Perhaps no other industry has as much hype as the fitness industry. This billion dollar market has its fair share of unfulfilled promises and broken dreams. From the days of seeing Charles Atlas comics of bullies kicking sand in the face of skinny boys to the present, fitness has been a lofty goal that for many appears out of reach. Our first test review will be of Explosive Training Streamline Machine. This is an isometric exercise machine consists of a bench and bar which provides a digital readout of the maximum amount of force exerted on the bar. Pete Sisco, an accomplished author in the field of exercising with heavy weights in a limited range of motion, apparently helped originally develop the machine. While Sisco is no longer affiliated with the product, his theories provide the basis for the muscle building goals of this exercise equipment. (Lately, Tony Reno has added additional software to an updated version which apparently claims fat reducing and aerobic benefits.) This review will primarily concentrate on the alleged muscle building benefits of the machine.
Pre test criticism of the Streamline: Prior to testing the machine, it is incumbent to acknowledge some of the criticism of the machine and of Pete Sisco's Maximum Contraction theories which one runs into on the Internet. One criticism is that "supposed users" increases in static contraction strength (in their strongest range) do not correlate to gain of strength with full range of motion lifts. Another complaint is that some actually lose strength in full range of motion after prolonged static contraction training. A third criticism is that after prolonged static contraction training, the subject loses endurance. The fourth criticism is no before and after studies.
Test subject: 49 year old male. 6'1" 191 lbs. BMI per Wii Fit 23.8. Better then average athlete. Weight training for past 10 years: moderate.
Pre Streamline training Evaluation Will Include: Machine bench press: Free weight bench press: Pullups: Pushups: Chinups: Vertical leap. Streamline testing will include: Bench: Military press: Lat pull down: Leg press: Toe press: Row: Dead lift: Shrug: abdominal crunch:
Testing protocol: In order to address potential criticism before the start of the test, several modifications have been put in place. For example, instead of training in just the strongest range, there will be three static holds, HIGH, LOW, MIDDLE or the equivalent. Prior to the three static holds, there will be a relatively light warm up of full range calisthenic or dumbbell. A similar warm down will occur after the three static holds are complete. ( For example, prior to bench press holds, 10 push ups. Same for warm down.) The purpose of the three different positions (starting in the strongest range first) is to see if multiple hold points will help transfer any strength increase to full range of motion. Static holds shall be all out for 5 seconds as advocated by Sisco followers. Similar reasoning is behind the warm ups and warm down. In addition, the warm downs may off set any decline in endurance. Initially, the subject will be given a full body work out. There will initially be 4 days rest between strength work outs. If this proves too taxing, then rest days will be added accordingly. We may also switch to more of the A and B split schedule as advocated by Sisco should the subject experience discomfort. On days where no strength training will be performed, a moderate walk or elliptical will be performed in a range that should not interfere with muscle building. (It should be noted that we will not be strictly following the Explosive Training or Sisco's specific instructions. This is not a comment upon whether their programs will work as written. Rather, this is an attempt to test this apparatus for strength and fitness gains for this subject within acceptable parameters agreed upon by this subject.)
Measurements To be taken: Chest Arms Thighs Waist The subject's photo will be taken initially and then again after 4 months. The subject's face will be cropped out of the photo and the identity of the subject will not be revealed without his or her consent. Initial measurements of: chest: waste: bicep: thighs: blood pressure: will be recorded and will likely be published.
Hypothesis: 1. The subject will gain static strength over the course of 4 months possibly up to his genetic potential. (An untrained subject one would theorize may take longer to reach his genetic potential.) 2. The subjects full range of motion strength will stay the same or moderately decrease. 3. The subjects weight will slightly decrease. 4. The subjects muscle size will slightly increase. 5. The subjects endurance will remain the same. 6. The subjects resting blood pressure will decrease. 7. Vertical jump will remain the same.
Other subjects: Three female subjects will also under go similar training. Their photos and measurements are not likely to be published. Comments as to their progress or lack there of may be made but the bulk of the data and photographs not shared at this time. Additional remarks: Comments are welcome; however, keep them in good taste. Nothing here is for sale and neither the tester(s) nor subject(s) have any financial stake in the outcome. The anticipated start date is 5-1-09 the training is anticipated to run through September 30, 2009.
9-8-09 Results: Our tests are done. Additional data may be posted on the individual subjects. Here are some results: 1. Static strength increases occurred for all subjects tested. However, the male subjects exhibited smaller gains in static strength that the females. The more trained the subject, the less percentage increase in static strength over the 12 week period. 2. Full range of motion strength was not affected in trained male subjects (except for one male.) In female subjects, full range of motion strength improved. Improvement was present in dynamic strength of untrained male subjects. Dynamic strengh improved with both trained and untrained female subjects. Static strength of all subjects improved. 3. 90% of the subjects had a decrease in weight with static training. 100% of the females reported weight loss to some degree. 4. The muscle size of male subjects remained the same in all but one male tested. That male had a slight increase in bicep size and a moderate increase in thigh circumference. All females tested had a decrease in thigh and waste measurements. None increased in size. 5. There were subjective remarks of increased endurance. This came mostly with training protocols involving 90 second holds at 65%of maximum. No subject tested with less endurance. Some exhibited moderate improvement in full range of motion repetitions. 70% of the females improved their time in the mile run. 6. Blood pressure remained the same. It should be noted that exercise caused a sharp spike immediately post exercise. A physician should be consulted before any exercise program is begun. 7. Vertical jump remained the same or was slightly improved in all subjects but one. She increased her vertical jump significantly. This was directly attributable to static training at high levels on the leg and toe press.
Conclusion: Static training has its place. It especially benefits untrained individuals. Using static contraction followed by range of motion exercises, strength was either maintained or gained in all subjects. Endurance improvements were seen in 70% of all females. No subject demonstrated a decrease in endurance. All subjects expressed an interest in continuing to include static training in their future exercise protocol. The biggest complaint was "back pressure" associated with the leg press.
Update 7-19-10: See Male #1's updated measurements. In addition, there is a new study that suggest that a 7-10 day recovery after a hard workout may be ideal!
Update 5-9-13: Our male subject has agreed to be photographed soon. This is a 4 year follow up study that may help demonstrate how subjects progress over time. Again, this site and its authors have no affiliation with any fitness company or trainer.
Update 5-9-15: We have provided an update on the male subject. He is now 55 and still mostly trains only one time a week with statics. This is not a prepped photo. He weighs about 186 and has definition. Blood pressure, maximum strength, etc were not tested.
Pre test criticism of the Streamline: Prior to testing the machine, it is incumbent to acknowledge some of the criticism of the machine and of Pete Sisco's Maximum Contraction theories which one runs into on the Internet. One criticism is that "supposed users" increases in static contraction strength (in their strongest range) do not correlate to gain of strength with full range of motion lifts. Another complaint is that some actually lose strength in full range of motion after prolonged static contraction training. A third criticism is that after prolonged static contraction training, the subject loses endurance. The fourth criticism is no before and after studies.
Test subject: 49 year old male. 6'1" 191 lbs. BMI per Wii Fit 23.8. Better then average athlete. Weight training for past 10 years: moderate.
Pre Streamline training Evaluation Will Include: Machine bench press: Free weight bench press: Pullups: Pushups: Chinups: Vertical leap. Streamline testing will include: Bench: Military press: Lat pull down: Leg press: Toe press: Row: Dead lift: Shrug: abdominal crunch:
Testing protocol: In order to address potential criticism before the start of the test, several modifications have been put in place. For example, instead of training in just the strongest range, there will be three static holds, HIGH, LOW, MIDDLE or the equivalent. Prior to the three static holds, there will be a relatively light warm up of full range calisthenic or dumbbell. A similar warm down will occur after the three static holds are complete. ( For example, prior to bench press holds, 10 push ups. Same for warm down.) The purpose of the three different positions (starting in the strongest range first) is to see if multiple hold points will help transfer any strength increase to full range of motion. Static holds shall be all out for 5 seconds as advocated by Sisco followers. Similar reasoning is behind the warm ups and warm down. In addition, the warm downs may off set any decline in endurance. Initially, the subject will be given a full body work out. There will initially be 4 days rest between strength work outs. If this proves too taxing, then rest days will be added accordingly. We may also switch to more of the A and B split schedule as advocated by Sisco should the subject experience discomfort. On days where no strength training will be performed, a moderate walk or elliptical will be performed in a range that should not interfere with muscle building. (It should be noted that we will not be strictly following the Explosive Training or Sisco's specific instructions. This is not a comment upon whether their programs will work as written. Rather, this is an attempt to test this apparatus for strength and fitness gains for this subject within acceptable parameters agreed upon by this subject.)
Measurements To be taken: Chest Arms Thighs Waist The subject's photo will be taken initially and then again after 4 months. The subject's face will be cropped out of the photo and the identity of the subject will not be revealed without his or her consent. Initial measurements of: chest: waste: bicep: thighs: blood pressure: will be recorded and will likely be published.
Hypothesis: 1. The subject will gain static strength over the course of 4 months possibly up to his genetic potential. (An untrained subject one would theorize may take longer to reach his genetic potential.) 2. The subjects full range of motion strength will stay the same or moderately decrease. 3. The subjects weight will slightly decrease. 4. The subjects muscle size will slightly increase. 5. The subjects endurance will remain the same. 6. The subjects resting blood pressure will decrease. 7. Vertical jump will remain the same.
Other subjects: Three female subjects will also under go similar training. Their photos and measurements are not likely to be published. Comments as to their progress or lack there of may be made but the bulk of the data and photographs not shared at this time. Additional remarks: Comments are welcome; however, keep them in good taste. Nothing here is for sale and neither the tester(s) nor subject(s) have any financial stake in the outcome. The anticipated start date is 5-1-09 the training is anticipated to run through September 30, 2009.
9-8-09 Results: Our tests are done. Additional data may be posted on the individual subjects. Here are some results: 1. Static strength increases occurred for all subjects tested. However, the male subjects exhibited smaller gains in static strength that the females. The more trained the subject, the less percentage increase in static strength over the 12 week period. 2. Full range of motion strength was not affected in trained male subjects (except for one male.) In female subjects, full range of motion strength improved. Improvement was present in dynamic strength of untrained male subjects. Dynamic strengh improved with both trained and untrained female subjects. Static strength of all subjects improved. 3. 90% of the subjects had a decrease in weight with static training. 100% of the females reported weight loss to some degree. 4. The muscle size of male subjects remained the same in all but one male tested. That male had a slight increase in bicep size and a moderate increase in thigh circumference. All females tested had a decrease in thigh and waste measurements. None increased in size. 5. There were subjective remarks of increased endurance. This came mostly with training protocols involving 90 second holds at 65%of maximum. No subject tested with less endurance. Some exhibited moderate improvement in full range of motion repetitions. 70% of the females improved their time in the mile run. 6. Blood pressure remained the same. It should be noted that exercise caused a sharp spike immediately post exercise. A physician should be consulted before any exercise program is begun. 7. Vertical jump remained the same or was slightly improved in all subjects but one. She increased her vertical jump significantly. This was directly attributable to static training at high levels on the leg and toe press.
Conclusion: Static training has its place. It especially benefits untrained individuals. Using static contraction followed by range of motion exercises, strength was either maintained or gained in all subjects. Endurance improvements were seen in 70% of all females. No subject demonstrated a decrease in endurance. All subjects expressed an interest in continuing to include static training in their future exercise protocol. The biggest complaint was "back pressure" associated with the leg press.
Update 7-19-10: See Male #1's updated measurements. In addition, there is a new study that suggest that a 7-10 day recovery after a hard workout may be ideal!
Update 5-9-13: Our male subject has agreed to be photographed soon. This is a 4 year follow up study that may help demonstrate how subjects progress over time. Again, this site and its authors have no affiliation with any fitness company or trainer.
Update 5-9-15: We have provided an update on the male subject. He is now 55 and still mostly trains only one time a week with statics. This is not a prepped photo. He weighs about 186 and has definition. Blood pressure, maximum strength, etc were not tested.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteLooking forward to the start and the photos.
ReplyDeleteI look forward to the "test" too. But here is my theory:
ReplyDeleteMaximum static traction predominately trains fast twitch fibers. Fast twitch fibers only work for, at most, 20 seconds at a time. After that, you are using slow twitch fibers (because your fast twitch fibers are fatigued.)
HIT and SCT and other high intensity, low volume, low frequency systems do not work for some because of their anatomical make up. If there genetic structure is such that they have predominately slow twitch muscle, I suspect the training will have minimal benefits.
If your subject has a predominance of fast twitch fibers then SCT should work for him. Conversely, A high volume, high frequency routine won't likely work on him because he would be OVERTRAINING his fast twitch fibers.
If the subject has more slow twitch fibers than than VOLUME training is more likely to help him. HIT/SCT programs would generally UNDERTRAIN your subject if the majority of his muscles are slow twitch.
Yet, everone can theoretically improve the strenght of what little fast twitch muscle that they have from SCT in my view. It's just that those with a lot of slow twitch muscle will benefit the least.
So if your subject is a sprinter, I theorize he will benefit the most from this training protocol. If he has the make up of a distance runner, I suspect his improvement will be minimal.
In sum, under my theory the AMOUNT of improvement in the subject will vary according to your FT/ST ratio. This assumes the subject eats an appropriate diet and gets the requisite amount of sleep.
Personal Trainer
When will initial test results be released?
ReplyDeleteIf you decide to go to a work out split, here is an example:
ReplyDeleteWorkout A
Shoulder Press - 170/10/10/10
Shoulder Shrug - 180/10/10/10/10
Biceps - 115/20/20/15 (on bicep machine)
Triceps - 115/20/20/15 (on tricep machine)
Abs - 100/15/10/10 (on abdominal machine)
6/27/03
Workout B
Weight/Set1/Set2/Set3 (hold times - not reps)
Lower Back - 270/10/10/10
Bench Press - 160/10/10/10
Upper Back - 215/10/10/10
Leg Press - 435/12/12/10
Calves - 140/15/10/10
Can't wait to see the results!
ReplyDeleteTONY RENO HAS FALLEN OFF THE FACE OF THE EARTH. EXPLOSIVE FITNESS PHONE HAS BEEN DISCONNECTED AND SO HAS TONY RENO'S CELL AND HOME PHONE. DOES ANYBODY KNOW WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO TONY RENO AND EXPLOSIVE FITNESS?
ReplyDeleteThe above is not true. I personally spoke to Mr. Reno by telephone today when I read this post. If the above poster wishes to email me at mabprudence@aol.com, I will be happy to provide an email. This site is conducting an independent test and is not an advertisement for Explosive Fitness.
ReplyDeleteIF TONY IS AROUND, WHY DOESN'T EXPLOSIVE FITNESS ANSWER THEIR PHONE. I'M A FRIEND OF TONY AND HAVE BEEN FOR AWHILE. I'M USING THE EQUIPMENT FOR YEARS AND I'M IN THE BETA TEST. I'M WORRRIED ABOUT TONY AND HAVEN'T HEARD FROM HIM.
ReplyDeleteAs I said before, I offered you my email. I am not in any way related to the company or any one who works there. I did however speak with him. you must be using the wrong number. The Answering machine says they are working on a production issue and that it will be hard to get back to the caller for a few weeks. Nevertheless, he returned my call and answered some questions we had regarding the equipment.
ReplyDeleteWe welcome comments on this site. We welcome your experiences. But this is not a site to make accusations or implications which are not true. There are plenty of websites that will allow you to contect the company and most of the recent ones have a valid phone number and email.
I for one welcome an objective analysis of this machine. While I recognize 3 or 4 test subjects is not ideal, it will at least give some objective data and analysis on this machine.
ReplyDeletePT. Trainer
Holding three static positions including the mid range makes the most sence if you want both strength and size gains.
ReplyDeleteBig V.
Keep following the posts on the different test subjects as they will be updated frequently.Second, while customer service may be slow to respond at times, the company is viable and does continue to sell and ship products. This testing is being conducted independently of Explosive fitnesses and the testers, trainees and authors have NO affiliation with Explosive Fitness or Tony Reno.
ReplyDeleteHeres what the literature would suggest:
ReplyDelete"Because static vs dynamic exercise-type specificity has been clearly demonstrated, one would expect to find clear evidence that dynamic exercise is better than static exercise for improving performance in dynamic functional activities. Surprisingly such evidence has not been strong. One of the reasons why static exercise is effective for improving dynamic performance is that both static and dynamic training produce similar hypertrophic effects. Also, both kinds of exercise require learning how to generate high forces via neural stimulation of the muscle. In addition, movements such as the vertical jump start from zero velocity. Thus even slow speed strength is critical for accelerating the body early in the movement."
I love your site and your test subjects. I am eager for more posts and photos.When I was training with static Contraction, I was very impressed with my strength gains. I am a white male who was only moderately trained. My strength gains were phenomenal, but my size gains were disappointing. I logged all my measurements and maybe able to retreve them if necessary.
ReplyDeleteDespite strength gains, I looked like I did some weight training, but I did not look strong. I don’t think that anyone would be able to guess that I could max out most gym machines using statics. Furthermore, even though I only trained statically, when I switched back to a full range of motion exercises, the weights I could handle had greatly increased. I concluded that both my static and my dynamic (overall functional strength) strength had improved.
But when it came to measure muscle size, I concluded that I was a hardgainer. I now do super slow range of motion exercise and incorporate some static holds in my training.
What you guys do is great. Unbiased opinions. I understand that testing may not be perfect, but you are giving us the raw data and the subject comments in as close to real time as possible. I for one salute you!
ReplyDeleteI am slowly becoming a believer in the eqipment, at least for my wife.
I am interested to see what effects the training has on muscle size, if any.
ReplyDeleteEnd results and conclusions will be posted soon. We are updating some of the trainee profiles with photos etc. Not all data will be posted, but rather high lights and low lights of the trainging logs.
ReplyDeleteIn short, it's a great way to "teach" the nervous system what it feels like to hold heavy loads, and it allows for max recruitment of muscle fibers. On an aside, there is also a 15 degree carryover in terms of ROM trained. So, while isometric training DOES NOT help to improve increased strength over a full range of motion (ROM), it does increase strength in the ROM in which you are training (in addition to 15 degrees above and below the trained ROM). So it's a great way to help train past sticking points.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, static contraction training has merit but should be used sparingly. I am reluctant to base someone's entire training approach to static contraction training. It is however a nice "kick in the pants" and provides a different training stimulus for someone who has hit a plateau.
Thanks for the update.
ReplyDeleteGood report. I am a male who has had good results with Static Contraction Training. In fact, I gained both strenght and size. I choose to back off some because I thought I might put on 'too much muscle.'
ReplyDeleteMy goal was not to be huge, just look fit. I got stronger and faster without increasing my weight more than 10lbs.
SCT on Explosive Fitnes Stream line helped me accomplish my goals. I am now on a 1 time per week maintaince program. In between workouts, I walk 3x a week and do pushups and situps once a week or so.
Happy Camper
Human's have two types of muscle fibers, slow twitch and fast twitch. The larger, faster-contracting fast-twitch fibers have a greater potential for the development. Individuals who have a higher percentage of fast-twitch fibers have a greater potential for isotonic strength. Muscle biopsies have revealed that heavy weight lifters have twice the area of fast twitch fibers as non lifters. This correlates with genetics and to training. The effect of strength training on muscle fiber types indicates that both types grow larger with training, but growth of the fast fibers is more pronounced with heavy lifting.
ReplyDeleteStrength training can improve the capabilities of both types of muscle fiber but it will never change one type to another. Thus a trainee's genetic makeup will always cap his potential.
Thanks for the study and the comments. Great information here.
ReplyDeleteHas anyone heard from Tony? I am using the new streamline product and was actually one of the first to start the beta program. I have been waiting for the "new release" for quite some time in which "fitness would be solved". The website and program has not changed for 6 months even though it says it is a few bugfixes away. No phone or email I have works. Is Tony still in business? Can anyone help with some info?
ReplyDeleteDoctors Hettinger and Muller" conducted a study in 1953 concerning "Isometrics" or "Static Contractions" (as it's now being referred to.)
ReplyDeleteDrs. Hettinger and Muller concluded that gains in static contraction strength of 5% per week were produced by one daily 66% maximal isometric exercise which is done for 6 seconds.
Such strength gains with so little training time seemed unbelievable. But other subsequent studies confirmed that static contraction training leads to static strength gains. Those gains can be substantial as demonstrated by some of your subjects. But the more highly trained that the subject is, the harder it becomes to improve his strength.
Static contraction and John Little's maximum contraction are the same basic idea. According to Max Contraction, you could do one high intensity full body workout once a week, leaving 6 days to recover and make massive gains in strength and size. Dual factor training advocates training with high intensity four days a week for 3 weeks, followed by the unloading phase of lower intensity training in the 2 weeks following. In theory, you'd still make massive gains.
ReplyDeleteIf by utilizing Max Contraction you can make progressive gains weekly, wouldn't it make more sense than to trash your body for 3 weeks then just lightly abuse it for 2 weeks?
Little is a success story. Most of the “research results” on static contraction is based on strength increases. Strength gains occur rapidly with that method in untrained individuals. The strenght increases result primarily because it’s a great neuromuscular efficiency builder–nerve force improves rapidly. This is true for any type of similar isometric-contraction work. With statics, you get stronger but not necessarily bigger. With statics there probably is some tension-induced hypertrophy of the key 2A fibers due to occlusion, or blood-flow blockage.
ReplyDeleteLittle believes in his system because he sees a lot of strength gains in his clients. While he may think that lack of muscle mass is due to bad genetics, it is mostly likely because statics alone are not a good mass builder. In reality, without drugs or superior genetics, muscle is very hard to build. Yet combining statics and dynamic exercise may maximize what a subject can genetically achieve.
Big B.
I'm confused: 1/ NO males demonstrated ANY increase in full-range strength. 2/ ONE male had a SLIGHT increse in muscle size. All other had NONE. In spite of this they ALL intend to continue including statics in their workouts? And you conclude that statics have a place in a complete workout? I guess, if -results- aren't important!
ReplyDelete“Do not attach yourself to any particular creed exclusively, so that you may disbelieve all the rest; otherwise you will lose much good, nay, you will fail to recognize the truth of the matter.”
ReplyDelete- Ibn al-Arabi
THE SIZE PRINCIPLE AND A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE UNSUBSTANTIATED HEAVIER-IS-BETTER
ReplyDeleteRECOMMENDATION FOR RESISTANCE TRAINING
Ralph N. Carp inelli
Human Performance Laboratory, Adelphi University, Garden City, New York, USA
…”The correct interpretation of the size principle and its practical application should help dedicated trainees understand what constitutes a proper stimulus for resistance training and how to apply that stimulus. That is, the size principle does not support the popular resistance training recommendation to use a maximal or near maximal resistance. The size principle and interpolated twitch studies support the contention that if maximal motor unit activation is desired, a maximal or near maximal effort at the end of a set of repetitions— regardless of the amount of external resistance—will elicit maximal motor unit activity. Effective resistance training does not require the use of a maximal or near maximal force to stimulate the available motor units and produce significant increases in muscular strength.
...effective resistance training simply requires the selec¬tion of a desired range of repetitions (e.g., 3–5, 6–9, 10–12 RM), which is based on a personal preference rather than a specific goal, and a progression of the resistance to stay within the desired range of repetitions (Carpinelli et al. 2004). Very high RMs (e.g., loads lighter than 20 RM) or an extensive time under load (e.g., longer than 2–3 minutes) may involve mechanisms of fatigue that are not conducive to stimulate optimal increases in muscular strength.
...the specific mechanisms of fatigue and exactly what constitutes an optimal stimulus for strength gains are unknown. If a maximal— or near maximal—effort is applied at the end of a set of repetitions, the evidence strongly suggests that the different external forces produced with different amounts of resistance elicit similar outcomes If the size principle was correctly applied effective resistance training may appeal to a larger proportion of the population...
Because many people fear injury... the heavier-is-better perception may actually be a deterrent to resistance training, which deprives those most in need of health-related benefits. These potential health-related benefits include the prevention of osteoporosis, falls, fractures and dis¬ability, changes in risk factors associated with cardio¬vascular disease, some cancers, diabetes (improvements in glucose tolerance and insulin resistance), enhanced lipid profiles, elevated resting metabolic rate, decreased resting blood pressure, reduced back pain and subse¬quent disabilities, and greater functional ability (Winett & Carpinelli 2001)—all in addition to muscular hypertrophy and strength gains.”
Read this again dude:
ReplyDelete1. Static strenght increases occurred for all subjects tested. However, the male subjects exhibited smaller gains in static strength that the females. The more trained the subject, the less percentage increase in static strength over the 12 week period.
2. Full range of motion strength was not affected in trained male subjects (except for one male.) In female subjects, full range of motion strength improved. Improvement was present in dynamic strength of untrained male subjects. Dynamic strengh improved with both trained and untrained female subjects. Static strength of all subjects improved.
3. 90% of the subjects had a decrease in weight with static training. 100% of the females reported weight loss to some degree.
4. The muscle size of male subjects remained the same in all but one male tested. That male had a slight increase in bicep size and a moderate increase in thigh circumference. All females tested had a decrease in thigh and waste measurements. None increased in size.
5. There were subjective remarks of increased endurance. This came mostly with training protocols involving 90 second holds at 65%of maximum. No subject tested with less endurance. Some exhibited moderate improvement in full range of motion repetitions. 70% of the females improved their time in the mile run.
6. Blood pressure remained the same. It should be noted that exercise caused a sharp spike immediately post exercise. A physician should be consulted before any exercise program is begun.
7. Vertical jump remained the same or was slightly improved in all subjects but one. She increased her vertical jump significantly. This was directly attributable to static training at high levels on the leg and toe press.
Conclusion: Static training has its place. It especially benefits untrained individuals. Coupled with range of motion warm ups, strength was either maintained or gained in all subjects. Endurance improvements were seen in 70% of all females. No subject demonstrated a decrease in endurance. All subjects expressed an interest in continuing to include static training in their future exercise protocol. The biggest complaint was "back pressure" associated with the leg press.
Thanks. I think I understand it now.
ReplyDeleteSo good, but not the end all it was thought to be by marketers?
ReplyDeleteBe safe, basically think 'if i pass out during an exercise will i be hurt? safe
ReplyDeleterange, slower movement, no val salva. No ego here.
Remember the fitness culture sells gimmicks to the tune of billions. Anything is
better than eating poorly and watching tv all day. Most people will respond to any protocol for a while. Some will progress more than others.
The male subject did not improve as much as the three females. Yet, all had some benefit from explosive fitness training.
HAS ANYBODY HEARD FROM TONY RENO?
ReplyDeleteI MADE MY FINAL PAYMENT FOR THIS SYSTEM MORE THAN SIX MONTHS AGO AND HAVE RECEIVED NOTHING.
I AM UNABLE TO GET THROUGH BY PHONE AND NONE OF MY EMAILS GET ANSWERED.
I suggest that you may want to post your complaint on the Yahoo forum:
ReplyDeletehttp://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Explosive_Fitness/messages?o=1
Tony Reno posted on that site at least one time. Otherwise, you may need to consult a lawyer for your legal options. We just tested the machine and make no representations as to the company's stability or reliability in handling complaints etc.
Tony hope your alright haven't heard from you for a long time. Im still waiting for that downloadable program .for the card my card has been fried for a year .give me a call 917-747-2701 or I'm coming up to look for in nashua, Your friend Iggy
ReplyDeleteWe already went looking for them. This company is gone, no one can find him, all numbers have been removed. Half your names i know because i shipped you the freight and this company has stiffed us 20,000 and there are at least 3 other freight forwarders in the whole about the same. The companies kyting way of doing business probibly did cause them to fold but more important is the complete uselessness of their product. Do your push ups, sit ups, and deep knee squats daily and you'll never need another machine. Come one people. Tony better stay missing at this point!!! Any creditors better take warning because in the end you will get beat! These are facts, you want to reach me - 617-568-9333 Thiefs!
ReplyDeleteWHEN MY $900.00 METER STOPPED FUNCTIONING I CALLED AND SPOKE WITH TONY RENO PERSONALLY. I WAS PROMISED A NEW METER “NO PROBLEM”. I SENT MY BROKEN METER IN OVER A YEAR AGO AND HAVE NEVER HEARD BACK. I HAVE CALLED LEAVING MESSAGES MANY TIMES AND HE HAS DISCONNECTED HIS PHONE. I LOVED MY MACHINE BUT NOW IT SERVES AS A $3000.00 PILE OF CRAP TO HANG CLOTHS ON.
ReplyDeleteI WOULD NOT RECOMMEND DEALING WITH TONY RENO OR EXPLOSIVE FITNESS!!
IF YOU CAN FIND A WAY TO CONTACT EXPLOSIVE FITNESS PLEASE LET ME KNOW!!
TOM MIXX 586-601-8725
Tom:
ReplyDeleteIf you can get the meter back, you might want to see if it can be repaired at Radio Shack. Otherwise, you may wish to try to buy a strain gage from an internet supplier. Keep trying to contact Tony Reno,using email. Good luck and keep us all posted.
I also sent my meter for the Digital Streamline to Tony Reno about a year and a half ago. They were going to update the software for the meter. Weeks later I called and spoke to David and he assured me that I would get the meter back within a few weeks. He said that he was looking at my meter as we spoke. I never got the meter back. I was also part of the so-called "Beta" program for the Digital Streamline. Very disappointing.
ReplyDeleteBummer. It is a good product but horrible customer service and poor handling of a business plan.
ReplyDeleteI used the leg machine and did increase strength. However, I have problems with my hips now and don't use it anymore. I also have the upper body machine but never used it. They both sit in my bedroom and I would like to sell them at a reduced price. They both look like they did when I bought them. E-mail twoyarbs@msn.com
ReplyDeletethere is a new website up that sells the XF Streamline and I bet Tony has something to do with it. It is Staticcontractions.com
ReplyDeleteI also have a unit that I would like to sell.
He had another website after explosive fitness one went down. I think he got used to ripping people off. I was in the beta program and he was supposed to give our money back after two years. He disappeared right before the two years were up. Good luck, Hopefully someone will find him.
i worked for Tony when he was first getting started over 10 years ago...extremely well spoken guy,absolutely has MARKETING brains...but knows little to nothing about the technical in's and out's of exercise/strength training. I spent many hours organizing parts and discussing ideas with Tony...without a doubt,he is strictly a money driven guy and loves to think he is applying good science...;his equipment is absolute junk...but so is 99% of the home fitness market.
ReplyDeleteScott in Manchester NH
Former worker: I don't know Tony. But I have to disagree as to the equipment being junk and any reference to the system not working. I have trained on an EF for 2 years. I have lost weight and increased strength. It has improved my full range strength as well as my ability to statically hold a weight.
ReplyDeleteI really notice it when I move a couch etc. He may be a horrible business man, but for me the system improved my life. I work out once a week with the EF and incorporate some pushups and pull ups. I am a very satisfied customer.
Isometrics do work... at least for me.
I have a xf streamline unit for sale. Dr james martin 925-234-8551
ReplyDeleteI too use isometrics. They worked for me as well. I toned up and lost weight working out only once a week. I don't have any interest in any company and just want to say I appreciate this article because it got me started.
ReplyDeleteI too used the isometric principles and tried to incorporate a little movement body weight exercises as did the trainees.
ReplyDeleteI am still using the protocol that I learned on this site 1.5 years later. The key is to breath. YOu don't even need a timer. Count your deep breaths.
Very satisfied with my progress. I used a smith bar locked into position. No way to judge total strengh increases, but I look great!
You should get credit for being one of the first to test the protocol of static contraction followed by dynamic exercise. Since your articles, I have performed TSC followed by dynamic contractions.(Either with or without weight moving the extremity while opposing the movement with the opposite muscles. I do a TSC for one minute followed as soon as possible with dynamic contraction 10/10 speed. I try to do 6 to 10 reps.
ReplyDeleteBy combining TSC with dynamic contraction (movement under tension) I hit failure after 90 seconds of total exercise. The combined TSC and dynamic exercise never exceed 2 minutes per set.
When I have no way to measure the force output the TSC have to be by feel only. If I press on a scale, I feel like I get more feedback but it is not necessary.
This protocol may not be for everyone, but if you have the discipline, it is a safe time efficient method to stay fit.
Thank you!
Let me echo Roger's comments. Based on my experience, the static protocol followed by some dynamic movement such as pushups is an effective way to tone and build muscles. In eight weeks, I gained over 50% static strength in the bench. I put on muscle (based on measurements only) and I lost weight.
ReplyDeleteStatic contraction training (holding weights over an extended period of time)helped improve my endurance. I held the weight for 25 to 30 seconds. Not sure if I held to failure, but I was tired after I was done.
ReplyDeleteAfter three weeks (one session a week, I felt like I could run a ten k without much difficulty. I feel great and look great.
Thanks for sharing this technique.
I have for sale a hard to find COMPLETE Explosive Fitness XF training system. XF2000 upper body machine, EX5000 leg press, XFmeter and bench. I have owned since new. I need a total knee replacement due to ongoing complications from a motorcycle accident. My doctor says the weight I can generate on the leg press will literally destroy an artificial knee.
ReplyDeleteI would like $3000/offer
if interested text Tim (319) 360-0284
I have studied the issue immensely and intensely. The bottom line is that to get maximum benefit from your muscles you must train them statically, dynamically and with negatives. If you do all three, you maximize your genetic potential. That is all, carry on!
ReplyDeleteBeen doing isometric's for years now doing it with jymfit that i got from www.jymfit.com
ReplyDeleteTHE 2015 update photo is awesome. Dude kept in good shape with minimal workouts.
ReplyDeleteI see there are recent comments here. Has anyone (a) Got a refund or delivery for a machine from Tony Reno? (b) want to by a Stream Line machine (in Australia)? Comment here and we will connect.
ReplyDeleteThis guy reminds me of some principles of strength training. Strength means something with respect to an activity, for example the press. Experience suggests that if you do a lot of high rep presses, adaptations occur in endurance. High weight for fewer reps promotes maximum one time lift strength. Different training also seems to produce different levels of hypertrophy. Strength increases can be because of increased muscle mass, neurological adaptations, and/or because of motor skill improvement (learning of skill involved.)
ReplyDeleteThe adaptations that occur in type IIA and IIB fiber seem to be correlated with the type of training. Lower weights for more reps, and IIA and IIB fiber takes on characteristics of type I fiber. Higher weights for lower reps stimulates IIA and IIB fiber to take on characteristics of IIX fiber.
In other words, how you train may affect underlying physiological adaptations. Furthermore, there may be a distinction between strength and muscle mass as the subject ages. Some studies suggest that in case of extreme sarcopenia, strength declines more rapidly than muscle mass. This appears to be because of a disproportionate decline in the amount of fast twitch fiber. The only true way to test this may be through repetitive muscle biopsy and few people are willing to be such lab rats.
In any event, this guy looks great for such a limited protocol. I would love to be able to train about 500 more with his protocol and create a batch of super seniors as they go into the last third of their lives.
Well worth the read! Especially enjoyed the updates and the comments.
ReplyDeleteLooking for a meter for a Streamline, or for the XF model before that if it is compatible with the Streamline....anybody know where I can get one?
ReplyDeletei have a complete xf2000 upper body system and ex5000 leg press and meter available and i'm looking to get rid of it quickly and cheap. let me know if you are interested.
DeleteCorey,
DeletePlz contact me:
mwinchester@inbox.com
Hello Corey K, if you have the equipment still, I will buy it from you. Please reach out to me at jvargh or call me at 908 334 6482.ese6@yahoo.com
DeleteHello Corey K, if you have the equipment still, I will buy it from you. Please reach out to me at jvarghese6@yahoo.com or you can call me at 908 334 6482. Please tell me what your location is. I live in new jersey and I will be willing to drive a decent distance to pick up the items. Much thanks in
DeleteSorry I sold all my stuff a couple years ago, I forgot to update my post.
DeleteCorey K
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI wish I sharing good news, however it isn't. For those looking/wanting replacement parts (meters) you're completely out of luck UNLESS you find someone willing to sell only a meter from their unit they purchased. His meter were made exclusively for him by a company out of the NE US, NH or CT I think. If staticocntractions.com exists, they AREN'T selling EF equipment and Tony is definitely not associated with that site or individual other than when he sold the machine to them over there.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the style of equipment, isometrics, and partial range maximum static holds, I've proven beyond the shadow of any doubt, (case studies) when performed properly NO other strength training can touch it. I worked with Tony "probably" longer than anyone, and owned more EF machines, sold more EF machines, promoted EF machines, created EF workout manual and exercise dvd. and got screwed over more than about anyone too. I trained clients (couch potatoes to elite, professional and Olympic athletes and everything in between)in a studio for over a decade. Logged over 16,000 training sessions, from over 2,000 clients. Was nominated innovator of the year in my state for my work in physiological adaptive response to my type of strength training using this type of equipment. Have a patent pending a similar (much better) equipment. PLEASE don't misunderstand, I'm not sharing this to impress anyone, I wish only to impress upon anyone with an open mind to try it, do it properly, this study here is flawed (they admitted they didn't follow the proper protocol) therefore in my opinion, the data is useless. My data overwhelmingly proves the FACT that this type of strength training is superior to every other training. And YES there is absolutely mass gain as well.
--DIE HARD METZER FAN--
(Sisco didn't come up with bupkiss, Metzer is the real genius)
MENTZER
DeleteI typed it twice, wth
MENTZER
Die Hard Metzer Fan: I found this study here to be very helpful. While it admitted some difficulty getting subjects to stick to the protocol, the results supported the benefits of static training.
DeleteWhat do you mean "Sisco didn't come up w/ bupkiss"?
DeleteIf anyone has a SCT machine for sale I'd like to discuss it.
ReplyDeleteI have one of the original leg press machines with the meter. Anyone interested can contact me at mkeele@aol.com
ReplyDeletePeakfitpro appears to be selling a machine similar to the explosive fitness machine sold in 2008. The cost looks like it is in excess of $5,000. No one here has tested that machine but we make note of its existence.
ReplyDeletehttps://peakfitpro.com/innovative-tech/
I created the PeakFitPro. I'd be happy to help answer any questions you may have about it.
DeleteIf anyone has an the original XF equipment, xf7000, streamline or any of the 1rep gym models that they would like to see, please email me at jvarghese6@yahoo.com. I live in new jersey and I am willing to drive a decent distance to pick up the item if the price is right....thanks
ReplyDeleteWeb MD weighs in on the cardio benefits of weightlifting in general. https://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/news/20181127/just-a-little-weightlifting-can-help-your-heart#1
ReplyDeleteDr. Ken Cooper talks about the benefits of static training. https://www.cbass.com/strengthtrainingandheart.html
Hello, all!
ReplyDeleteI know this may be a longshot, but I just inherited my dad's 3 piece set of Explosive Fitness Equipment (XF Streamline), which he bought in 2005-2006. The manuals are gone... I've been able to figure out how to put them together (they were mostly assembled when I took them from his home), but I have some extra pieces and I'm not sure how to use them. Thank you to whoever posted the link to Peak Fitness. That is very helpful for the bench press machine and some ideas for the leg press machine... but I have a corner-style standing press machine that I have no clue how to use. Does anyone have a manual for this equipment, or names and authors of books that I could check out (or buy from you?)? I'm willing to pay; just need some guidance. Thank you in advance!
If nothing else, I have a meter for the corner, standing machine and one for the bench press machine that both work...
i am looking to purchase any of the isometric\static contraction machines. I had the original set. If you are willing to sell the set you got, please email me at jvarghese6@yahoo.com. I live in new jersey and I am willing to drive a decent distance to pick up the item if the price is right....thanks
ReplyDeleteI have a complete set (EF5000, XF2000, XF meter, and bench, all in great condition) available in MN for you or anyone else interested. You can contact me at Spencerbaldwin@rocketmail.com if interested
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteSuch an informative post. Thank you for sharing
<a href="http://www.oasishealthclub.com.au/blog/>Gym in Logan Central QLD</a>
Been following this protocol for almost 10 years. Thank you! My 1 x per week experience has kept me fit and happy. I can not thank you enough for sharing this with folks like me who didn't have to pay a dime for the information. God bless you and the volunteer subjects.
ReplyDeleteI second gregs comment on JymFit, defnitly my favorite isometrict tool.
ReplyDeleteI have a complete set (XF2000, XF meter, and bench, all in great condition) available in Croatia, Europe for anyone interested. You can contact me at kresimir75.g@gmail.com if interested.
ReplyDeleteThanks and that i have a keen offer you: How Much For House Renovation Uk renovate my house
ReplyDelete