift by Kenady. Pisarenko's clean produced almost four times as much power (resistance, distance and speed combined), 21.64 watts/kg body mass, as Kenady's deadlift, which produced only 5.67 watts/kg body mass. Slow lifting as in bodybuilding or power lifting does NOT increase torso kinetic energy or torso rotational energy, nor train the mind to think in terms of acceleration and speed as required in most athletic events.
Kenady's Deadlift------------Pisarenko's Clean
Training with the Olympic lifts develops strength, power, acceleration, speed and mobility, all of which transfer to athletic movements found in other sports. While no published research exists to validate this statement, deductive reasoning and overwhelming empirical evidence provides strong support.
Fifteen years ago the University of Nebraska started training their football team using only the Olympic lifts and the squat (and still do today). The training change produced stronger, faster, more mobile players--and a winning record. The effect was to force other schools to adopt a similar strength program. In fact, it's difficult to name a college today that does not embrace athletic-type strength training. Another example is Allen Feurback, former world record holder in the shot put and U.S. National Olympic lifting champion (242 lb.class). Prior to switching from bodybuilding exercises to Olympic lifting, Al's best throw was 56 feet. After switching he threw a world record 71.5 feet. Both of these examples present strong empirical evidence of the transfer of training from Olympic-type lifting to other sporting activities. I believe you'll agree, this evidence is hard to refute. Transfer is the hallmark of athletic-type strength training. This concept is universally accepted by sports physiologists who know and understand athletic-type strength training.
As for muscle fiber recruitment order, an electromyography (EMG) study I did 20 years ago showed that the size principle does not hold in maximum explosive power movements. As explained in Quantum Strength & Power, it is almost entirely the fast-twitch motor units that are recruited in performing such movements.
EMG techniques make it possible to study recruitment order, the relationship between stimulation and the amount of force developed, the type of muscle contraction (concentric vs. eccentric) and the effects of fatigue. EMG analysis in my study showed the approximate percentage of the recruitment of muscle fiber types in the quadriceps of a trained athlete during execution of a one repetition squat with progressively increasing loads.
Starting with 60% of one-repetition maximum, the slow-twitch fibers contribute 60 percent to the effort; fast-twitch fatigue resistant fibers, 30 percent; and fast-twitch fatigable 10 percent. At 100 percent maximum effort, however, the percentage of slow-twitch fibers involved is only 5%, while fast-twitch fatigue resistant is 15 percent, and fast-twitch fatigable is 80 percent.
The implications for athletic-type strength training are clear. To develop strength in the fast-twitch fibers you have to train with heavy weights. Light weights contribute little to optimizing strength and power performance.
The onus is on advocates of slow lifting to determine the degree of muscle fiber activity resulting from that protocol. Which method, slow or fast, stimulates more fast-twitch motor units? We know that high-intensity, explosive power movements activate a large percentage of fast-twitch muscle fibers. Is that also true for slow lifting?
Slow lifting also involves an element of danger not seen in fast lifting, where there is no prolonged breath holding. The technical details are in Quantum Strength & Power, but in simple terms slow, prolonged lifting impairs blood flow to and from the heart. Obstruction is virtually complete when the force of muscle contraction effort reaches 80 percent of maximum. How hard the heart must work during a lift is determined to a great extent by the arterial blood pressure required to drive the blood through to the muscle tissue which is contracting the hardest. So performing sustained forceful lifting movements greatly increases the muscle tissue pressure, thus requiring a very high perfusion pressure, which in turn causes a large increased pressure and reduces blood flow back to the heart (reduced venous flow to the heart). During lifting, insufficient venous return not only impairs the heart's own blood supply (the heart cannot work anaerobically) it also causes a drop in stroke volume (the amount of blood pumped with each heart beat) due to insufficient filling of the chambers.
The June issue of Hypertension reported that slow forceful weight training can result in stiffer arteries. What happens is pulse pressure increases because the arteries don't expand. It has to do with the rigid lifting position when bodybuilding or powerlifting. This is not seen in Olympic-type lifting or programs where there is a balance between weightlifting and aerobic exercise. People with borderline hypertension need to be careful how they lift in terms of type of lifts (large or small muscle group exercises - large are recommended as they have less effect on blood pressure), intensity, and prolong breath holding. Middle-age lifters should be especially aware of this potentially dangerous health risk and maintain a good level of cardiovascular condition.
To counter the immediate effects (and potential long-term chronic effects) of heavy lifting and help maintain a healthy cardiovascular system, lifters need to do a minimum of 15 minutes of aerobic cool-down at a low intensity (heart rate 115-120) immediately following every lifting session. This provides the heart an opportunity to work against a low perfusion pressure while enhancing venous return.
I don't know, but my best guess is that Dr. Winett and Dr. O'Shea are both correct, but from different perspectives. Dick Winett is no doubt right from the vantage point of a person suffering from inflamed joints, and he may be correct from a purely bodybuilding perspectives. On the other hand, Pat O'Shea is probably correct from the viewpoint of one mainly interested in athletic performance.
Slow lifting is clearly a sound option for someone who suffers from sore joints and wants to continue lifting hard, without inflicting further damage. In fact, Dick has demonstrated by his own example that doing reps very slowly not only eliminates the pain, but allows one to continue training extremely hard. Dick has become so adept at lifting slowly that in some cases he is approaching his previous best lifts done in typical explosive style. What's more, he hasn't lost any size in the process. The jury is still out, but it may well be that lifting slowly is a viable strategy for bodybuilders interested in loading muscles throughout the range of motion solely for the purpose of building size.
Pat O'Shea, however, has the overwhelming weight of current evidence on his side from the standpoint of athletic performance. I can testify to that from my own experience. There's no doubt in my mind that doing the Olympic lifts gave me a decided edge in winning the New Mexico State Pentathlon Championship; among other things, the quick lifts gave me the power to out jump all of my non-lifting high school classmates. (See my book Challenge Yourself and "Keep That Spring" on this web site.)
As Pat observes, today most high school, college and professional coaches embrace athletic-type strength training. Al Vermeil, the only strength coach who has been in the NFL, the NBA and Major League Baseball, and the only coach to have a world championship ring in football (San Francisco 49s) and basketball (Chicago Bulls), is a sterling example. "We use the Olympic lifts [power cleans, power snatches, push presses, push jerks and high pulls]," says Vermeil, "because they simultaneously develop strength, explosiveness, speed, coordination, timing, balance and spatial awareness, all qualities essential to the success of any athlete." Citing the specificity principle, Vermeil adds: "Train slow and the athlete becomes better at doing things slowly. Train explosively, and the athletic will become more explosive."
That's my opinion. What's yours?
For more information on slow lifting and many other training topics go Master Trainer (www.ageless-athletes.com). Pat O'Shea's book Quantum can be ordered from us (see Recommended Books under the Products page below), and to visit Pat's website go O'Shea (www.StrengthFit.com). For instructions on how to learn the Olympic lifts, we recommend An Introduction To Olympic-Style Weightlifting, which can also be ordered from us (See Recommended Books under Products page below). For those interested in becoming a competitive Olympic weightlifter, we carry and recommend The Weightlifting Encyclopedia, the definitive book on the subject.
Artie Drechsler has produced an impressive new "Video Companion" to his highly acclaimed Weightlifting Encyclopedia (see our Products section). It's not a slick presentation, but it's very thorough and absolutely information packed. Three hours long, the video is divided into six major sections: Introduction, Elements of Technique, Technical Rules, Assistance Exercises, Teaching and Learning Techniques, and Using Equipment. Beginners will find the suggested sequences for learning the lifts especially helpful.
If you're interested in becoming an Olympic lifter, this video includes just about everything you need to know to get started on a solid footing. It's probably overkill if you only want to learn the power snatch and power clean, but you'll certainly get your money's worth and much more. Artie Drechsler doesn't do anything half way, and this video proves it again in spades. We highly recommend it. The price is $39.95 + $4.00 shipping.
For more information or to order go to his website (www.wlinfo.com).
Arthur Drechsler, author of The Weightlifting Encyclopedia and an expert on the subject of building usable strength, offers his thoughts on slow lifting below. Nobody does a better job of analyzing and explaining the finer points of strength training than Artie Drechsler. In his usual calm and measured way, he points out some drawbacks of slow training that are not readily apparent. For a sophisticated analysis of lifting slowly - and why it would probably be a mistake for most people to limit themselves to this type of training - read on.
* * * *
There are clearly a number of things to recommend slow training. As Dr. Winett has noted, slow training may minimize joint stress for some trainers. It also certainly maximizes time under tension for a given period of training and such tension has been shown to have an influence on the training effect. In addition, there are a number of very valid points made in the slow training literature. For example, in pointing out some of the hazards of aerobic exercise, the slow training advocates have highlighted problems that can arise from a form of exercise which is typically viewed as being much safer than resistance training, although this is in many ways incorrect.
However, as is the case with any form of exercise, the value of slow training tends to be quite specific. For instance, slow training will prepare one to move objects slowly in a relatively efficient manner. But because human activity rarely proceeds in this fashion, it is unlikely that trainees will find this training effect to be of much practical value.
There will no doubt be other training effects on the muscles as a result of slow training, such as hypertrophy and increases in strength. But the latter increases are likely to be most evident in strength tests which involve moving objects slowly. Carryover to other forms of strength performance will tend to be less profound.
Some advocates of slow training argue that certain forms of cheating, or use of momentum, when one is lifting in a conventional manner, makes it difficult to regulate the training effect. But if regulating the training effect for such training presents difficulties, so does carrying out a particular lift over a period of several seconds. This is because a trainee may find that lifting the bar more slowly toward the beginning and end of the movement is far easier than lifting at consistent tempo (which includes lifting through the sticking point). Therefore, while two lifts may take the same 5 seconds, they can evoke very different training stimuli because of differences in performance style. Even small changes in tempo during slow training can likely influence the training stress experienced by the trainee as much as other forms of cheating.
I also have significant doubts that slow training will prove to be more effective in terms of strength development than other forms of training. My reasoning for this is that the effectiveness of the very slowest form of training ever developed, isometric contractions (which are actually done at zero speed), have not proved to be more result producing than more conventional forms of training.
Finally, it has been my experience that training at a very slow tempo can cause tendonitis. There appears to be something about the slow tempo of lowering the resistance that generates this reaction. This is certainly not to say that all trainees who practice this form of exercise will experience these effects, or that tendonitis is unknown to conventional resistance trainers. The point is that no form of training is exempt from stress related injuries and that in my experience such injuries tend to be generated by inappropriate training loads and exercise performance than from slow vs. fast lifting. All training must be titrated so that the athlete optimizes the risk/benefit ratio. And one of the best ways to avoid overuse injuries is to use a mix of training methods.
Dr. O'Shea has already pointed out some of the issues related to cardiovascular stress that may arise from very slow training carried out over a long period of time. While we are certainly far from understanding the cardiovascular risks (if any) associated with slow training, or really any other form of resistance training, it would appear that if any form of resistance training presents a risk it would tend to be the training method that raised and sustained blood pressure levels for the greatest period of time. There's little or no evidence at this point that conventional forms of resistance training affect blood pressure adversely. In fact, at least one study conducted in the former USSR showed no negative effects on blood pressure even from competitive weightlifting training.
In summary, I believe that slow training is a useful tool in the training arsenal of most resistance trainers. It may confer special benefits to certain athletes who are experiencing joint pain from performing more conventional forms of resistance or sport training. On the other hand, it may cause connective tissue problems in some trainees. Training is very specific and those who wish to utilize their resistance training to prepare them for the rigors of a sporting life, or even everyday life, would likely benefit most from a wide variety of training methodologies including some explosive types of training.
It should be noted that explosive training is far less risky than many would have one believe if: a) the trainer is conditioned gradually to explosive movements, b) the trainer has no pre-existing injuries, c) warm-ups are adequate, and, d) the technique used in the explosive movements is sound. Contrary to popular belief, injury levels in weight training, including competitive Olympic-style Weightlifting, are lower than they are in many other forms of sporting activity that are considered quite safe. Needless to say, all forms of strenuous exercise, including slow training, carry risks, but only strenuous activity will prepare one for a strenuous life, perhaps even for a much more sedentary life.
[Editor: For later article on this subject go: " Slow or No."]
Ripped Enterprises, 528 Chama, N.E., Albuquerque, New Mexico 87108, (505) 266-5858, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org. FAX: (505) 266-9123. Business hours: Monday-Friday, 8-5, Mountain time.
[Home] [Philosophy] [What's New] [Products] [FAQ] [Feedback] [Order]
Copyright©1999 Clarence and Carol Bass. All rights reserved.