depends on the training goal 
I like the idea of the bands slingshotting the weight down, but not loading the eccentric/concentric switch over and the sticking point.
Anyway I have found that even if you have the bands only active in the top half, the brain thinks the whole movement is heavier. Probably due to the extra kinetic energy from the bands
This maybe the same effect the AMT jumps are striving for
I am by no means an expert on this subject or an advanced athlete, but I have spent a lot of time reading on the subject and discussing-mostly with kellyb. Anyway as far as the AMT jumps are concerned, if anyone wants to give them a try I found a cheap and easy way to perform them. I got a metal folding chair and two nylon bungee cords. I put a weight belt around my waist, attached one end of the cords to the crossbar between the legs of the chair and the other end to the weight belt. Then perform the depth jump. I set it up so there was just enough slack in the cords when I hit the ground that they would unhook from the chair. Now I didn’t regulate the height or the tension as specifically as DB says to, but the setup worked. Did I increase my vert. jump 18% by my next session? No. But my weakness has always been my elastic abilities and I would have benefitted more from just normal depth jumps.
Now as far as my thoughts on DB. I believe he has many valid points in his writing. I have read many books by many coaches, Charlie included. While they are all good/great coaches and have trained many successful athletes, for me DB’s auto-regulating ‘system’ makes the most sense, it is the only one that has given me a standard on how many sets, how often, etc. I have the same complaints with him as most of you do, his writing style and terminology are difficult. That is the reason I had for not reading his a-reg articles on elite fitness at first. But after reading them, and re-reading them, and then reading them again, as well as getting a copy of his book, the system makes a whole lot more sense. Am I ready to crown him as the greatest? No, but I will give it a try and monitor my results myself. I have conversed many times with Kelly about this system, and he is having good results implementing some of DB’s ideas.
anyway, just my two cents…
Lance Tamburo
I have been in contact with Hammer for about 8 months now and he has been very informative and polite as well as expedient in his answers to my inquiries, via email. So, this being said, I will bring a couple of things out for thought. I sampled a 1 week that I got from him when I purchased his book and I gained about 9 to 13% neural duration improvement, in the lower body exercises, in about 2 weeks. Now, mind you, I have lifted for over 20 years so these were not rookie gains but at the same time, some of my best lifts are some years past. What this proved is that while my neuro magnitude is pretty good due to strength dominant training(or has been before) my neuro rate and especially neuro duration(training like a lifter, not an athlete) is poor. (Westside guys addressed the neuro rate problem with their compensatory acceleration day)What I did was train the weakest segment on my lifting. So, in order to not get long winded, I’ll say this: his system has a lot of different options to identify and improve what is lacking in your training and his “drop off margin” is a good place to start with to determine a termination point for any training session. Read the book, read it 2 or 3 times and give the system a shot. Either it works or it don’t. Bottom line.
I’m not talking on his behalf as I wrote earlier, so ignore my postings on that matter. I’m enthusiastic and get carried away, so just skip my ramblings and do what you do best. I respect you and your expertise.
It is alright to be cynical, but to judge every book by it’s cover is not necessarily the best approach. I think it is worthwile to spend time and learn about what he is talking about and then do the judging. Many only seem to be interested on specific exercises he does at some phase of the development of an athlete and do not see the big picture he presents.
I have noticed that he does seem to have a reason for everything he does with an athlete at a certain point in time and he can clarify the reasons.
Now is there really something in his system that someone here disagrees on? That would make this discussion worthy of reading and maybe we could discuss the reasons behind the differing opinions.
I don’t think anyone disagrees with his system…
But his public relations is a bit horrible!
From what I hear, DB Hammer always remarks “A study has proven…” without adding in proper references. I HATE that type of writing/talking. Normatitive statements have no place in professional publications.
Someone list three concepts in simple language that are exclusive and original. I am not bashing anyone but I feel that we need to focus on the thread…although Charlie’s wit is more entertaining then the Fox reality show about the midget weddings.
If one can demonstrate something new or untapped then lets review those concepts! I like Pakewi’s point about repeat bouts…but that is not 100% new, but I think we can expand on that with the training of Dara Torres.
Isn’t she trained by Jack Barnathan (aka ISSA!!)?
Actually for #2, Neuro-duration vs. neuro-magnitude vs. neuro-rate work
I also found his concepts on working in the An-1 (anaerobic response, up to 9 sec), An-2 (anaerobic reserve, from 9 to 40 sec) and Ae-1 (aerobic response, beyond 40 sec) zones interesting. The idea is that for all training types, including weightlifting, you work based on time, not reps.
i dont follow db hammer’s training protocols or any of his work for that matter, but i do know one thing, whether its his style of writing, ideas, etc he gets people talking about him & thats good marketing. as it was once said, “any publicity is good publicity”
1: This is a new concept?? How about S, SE1, and SE2? Only about 50 years old.
2: Why would you use weights for endurance with all the other options available?
3: Do you consider it reasonable, or even possible, to regulate recovery for ONE training componant independant of the other componants which must co-exist?
4: Even if 3 is possible, what sort of plan will you have as recovery periods for various componants diverge, or, worse, converge as time goes by?
5: A plan that considers an individual componant in isolation works well when there is precisely ONE componant, ie weights.
Can we start discussing Dara Torres’ training in another “Other Sports” thread?
I actually find none of the 3 points indicated above by Delldell original per se,as they are well present and documented (with different language) in literature ( Zatsiorsky,Siff).
Direction taken by DB for development and application of above may well be more “original”,but again, we all here need more facts,be it well documented Athletes’ experiences,or self tested medium-long term sport results.
I would also refrain from creating opposition and counterparts without having well known and present the big picture,and again start discussing points which maybe share -or at least seem to suggest- similarities with what we are possibly more familiar with.
Here are a few facts (1,5)…coupled with strong logic (2,3) and even (4) something to fry one’s brain upon for a while… 
All I can say after a couple of weeks of applying DB’s stuff, that I am a new man!
There is something worthwhile here for sure.
Even though sleep has has been less than great lately thanks to the damn hot weather in Sydney. I am definitely stronger and more energised.
This morning at my part time job, 4:30am hauling around big bundles of paper, they felt so light, like 50% lighter than normal. My lower back wasn’t tightening up like it normally does and after work, 3 hours of loading, carrying and throwing stuff, I still have plenty of energy left!
There is something happening to my body on a few levels as a result of DB’s stuff and autoreg system.
Thanks to years of sitting on my butt I have bad motor/neural habits that cause me to tighten up my lower back and spinal erectors while walking, running, standing or sitting. As you’d expect this plays havoc with general well being, sports/sprinting and recovery from workouts - especially since I do a olys, pulls and squats. 2 sessions of ISO and then OI work on splitsquat, reverse back ext, GHR and Lat machine situp fixed that up big time! No more back tensions!
I have tried everything to get rid of this, Rolfing and even sitting on a sitfit device only partially helped, they alleviate the symptons, but don’t fix the source of the problem.
OI have done something to me nuerally that makes the body relax more, and conserve nerve impulses/muscular tension. Probbaly why I feel I have more energy and stamina. Greater work capacity as a result - effeciency
Strength levels are definitely up, I will find out for sure this week and the next. Those ISOs so far have proved to be far more effective than regular reps for strength - especialy so as I am Neuro-Magnitude dominant thanks to my “abuse” of speed squats, olys and reactive exercises
I am now trying to balance my frictional strength vs my elastic strnegth as far as the weightroom goes.
It seemed as I got stronger on normal training methods and systems, the more injury prone and the less work capacity I had. Now DB’s system/concept had reversed that trend, and certain aches I get have all but dissappeared. Fix your neural “weakness” and things fall into place.
I’lll see how my strength levels pan out in a few weeks time. If things shoot up 50lbs then there is something working for sure 
I have tried a lot of methods and systems, and so far I am liking this one.
It’s hard work for sure on many levels, but results so far have been worth it.
Most methods/systems are like giving you a roadmap, but you still have to get to the destination yourself, it’s still hit and miss. DB’s autoreg and system is like giving you a roadmap and a guide, it really does take out a lot of guesswork.
Like Joe Cole said, it’s as if someone injected me with hard drugs without me knowing! There is a certain feeling of lightness and a spring to step, the last time I felt like this I was a teenager 
Sounds good on the one componant you describe (as you might expect, if recovery is ideal for that one). Now I’d like to see how it goes for you in the other training areas. To track this, please advise what adjustments you make in all areas as you go.
Time instead of reps is not a new concept.
Well, first I didn’t say it was new I said it was an interesting concept to apply to weightlifting. I realize that it is not new even in that context since I know that there are even some old machines at my gym that are based on repping until the light turns red. But I found the idea of using time for reps even when attempting to build strength an interesting twist. It also is a more practical means of regulating volume for some of the short range of motion exercises that he uses. Again, not a new concept, after all, Isometrics require that you time them since you only do one rep!
2: Why would you use weights for endurance with all the other options available?
Dunno. I didn’t get the impression that the use of reps in the An-2 range was necessarily just for building endurance, but I can’t say that I fully understand the system. I think the claim was that work in the lower part of the AN-2 range could have significant impact on the AN-1 range.
3: Do you consider it reasonable, or even possible, to regulate recovery for ONE training componant independant of the other componants which must co-exist?
4: Even if 3 is possible, what sort of plan will you have as recovery periods for various componants diverge, or, worse, converge as time goes by?
5: A plan that considers an individual componant in isolation works well when there is precisely ONE componant, ie weights.
I’m not sure that this is exactly what his system does. If there is general fatigue (i.e. fatigue of the CNS that would effect any high-intensity sporting activity) then it would be seen in any training activity. Therefore, regulating off of that training activity would presumably take this into account, no?
I don’t believe there is a different kind of CNS fatigue for sprinting as there is for lifting. Certainly sprinting and weightlifting can cause different degrees of CNS fatigue depending on all sorts of factors, but CNS fatigue is CNS fatigue. And since CNS fatigue is usually the limiting factor this would be the most important factor to autoregulate for. I guess you could make the argument that the effect of CNS fatigue would cause different magnitudes of performance decrement for different exercises but it seems to me that you could determine those effects with reasonable accuracy over time.
If we are talking about specific fatigue, as opposed to CNS fatigue, then components that do not effect the same motor units or systems would presumably be safe to train (such as a split routine.)
For example, if I go out and trash my CNS by sprinting one day, then the next day head to the gym, it is unlikely that I will be able to achieve optimal performance in lifting. If I do (because of potentiation effects or whatever) and then proceed to trash my CNS more, eventually it will show up (in all of my training activities) and I would then autoregulate down. Of course this is all very reactive instead of proactive. Perhaps by the time I regulate down, it is too late and I’m injured!
Again, I don’t want to be the spokesperson here for DB’s system, because I don’t think that I have a good enough grasp to claim any sort of expertise. I’m just trying to further the discussion so that perhaps I can discover something of use to my training.
Some good points, and you point out the risk of reactive vs proactive planning.
Maybe I can come up with an example:
You may have an excellent sprinter with excellent lifts BUT you may also have an excellent sprinter with good to average lifts. The recovery demands of the excellent sprint sessions will be much greater than the needs of the lifts (in either case, but more with the lower lifts), so the recovery cycles may be all over the map, ending up, on one occasion, with lifts on the same day as the sprints, and, on another, an alternate day, etc.
In other words, the "art’ in the coaching is in the compromise. How much can you advance each of the componants so that each of their recoveries is complementary to every other, allowing for an organized advancement of the whole- and the timing of the ultimate peaking goals.
As it is unlikely, in this holistic setting, that you will maximize the advancement rate of ANY one componant (beyond speed, of course!), it is not surprising that any number of maximization schemes may offer faster results for a single componant in the short term.
He does say that the optimal amount of fatigue and recovery for training different modalities (speed, power,strength) will vary depending on the individual and this is where the AREG system requires some fine-tuning. For example, one might advance the fastest with a different amount of fatigue inducement and recovery in strength work than in speed work and vice versa. The idea is to start off at a standard (6% on a 4 day frequency scale) and adjust 1-3% in either direction to find the best response.
As for uniqueness, although a lot of it is not new, he does give special attention to identifying deficiences and correcting them and has many creative ways of doing this so that an individual knows exactly why they’re performing a certain movement, method of execution, working in a specific rep range, etc. Good or bad, for people like myself who like to overanalyze every detail there is a lot of ammo. to use.
Well if you study his materials, there are all the answers to the questions presented. His system makes some of the questions vanish alltogether. It is not a bad idea to familiarise yourself with his ideas. His system, as I consider it, is much more unique than other systems I’ve seen, and he uses induvidualisation a lot more than anyone I know. Comparing it to the other systems I HAVE seen is like comparing apples and oranges.
And also how many coaches do really have three alltogether original and exclusive ideas WTF? DB certainly has more than any other coach I know, besides it is not only some simple ideas but a total system to develop an individual athlete. It takes time to learn and I propably understand only a little of it.
I think that anyone who dismisses him is an IDIOT, but if someone has a better system, then I’m all for it.