Work Vs Nourishment: Maxick's Training Philosophy
Certain narratives heavily saturate our modern world. Some make it to prominence because the truth always makes it to the surface. Other times it could be due to ignorance or money.
When I first got into progressive calisthenics I was heavily focused on chasing more difficult variations of the exercise I was doing.
Handstand push-ups but I got my eyes on the close handstand push-up.
Close pull-ups but I got my eyes on the one-armed pull-up.
One-legged squats but I got my eyes on the sissy squat.
This was great in the beginning which is called “newbie gains.” Any new training stimulus you provide to your body will make it adapt quickly, especially when you’re younger. As you age, most of your adaptions slow down and even come to a screeching halt.
Unless you practice an important principle.
I was nonplussed and chagrined, when it dawned upon me that I was using and tiring my muscles instead of making them stronger. And then it occurred to me that it is not work but nourishment, which makes muscles strong. Exercise of the muscles, rational exercise, aids the muscles to obtain nourishment, but as I observed later, rational exercise must be accompanied by mental concentration on the muscles to be exercised.” (P 11, Maxick, Muscle Control)
Back to the narratives in our modern world, I was talking about in the beginning.
This constant seeking of greater intensity & tension on my muscles in terms of calisthenics(which for others might be weights) I thought would propel me to new heights. This “Progressive overload” is a major part of the fitness journey some tell us. There are many ways to progressively overload an exercise but the main one is more weight/more difficult movements.
But the older I got the more this training approach slowed me down. By modifying my workouts to mainly overcoming isometrics I started progressing in terms of strength. After a while and gearing my workouts toward hypertrophy, I began to feel a bit sluggish again. I was jaded almost.
“A muscle that has been brought into prominence and condition by means of Muscle Control is full of energy and resistance, ready to work, and well fortified; whereas the muscle that has been tired by heavy work is usually lacking in resistance, and jaded.” - Maxick
“This is the reverse of the old fashioned method which often defeated their objects by exhausting the user.” - Maxick
What I’ve realized is that even if you don’t train by going to failure, training at the upper levels of intensity/individual recovery capabilities too much will make you feel some of this, “Jaded” feeling after a bit. This 8 to 12-rep range for the upper body and 10-20 for the lower body will build muscle. But this alone will not get you to your goals as too much of this can leave one jaded.
It was my training over the past year that had me saying,
“Maxick is right. I need more nourishment”
With bodyweight exercise how would I go about this? I realized I needed to go lighter/less difficulty in my movements.
Back to the basics…
I first tried out the semi-light day and aimed for 15 - 25 reps not going to failure but just a little fatigue and burning sensation in my muscles. But I didn’t feel like I was getting the spring in my step till I regressed back to the light days or in terms of micro-workouts, light workouts. I would aim for 30 to 50 that’s it. But here’s the neat thing I emphasized the stretch. #lengthened partials.
My intent was constant tension/blood flow within the muscles which is all that Maxlading is about. I just put a calisthenics spin on it. Now of course I could just do contraction isometrics which I do do. But sometimes moving, moving fast, helps with my peace of mind because other things like forsaking the world I can’t do at the moment…
I figured if prisoners and those in the calisthenics community can get big off of lengthened partial bodyweight exercise, why can’t I? However, my goal is not large muscles solely from this form of training. That would take way too much time out of my day.
Plus, I’d be repeating old mistakes as all my mass after college from calisthenics made me great for the pull-up bars and obstacle courses, but horrible for everything else…
Can’t have the mass without the explosiveness, endurance, and functionality. This is where the overcoming isometrics and contraction isometrics come in. Actually, a program of some high-rep body weight movement as well as some overcoming isometrics sounds pretty good don’t you think?
Or some light bodyweight exercises coupled with contraction isometrics during the movement…
But I still love higher-difficulty movements from calisthenics. What all this means is that I don’t have to train in this way as much…heck I shouldn’t train in this way that much. Without the nourishing of my muscles through higher reps, I can’t build a proper foundation in which to build more muscle.
Continue to train with higher-difficulty movements and throw in some higher reps here and there.
I like researching, going down various rabbit holes, and recognizing patterns.
I didn’t notice before but there are a decent amount of videos on YouTube about people, especially older folks, utilizing higher reps to gain muscle. Some of this high rep training is to momentary failure though.
On the other side of this is chasing the pump or “Feeder reps” from guys like Rich Piana. Essentially your goal is to do high reps of movement/lift filling the muscle with blood and nutrients similar to what Maxick advocated. This is meant to be done repeatedly every day or even multiple times a day. Therefore it can’t be of a high intensity/highly exhausting nature. You’re sending a constant signal to grow and eventually, your body will listen. The signal is the blood flow and with enough swelling, the muscle will change.
“It is this constant swelling up of the muscles that increases their size…All he need do is to exercise these muscles sufficiently every day to swell them to their limit. If the arm swells up 1/2 inch after exercising, it does not stay that way the rest of the day, but diminishes at least 15/32 of an inch, retaining 1/32 of an increase.” - Earle Liederman
Overall I’m seeing and experiencing that there’s a value in higher reps. It’s not quite cardio and it’s not high-intensity. But it can be nourishing. This might call into question what’s needed for muscle growth/strength increases because some in the old school had different thoughts...
Strenuous muscular work does not build muscle. If it did, the hardest workers, particularly those who start in childhood, would be the biggest and strongest people. But the reverse is actually the case, because strenuous training and hard labour actually break down the muscular tissue.
We know that there are the rare cases of men who are able to train strenuously and show good physical development. But such persons are possessed of extraordinary powers of recuperation and they would get better results from more scientific methods of training. Some men are vitally strong enough to withstand several years of hard wear and tear on the organs, and it is these rare cases that are held up by advocates of strenuous training as proof of the efficacy of such training.
However, few people have the time or inclination for such unnatural methods, and it has been proven that by reasonable methods everyone is able to gain and maintain their full potentialities in health, strength and muscular development. I use the word maintain because only when a natural method is used can the training be continued throughout life. - Court Saldo
Court Saldo, Monte, Maxick, and all involved in the Maxalding program that lasted several decades couldn’t compete on a stage with the chemically enhanced individuals of today. However, the levels of their development despite the lack of gear and pills the average person uses lends credit to the effectiveness of their training.
It’s interesting to observe the contrast between physical culture and the fitness industry today. Most around the physical culture time believe building muscle to be a simple manner while today we have all these studies, approaches, and arguments online. One of the main differences I see is this aversion toward hard/intense training and more toward just sending an appropriate signal.
Do we need to train hard yes. But it doesn’t have to be often. Training that leans more toward the nourishment/stimulation factor vice the destruction/exhaustive factor might be a better long-term strategy for both strength and muscle. Get the blood flowing, a little pump, and a little fatigue. Don’t chase it(the pump) though.
Sometimes…late at night, I wonder if there is no such thing as a “Hard gainer” and that our current methods are just more destructive to our muscles vice constructive…
It is something to ask how long repetitive movement has been around for and whether these methods are truly the only tool in our belt for strength and muscle.
Maybe one day humanity will learn a great deal more about our,
Nerve
and
Muscle….
How would this approach work with overcoming isometrics? Well, instead of the short/high-intensity force generations go for the longer/lower-intensity force generations.
Due to the nature of overcoming isometrics, you can go harder for longer(in terms of training frequency) without much fatigue. Whereas with calisthenics you can lean more toward the nourishment, with overcoming isometrics you can lean more toward the work.
But not too much.
A training diet of higher-difficulty calisthenics and high-intensity overcoming isometrics will work for a long time in terms of strength. Muscle is a whole different approach.
Whether it’s strength or muscle, some degree of nourishment will go a long way.
Thank you for stopping by and spending a few minutes out of your day.
Take care…