Josh

From reading this forum and other resources, I think it's safe for me to conclude that an effective exercise should contain these besides other things: (a) Perfect form, which means full range of motion done in correct body posture; (b) Greater ROM is preferable; (c) Quality of muscle contraction and relaxation cycle in the movement is also important. Correct me if I'm wrong, please, but I think all these show that ROM is very important for an exercise to be effective and to yield muscle growth and strength.

But just recently I read about Static Contraction method, where it is suggested that we do not need ROM at all. All we need to do is hold the weight at the top of the movement where the muscle is at the most contracted state, for about 5-10 secs, and that would be enough to stimulate muscle growth and strength. Of course the weight used is far more than if we use full motion, but this method seems to eliminate the importance of ROM alltogether.

So I would like to ask your opinion on the above. Does this method make sense? How does it compare to the more traditional ROM method? Thanks.

- Josh

Snake_Eyes

Isometrics are good for developing strength in a very narrow part of the ROM, as well as developing certain qualities of explosiveness if combined with other types of training.

As an exclusive means of training, you won't find it very effective, though.

LAM

I've been using some static contraction principles for over 10 years now. manly on certain compound exercises (bench, military, close grip and others). I broke many strength plateaus by using them and believe the methods helped my to become a member of the 2,000 lb PL'er club...

however for hypertrophy, I'm still out to lunch on that one...

Dumbest statement made in the Anabolic Zone for Nov

TBD

-----------------------------------------------------

What you talking about Willis ?

ponyboy

Static exercises are great for developing strength where you may have a "sticking point" for certain movements, but they only develop strength at that specific joint angle for the most part. All of your other principles are very sound.

mick01

I agree with LAM, although I use allot of pre-exaust and I only use the static method if I reach a plateau on a single joint movement. i.e. leg extension, pec-deck ect.

LAM,
At what point did you use statics on your pressing movements? Just before lockout???????

To refuse to learn anything that could prove beneficial to yourself is a working definition of stupid!

High-intensity training is going all-out, not almost all out. It is taking one set to one's absolute limit, not almost to the limit. It is using whatever equipment’s available. It is not the words of two or three men, but a commitment to work as hard as possible while in the gym without socializing, resting excessively between sets, or falling prey to the 'this isn't going to work so I'll copy the star' attitude"

LAM

yes, for the most part. I have always had naturally high T levels so it seemed that muscular tensile strength was never a weak point for me but building tendon and ligament tensile strength was.

static contraction techniques also build up that "mental" ability that you need when lifting very heavy...

Dumbest statement made in the Anabolic Zone for Nov

TBD

-----------------------------------------------------

What you talking about Willis ?