I’m holding isos for more than 2 min straight right now, and at about that time I start feeling some great warm in my legs…this is when tha fascia starts to get worked I think, and where flexibility gains are made.
If you keep a muscle under tension for a period of time, reduced blood flow and increased TUT … and then released it why would anyone NOT be surprised if the muscle didn’t feel more relaxed?
Look first at your training program and ask - what am I doing wrong first of all that I think I need Isos …
I never recommend a book written by a guy who doesn’t exist,validating his theories by claiming a successful career that also didn’t exist.
If you go EOD, you still benefit from the circulatory work BUT if you shift the holds to the tempo day you might defeat the whole purpose of the tempo.
EOD = ?
(message too short, blah blah 
)
Each other day…
Duxx, DB Hammer’s work does not deal with ISOs like this. For that reason, his book wouldn’t help you here.
John, the book is not confusing if you take the time to read and actively try and comprehend the material. Similarly, picking up a textbook to a 600 level college course might be confusing for you, but the information is still valid.
Charlie, have you read “The Sports Book?” I ask because you’re shooting a book filled with very good material down for the sole reason that the author used an pen name (and was prone to ‘mis-telling’ the whole truth). Once more, just because the author doesn’t exist doesn’t invalidate the information in the book.
Are you for real? Have you actually tried to read that stuff?
As for the nonsense about the book - two guys who apparently spent ‘some’ time with Schreoder decided to make some money and made up a name and fake training approach and spouted it as a revolutionary method … they essentially lied … tell me why would anyone take their word as gospel when they’ve NEVER trained anyone of any note - apart from the lying bit?
Seriously? Why would you even bother reading it let alone believing it?
Just goes to show you the bigger the lie the more people fall for it.
I totally agree with you, i have the book and probably only read 3 pages.
Yes, I’ve read every page and understand every bit of it. It’s really not that hard to digest unless you have trouble with English.
As for the Schroeder comment, that just shows you couldn’t have possibly read the book. The Inno-Sport system in no way mirrors Schroeder’s. You’re making uneducated attacks on someone just because their material is different than you’re used to.
Everything you find in “The Sports Book” can be found in Supertraining, Science and Practice, and a few other titles. It’s all legitimate.
Until they produce some fast sprinters, ill stick to the ole school methods > sprints, pc, squats and more squats.
Without taking into account that the faked european terminology look kind of stupid.
While I don’t own the book I have been aware of the Inno-Sport writings since they hit the internet some years back and I have no problems in speaking towards the efficacy of their work as it basically adheres to well founded concepts such as those which are presented very clearly here by Kelly Baggett:
http://www.inno-sport.net/Training%20Basics.htm
I don’t recall if forum rules allow us to post links to articles so if I was mistaken to post this link please let me know and I will delete it ASAP.
It might be more educated than you think - the two guys took his ideas, told lies and tried to make money - simple as that.
And if it’s all in Supertraining (as you suggest) - then at least people should buy that book - that author IS real and it’s easier read too.
By the way, I understand the principles of absorbtion/eccentric/isometric/plyometric training etc - my problems are thus …
-
Your Training program should be assessed to see if they are needed first and then ask - WHY am I including them? and what is it substituting? Then look at your program and ask - is it really the isometrics that are improving my program? or have I simply changing stressors that a properly balanced program should have been doing anyway?
-
DB Hammer - anyone who takes what a fake author has to say as Gospel really needs to sit down and have a good hard look at themselves.
I agree. If someone is low level- everything and anything works better than nothing, at least for a while, BUT, if someone comes along and inserts themselves in programs, insisting on change for change sake- results get skewed. We’ve seen an examples here recently.
if you are truly good you should produce at a high level and those that can’t often resort to subterfuge, exaggeration, secret societies, etc to attract the gullible.
…Crossfit…
I couldn’t resist.
Excuse the departure.
Again, you speak from lack of understanding of the program. It’s not just about going from ISO to absorption to reactive work. The whole point of the system is to constantly assess where one is proficiency wise, judge their strengths and weaknesses, and work to fix weak spots, all while working on increasing work capacity by applying work through autoregulatory training.
There is no magic bullet in this system and contrary to what you might erroneously assume, it is well thought out, balanced, and is about as straight forward as any other system in existence. Don’t let the terminology fool you, the system really is quite simple when broken down to its base level.
And I don’t care if DB Hammer is fake or not, I care about the information he presented. I can back everything he’s said up with studies and other literature but I’ve never seen anyone organize it all the way Nuttall did.
Once more, stop insulting the system when your level of understanding is so low that you don’t even understand its basic tenets.
I really don’t have the energy to engage in an argument about someone who doesn’t exist - it’s like trying to prove the tooth fairy isn’t real.
I’m not sure it’s possible to insult a system that doesn’t exist?
The definition of ridiculousness … Arguing about an imaginary system developed by an imaginary author that has never produced an athlete of note.
Again … I’ll say - all athletes need to look at their system as a whole and see what they are doing before they start adopting ‘new ideas’.
RJ, do you consider the fact that Inno always is working on one’s weaknesses, as a overall weakness of the Inno program? I know that some on here, including Charlie, have commented that this approach is extremely flawed.
Speaking with you is frustrating to the point of actually making me angry. Just because the author does not exist does not mean the system does not exist. Stop acting like a child and confront the issues themselves, don’t go name calling or insulting my intelligence.
And once more, there is nothing new in the system. At the moment, my training is comprised of SE, SE1, some speed work, a little bit of bounding, and a low volume of depth jumps and drops. Wow, all that sure is new and fancy. The only ‘new’ ideas in “The Sports Book” are the organizational and testing parameters, both of which are actually very flexible.
Also, just FWI, a number of professional athletes in the NHL and the MLB have been produced with this system. They’ve also produced a top women’s long jumper and plenty of other athletes in other sports that I’m sure I’m forgetting.