That website(www.hypertrophy-specific.com/hst_index.html) seems to support
training on XF machines to an extent.

Following the basic principles:
1. Mechanical Load - which there definitely is.
2. Sufficient Frequency - which is up to the user.
3. Progressive Load - again up to the useer, but this is the basis of SCT.
4. Strategic Deconditioning - I see this when I workout. I often decrease
weight (not by choice) and repeat the same excercise trying to get it higher.
Most people probably.

The only things I don't see is the high reps that HST is suggesting, and the
coupound excercise.

Any other thoughts ....
Al

--- In Explosive_Fitness@yahoogroups.com, thomas schanz <tommybommys@y...>
wrote:
>
> Show me the proof!!!......
>
> Check this out from
> www.hypertrophy-specific.com/hst_index.html
>
> "As opposed to hypertrophy, the foundation for the
> development of strength is neuromuscular in nature.
> Increases in strength from resistance exercise have
> been attributed to several neural adaptations. So,
> aside from incremental changes in hypertrophy,
> strength is largely a matter of "activating" motor
> units."
>
> That's why you gain strength on the XF machines, but
> next to nothing in actual muscle gain....it's neural
> adaptation, not muscle that lets you lift more each
> subsequent workout.
>
> I'd like to put the issue to rest, once and for all.
> Does SCT work or not? This is a quote from a member of
> the SCT and XF Yahoo Groups. He used to be very
> enthusiastic about this form of training, but has
> soured from it, due to it's what he says is SCT's lack
> of 'hypertrophic' ability (ability to build muscle). I
> will not mention his name to respect his privacy. Can
> anyone claim with 100% confidence that SCT DOES or
> DOES NOT work. (I'd especially like to hear from those
> who own Explosive Fitness equipment)
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]