The Myth of the Sensitive Aerobics Bunny

[Greg Newton]

Often times in perusing other forums or reviews of John's books you read some ridiculous assertions about the methods promoted here. One that had me rolling in the floor laughing was the snide, "Well, John Peterson might be able to 300 deep knee bends, but he would be buried under a 300 pound squat."

Or, one reviewer asserted that maybe high reps might serve an aerobics gym bunny, but real men needed to lift weights. Fair enough, let's examine that assertion.

At 190 I can do 100 strict Tiger Stretch or Atlas pushups. I can also do 25 reps with the Tee's. Realistically, don't you think I could bench press my bodyweight multiple, multiple times? How about two and quarter? Conservatively, I don't think I'd have any problem benching that a half dozen times or more. How about military presses? If I can do ten handstand presses at my weight, do you think I'd have any problem pressing a 135 pound barbell ten times?

Lets look at squats. Currently I do 100 flatfooted half squats every morning with strict control. I could easily do a hundred to two hundred more. With the isometrics squats I also do, do you think I'd have any trouble with that 300 pound barbell? Especially with powerbelt and knee wraps? BTW - for those who have reported that they were weaker in the barbell squat from practicing the Hindu squat - you were practicing the wrong exercise. Paul Anderson and John Grimek both did hundreds of free squats to augment their barbell squats, but they were flatfooted and done with the width they used for the barbell.

How about deadlifts? You can either lift it or you can't. I can do 100 Atlas situps and 100 ninety degree leg raises. But wait a minute you might say, those are abdominal exercises. You better believe it, and not only that but they strongly work the hips, core, and thighs, which are the prime movers in a deadlift. I wouldn't have any problem moving 315 for multiple reps.

Now those numbers are nowhere near world beaters. However, they are better than 90% of the drug free weight trainers in fitness facilities and garage gyms out there. My point is, there is nothing remotely gym bunnyish about any of the stuff practiced here. John Peterson is a nice gentleman, but I wouldn't kick sand in his face. At a lighter bodyweight he is stronger, faster, and much more conditioned. I've been the bulky, strength in the weight room only route. From personal experience I can tell you that the keys to lifetime strength, fitness, and longevity are right here.

[Huskerdarren]

Good post Greg. The only thing I will add is that it seems to be human nature for people to mock what they don't understand (or haven't tried)

Going to the gym and banging weights are what we've been conditioned to believe will lead to fitness. The muscle mags are about half full of ads for supplements. Bodyweight is so foreign to many people that they disregard its many benefits completely. This kind of thought leads me to examine my beliefs in other areas of life. Have I made assumptions about other things that are short sighted?

[Max McKinley]

Another great post Greg. There was a time that these things would not be so hotly debated, but it seems people have been so conditioned to believe that weight training is the only effective way to exercise.

[JoeJustice]

In the end I think weights just have a major psychological effect that many people can’t get past.

Just look at the ubiquitous initial question that every gym rat asks to size someone up, “How much can you bench?” And that gets into a strange area because the bench press doesn’t really have a whole lot of real-world application.

Add into this mix the entire fitness industry saying you need this amazing device or that amazing device. You can’t get a “real workout” (whatever that means) without the latest, chrome plated machines. You need all of that shiny metal to have results.

In the end, people are just brainwashed. The brainwashing turns into dogma. And dogma is a hard thing for people to get past.

But hey, I’ve been there too, I don’t want to sound like I’m above it all. When I first read The Miracle 7 and John was talking about hundreds of reps, I thought that was crazy. After all, high reps are just for cardio, right? Anything above 10 reps are just mindless reps, aren’t they?

The funny thing is, you can go to any gym around the nation and see plenty of people who go faithfully but are not in good shape. As a matter of fact, some of the most out of shape people I know have some of the most equipment.

I know a guy that has all kinds of homemade fitness equipment. He tries to recreate just about everything he sees. He’s got ropes, bands, pulleys, weights; all kinds of stuff! The only problem is that he’s terribly out of shape, carrying at least 40lbs of excess body fat. But he still thinks he’s some kind of fitness expert; even brags about the size of his chest and arms, even though they’re both coated with several inches of soft, pudgy, fat which he seems to think is muscle. All I can figure is all of that equipment he uses just has some kind of powerful psychological effect on him.

-Joe

[MikeNY]

Great post Greg, Joe as always great observations.

The Fitness Industry does not want what is taught here, Fitness is a business and is about making money. Many folks are into the Social Scene part of fitness, and the Social gathering rather than fitness plan and simple. Gyms are places to meet friends and women, and women can meet guys. Weight heads are into the steroid subsulture and buying and lifting more weight, it is an addiction. There is a huge amount of money made and spent on fitness plus part of the iron head scene has deep underlying homosexual aspects. The object of fitness on this site is life improvement, to better enjoy your life, family and world and happiness with your spouse.

[gruntbrain]

Many narrowly view aerobics; ie, they don't think of adding a resistance component to a heart healthy cardio session. A medley of Power Cals performed without rest is a good way to perform aerobics

[John Peterson]

Hey Greg,

I can perform 5 sets of 20 Superman Wheel Push-Ups from standing and Seven Sets of 30+ Pull-Ups in a single workout. I won't even state what I can do in some of the other exercises because it would sound boastful. But you know, there is one reason those guys cannot understand what it is that we teach and the answer is found in a quote by Marie Corellie in her incredible book, "The Life Everlasting"

"It is impossible that an outsider should enter into a clear understanding
of the mystical spiritual natural world around him and it follows that the
teachings and tenets of that spiritual nature world must be more or less a
closed book to such a one-a book moreover which he seldom cares or dares
to try and open. For this reason the sages concealed much of their profound
knowledge from the multitudes because they rightly recognized the limitations
of narrow minds and prejudiced opinions...What the fool cannot learn he laughs at,
thinking that by his laughter he shows superiority instead of latent idiocy."

Bottomline: any time one of these idiots wants to go toe to toe with me on a test of full body strength such as SuperMan Wheel Push-Ups from Standing, I'll be happy to comply. And I couldn't care less about using my age as an excuse. If they seriously want to test their full body strength I don't think anyone but a moron would argue that that exercise absolutely requires full body strength to the max.

---John Peterson

[gruntbrain]

Jp's age is not an excuse; it's an asset cuz he has had all those years to "practice"

[mike]

At 190 I can do 100 strict Tiger Stretch or Atlas pushups. I can also do 25 reps with the Tee's. Realistically, don't you think I could bench press my bodyweight multiple, multiple times? How about two and quarter? Conservatively, I don't think I'd have any problem benching that a half dozen times or more. How about military presses? If I can do ten handstand presses at my weight, do you think I'd have any problem pressing a 135 pound barbell ten times?


In the name of nitpicking I hope you meant 2 and a quarter as in 225lbs, because otherwise this statement will be picked apart on these forums claiming you said you could bench press over 400lbs for 6 reps. If that is in fact what you meant I will have to respectfully disagree and say that 25 reps on the T's will not correlate to those numbers unless you are already a very proficient bench presser. Although I will agree that great strength can be built without the use of weights, I can do 30 reps with the power T's now but cannot benchpress 2x my bodyweight for even 1 rep.

With that out of the way I think the problem with weight training as physical culture is that it is now marketed to the masses and as Mr. Peterson mentioned the fear of every great teacher is that stupid people willl ruin their teachings. There are many very intelligent strength coaches who train people and sports teams who charge top dollar to be certified under or trained by, but they cannot simply make all of their ideas available or their effectiveness would be diluted (and their revenue stream broken). Just as John cannot afford to simply post his books free to the internet these coaches do not give their information away. Today the blind lead the blind as far as fitness and those who do have even one eye often do not find it worth their time to help the masses of uninformed people around them.

[Andy62]

Empty cans rattle the loudest and so do blow hard macho type personalities. As Dr. Al Siebert says in his great book "The Survivor Personality" even in combat ."The Rambo types are the first to go." As long as they are obsessed with John he controls their minds and therefore is in control of them.

[Greg Newton]

In the name of nitpicking I hope you meant 2 and a quarter as in 225lbs, because otherwise this statement will be picked apart on these forums claiming you said you could bench press over 400lbs for 6 reps. If that is in fact what you meant I will have to respectfully disagree and say that 25 reps on the T's will not correlate to those numbers unless you are already a very proficient bench presser. Although I will agree that great strength can be built without the use of weights, I can do 30 reps with the power T's now but cannot benchpress 2x my bodyweight for even 1 rep.


That's fair Mike. The bench press at 225 would be the easy part. When I weight trained I have done all those lifts in the 10-15 rep range, so it is not like I am conjuring these numbers out of the air. I am stronger now than I have ever been, and I am sure I could beat my previous lifts in a relatively short time of focusing on the weights. The thing I figured people would question was the deadlift, since it seems like there is no correlation to what I do now.

But, the point is, why go back to something that wrecked my spine, shot my flexibility, and takes time and toll on the body? Whereas I can easily duplicate lifts I did when I was a weight trainer, there was no way on God's green earth I could duplicate what I do now back then.

[gruntbrain]

There's a fine balance between foolish ego feats & worthwhile challenging ones that keep one motivated & improving

[Andy62]

It is not the individual feats. Feats as individual goals or to set records or whatever are healthy. It is the obsession with thinking that it is somehow an overall measure of strength or anything else and that other people care that is screwed up.

[Greg Newton]

Hey Mike,

I re-read your post again and I have to ask, how does two and a quarter translate to 400 pounds? I' was in the gym scene from 1975 to 1995 and two and a quarter always meant 225. Even if you tried kilos the math doesn't work.


Also to Tim,

I bow in homage. Not only are you a pushup machine, but you were a bench pressing machine as well!

And to John,

The strength to do seven sets of 30 pullups is the kind of strength I want!

[JoeJustice]

Greg, I think Mike thought you were saying two and a quarter you bodyweight. 180 x 2.25 = 405

-Joe

[Greg Newton]

This thread has gotten me thinking as well about an Ellington Darden quote. Darden had a booth at a fitness expo and he was hawking a Nautilus pullover machine. A hayseed farmer walked up and in a country accent, asked Darden if he used this machine, could it help him develop the abilty to do 100 consecutive pullups.

Darden took one look at the man who was about six foot and 175 pounds and was at least sixty something. Sarcastically he replied, "You couldn't do 100 pullups if you used this for 100 years!"

To which the farmer, who was Curd Edmonds of pullup record fame, replied, "I did 107 yesterday."

[gruntbrain]

Curd Edmonds : a blast from the past

I'd like to approximate his & JP's pullup feats. I also fanatasize about performing a single rep with attached weights equal to my bodyweight( even if it's just a negative pullup)

[John Peterson]

Hey Friends.

I just read what Greg Newton stated. I first heard the story about Darden making the "wise guy" comments to Curd Edmunds from my friend Noel Johnson who had become good friends with Edmunds. Noel actually said to me, "Can you imagine some young punk saying that to him?" To which I responded that, "The guy that said it, must have been clueless."

But now get this, the reason that Curd Edmonds turned to Pull-Ups to begin with was because he suffered from "busted up weight lifter syndrome". In an article that I have on him, Curd stated, "I learned that I had to quit Barbells because they hurt my joints too much and then I turned to exercises that 'pulled the joints apart,' like chins and hanging leg raises." In 1978 at the age of 66 and a body weight of 167 at 5'10" Curd knocked off 117chins for a world record. His all time high was at age 67 with 220. At my current age of 56 (I'll be 57 in October) he had done 41. Bottom line: we can continue to improve as long as we have the desire.

---John Peterson

[Greg Newton]

Hey John,

Thanks for the correct details on Curd Edmonds' height and weight. I used to see his pictures in Iron Man, chinning beside his son. Buildwise, he was wide and rangy; sort of a scaled down version of Ronald Reagan.

The Darden story sums up my feelings on him and his disciples. If it dioesn't fit their paradigm, then pronounce some psuedo-science and kick it to the curb. To them, someone like Edmunds was an anomoly.

It also tells a tell of machine vs. bodyweight. Darden was right. You could use that pullover machine until the cows come home, but it wouldn't increase your ability to chin. In the same vein, I guarrantee you that if you could do 100 chins like Edmunds, he'd been able to use every plate on the stack in the pullover.

[JoeJustice]

I think this article has the pic, Greg...

http://www.la84foundation.org/SportsLibrary/IGH/IGH0101/IGH0101f.pdf

-Joe

[John Peterson]

Hey Greg,

I could not agree more. I always got a kick out of how seriously people would take a guy like Arthur Jones.The whole idea behind Nautilus machines was contrary to the way the gravity of the earth environment works on our bodies and the muscle structures that are created in response to that natural environment. Jones thought that by using the cam you would automatically compensate for increased leverage by increasing the curve of resistance. Which was of course correct. Unfortunately, it changed the muscle strength ratios from their natural resistance curve to an unnatural one and instead of helping athletes become more functionally strong in sport it diminished functional strength and many were plagued with injury as a result. so much for the geniuses that tried to outsmart mother nature.

I mention this because I can't think of a more worthless machine than a nautilus pullover machine. Or the arrogance of those that actually believed they were outsmarting nature.

It literally reminded me of a guy I know that had problem in his home with rodents and he complained because the exterminators had not been able to rid his house of them. He asked me if i had an suggestions and I said, "Yeah, I do. Buy a mouse hound (a cat for those not familiar with the term). " He literally looked at me and said,"Why didn't I think of that?"

---John Peterson

[Greg Newton]

Arthur Jones wasn't the genius people thought he was. His training ideas came from Joseph Hise and Louis Abele, who he never gave credit to. He was a mavarick and he was a hustler. That is not a slam, being a maverick and a hustler were things Jones was proud of.

But, the goods promised by Nautilus never delivered. Casey Viator, as opposed to Curd Edmonds, was a genetic anomoly with long muscle bellies and the ability to react favorably to steroids. As well, according to Viator, when Jones wasn't looking, he would do extra sets of dips and chins between the Nautilus exercises. The last I read of Viator, in the early eighties, he had completed repudiated Arthur Jones' training methods and was doing high volume.

On the other hand, Curd Edmonds was the real deal; a gentleman, a hard working farmer, and a Christian. That article Joe posted was wonderful. That was the picture I remembered. Curd also wrote letters to Joe Weider's Muscle Builder and took Ken Waller, whom he was distantly related to, to task for his bad boy antics. He was a true gentleman in every sense of the word, and even when he was made fun of in print, replied graciously back.

[mike]

Greg-

I was in fact referring to the fact that your statement was ambiguous in that almost all weights were given as numbers except the reference to your bodyweight and two and a quarter. I assumed (as most would) that you meant 225lbs but felt like it was worth noting that 400lbs+ for a dozen or so reps would be something of a 'world beater' most. Anyway I'm with you totally in that power cals are nothing to laugh at and there is no pressing need for a healthy guy who feels and looks better than ever to return to a sport that did not treat his body well.

Mr Peterson - how do you feel about DVRs and 3 position isometrics in relation to the natural strength curve of a muscle? I only ask because i feel like Visualized resistence allows me to put tension in the muscle where no other exercise really focuses effort. Such as contraction the bicept with the elbow nearly locked etc.

[John Peterson]

Mike,

I think you may have read IPR. If I'm right about that then you know that I teach 3-position static Isometrics. But with Isometrics unlike Nautilus you are not over stretching a muscle and loading it with more and more resistance as the leverage of the muscle increases trhough any given range of motion. Remember, with Isometrics one can selectively strengthen any or all points within a muscles natural range of motion.

DVR's of course utilize a natural muscular contraction but without overstretching while in the process of muscular contraction. Overstretching a muscle was and is what Nautilus machines were created to do loading the muscle through an extended range of motion. You could not create that feeling with DVR no matter how much you try.

---John Peterson

[blackbelt]

In the name of nitpicking I hope you meant 2 and a quarter as in 225lbs, because otherwise this statement will be picked apart on these forums claiming you said you could bench press over 400lbs for 6 reps. If that is in fact what you meant I will have to respectfully disagree and say that 25 reps on the T's will not correlate to those numbers unless you are already a very proficient bench presser. Although I will agree that great strength can be built without the use of weights, I can do 30 reps with the power T's now but cannot benchpress 2x my bodyweight for even 1 rep.

Ok, now I'm the one being picky. But, I HAVE to ask. Where does one get the 400 lbs form Greg's statement???

In addition, I would like to comment about the bench-pressing of 2x Mike's bodyweight.

Something that often gets overlooked is that weightlifting is a skill. And, like any other it takes practice. As such, a very strong person may not be able to lift what they think should be an easy weight, IF they haven't lifted in that manner previously.

[mike]

To Mr. Peterson-

I have read IPR and was just curious about hte range of motion, but the idea of overstretching makes it a lot more clear,thanks a lot!

To Blackbelt-
My thought process went something like this

" Realistically, don't you think I could bench press (1 multiplied by) my bodyweight multiple, multiple times? How about two and quarter (multiplied by my bodyweight)? Conservatively, I don't think I'd have any problem benching that a half dozen times or more. "


I realize this is a little abstract but I just felt like preempting any critics who are a fan of semantics. Anyway its quite a bit of a derailment to discuss it any further so let me just say that weight lifting is a skill not just a measure of strength, like any other exercise, which is why I hesitate to say there is a direct correlation between any power cal number and weights moved.

[Andy62]

In my opinion the claim that weightlifting is a test of strength is a scam. Read the link below and see what Arthur Saxon,The Iron Master,and arguably the greatest weightlifter of all time says. Look at how elite forces [Rangers, Seals, Airborne, Special Forces, Green Berets etc] and intelligence agents are trained worldwide and you will find that they are trained for physical and mental strength and toughness [ the steeling of both the mind and the body] Their training more closely approximates Transformetrics than in does the momentatry strength of the weightlifter.



http://www.sandowplus.co.uk/Competition/Saxon/DPP/dpp01.htm#4

[Greg Newton]

Hey Mike,

No problem partner. I forget sometimes that I am an older guy from a different generation and I have a tendency to use slang and expressions in my writing that doesn't always make sense to younger folks. I also tend to use phrasing and sayings from the generation ahead of me. Periodcally I have to explain to my students at school when I say something they don't get. I'll work on the clarity.

[blackbelt]

Realistically, don't you think I could bench press my bodyweight multiple, multiple times? How about two and quarter?

Ok Mike. I follow you now. There was simply a difference in interpretation here. You took it has two and a quarter times Greg's bodyweight. I took it as pressing his bodyweight two and a quarter times.

Thanks for the clarification.

[Aaron Hoot]

Hey Greg,

I just got around to reading your post today. It is a great post! I am not bragging but if you have read some of my other posts I mentioned my son Jake. His coaches are amazed at his abilities so far without ever using weights. Not only in much he can lift but how fast he is. All that he has learned from you guys. Thanks again Greg for this post.


Aaron