Super Slow Weights

VeryKatie
VeryKatie Posts: 5,961 Member
edited November 2024 in Fitness and Exercise
I was at the gym today and someone mentioned a method of gaining strength called super slow lifting. It's where you lift a relatively low weight (as compared to other progressive overload programs) for 10 seconds up, and 10 seconds down until your muscles completely fail. I looked it up afterwards and found an article on WebMD.

Does anyone have any experience with this? Comments? I do realize the WebMD article doesn't really reference a lot of study (it even notes that much more study is needed), but I thought I'd put it out there for discussion.

http://www.webmd.com/men/features/want-more-strength-slow-down

Replies

  • SideSteel
    SideSteel Posts: 11,068 Member
    edited March 2016
    VeryKatie wrote: »
    I was at the gym today and someone mentioned a method of gaining strength called super slow lifting. It's where you lift a relatively low weight (as compared to other progressive overload programs) for 10 seconds up, and 10 seconds down until your muscles completely fail. I looked it up afterwards and found an article on WebMD.

    Does anyone have any experience with this? Comments? I do realize the WebMD article doesn't really reference a lot of study (it even notes that much more study is needed), but I thought I'd put it out there for discussion.

    http://www.webmd.com/men/features/want-more-strength-slow-down

    I don't think this is optimal. This is an idea popularized by Fred Hahn. Fred is apparently a really nice guy in real life, but his ideas that he attempts to debate online (both training and nutritional ideas) are quite a bit off, and he's been repeatedly shown wrong by guys like Aragon, Schoenfeld, Krieger, etc.

    Is it effective? Yes, but it's far from optimal IMO.

    Lifting abnormally slow reduces total training volume. This is generally not good.
  • _lyndseybrooke_
    _lyndseybrooke_ Posts: 2,561 Member
    Sounds incredibly boring and time-consuming.
  • SideSteel
    SideSteel Posts: 11,068 Member
    Also I would argue that it's even worse for strength which is the subject line of that link. My reply was primarily considering hypertrophy.
  • This content has been removed.
  • VeryKatie
    VeryKatie Posts: 5,961 Member
    SideSteel wrote: »
    VeryKatie wrote: »
    I was at the gym today and someone mentioned a method of gaining strength called super slow lifting. It's where you lift a relatively low weight (as compared to other progressive overload programs) for 10 seconds up, and 10 seconds down until your muscles completely fail. I looked it up afterwards and found an article on WebMD.

    Does anyone have any experience with this? Comments? I do realize the WebMD article doesn't really reference a lot of study (it even notes that much more study is needed), but I thought I'd put it out there for discussion.

    http://www.webmd.com/men/features/want-more-strength-slow-down

    I don't think this is optimal. This is an idea popularized by Fred Hahn. Fred is apparently a really nice guy in real life, but his ideas that he attempts to debate online (both training and nutritional ideas) are quite a bit off, and he's been repeatedly shown wrong by guys like Aragon, Schoenfeld, Krieger, etc.

    Is it effective? Yes, but it's far from optimal IMO.

    Lifting abnormally slow reduces total training volume. This is generally not good.

    I did think it was weird that the testing was done with a bunch of old, specifically frail women. I would think any exercise would help them gain strength. Though perhaps this is a good one for also preventing injury for people in that situation.
  • VeryKatie
    VeryKatie Posts: 5,961 Member
    SideSteel wrote: »

    "CONCLUSIONS:
    From a practical standpoint it would seem that a fairly wide range of repetition durations can be employed if the primary goal is to maximize muscle growth. Findings suggest that training at volitionally very slow durations (>10s per repetition) is inferior from a hypertrophy standpoint, although a lack of controlled studies on the topic makes it difficult to draw definitive conclusions."

    Very clear! Thank you!
  • drachfit
    drachfit Posts: 217 Member
    It might work, but there are plenty of other well- studied, time tested and proven methods of gaining muscle strength, size, or whatever your goal is.

    Why gamble your time with an unproven method?
  • VeryKatie
    VeryKatie Posts: 5,961 Member
    drachfit wrote: »
    It might work, but there are plenty of other well- studied, time tested and proven methods of gaining muscle strength, size, or whatever your goal is.

    Why gamble your time with an unproven method?

    I'm glad I looked into it. It did sound time consuming to me. But I also roll of shamed today on a 50 lb bench press so I figured I should look into it haha.
  • stealthq
    stealthq Posts: 4,298 Member
    edited March 2016
    I have experience with it. You can gain a lot of strength, but the rate of gain is much slower than regular lifting. It is superb for making sure the stabilizing muscles are nice and strong - I can guarantee that if you do slow lifts and then switch to regular lifting, you will have zero trouble getting out of the hole, LOL. Also good for establishing correct form - plenty of time to observe and correct inconsistencies during the lift. It's not very good for hypertrophy.

    What it is great for are beginners while they're figuring out the lifts, people needing to strengthen stabilizing muscles to advance in regular lifts, anyone injured (slow == control), people with hyper-mobility problems and people who are nervous about lifting free weights.
  • middlehaitch
    middlehaitch Posts: 8,486 Member
    Thanks for the article I have bookmarked it to pass on to people I know who could benefit from weight lifting, but are not into going to the gym and lifting heavy, or doing a 30day shred type endurance workout.

    At 62 I have a lot of friends and relatives (70+) who fit into the parameters of the study.

    Cheers, h.
  • SonyaCele
    SonyaCele Posts: 2,841 Member
    i never do that unless i'm doing negatives , like for pullups or something. Its time under tension or turning a dynamic movement into an isometric exercise like planking .
    part of my program for gaining strength involves explosive strength, the complete opposite of going slow..
  • singingflutelady
    singingflutelady Posts: 8,736 Member
    SonyaCele wrote: »
    i never do that unless i'm doing negatives , like for pullups or something. Its time under tension or turning a dynamic movement into an isometric exercise like planking .
    part of my program for gaining strength involves explosive strength, the complete opposite of going slow..

    I sometimes pause (in the hole for squats, half way up for DL, on the chest for bp) as a training aid.
  • feisty_bucket
    feisty_bucket Posts: 1,047 Member
    edited March 2016
    Yeah, I took up super-slow after reading this book, Body by Science by Doug McGuff a few years ago:
    amazon.com/gp/product/B001NLL38S

    Also, Ellington Darden calls it "High Intensity Training" and I read his book too:
    amazon.com/New-High-Intensity-Training-Muscle-Building/dp/1594860009/

    I did it for a year exclusively, and ended up slightly weaker at the end. But I wasn't overfeeding.

    Some people train that way and there are Reasons for it, which I can't articulate as well as 5 minutes of Googling can, so I'll just leave it to the pros. Anyways, nowadays I do one set of superslow on the 5 or 6 primary lifts these guys talk about. And then to hedge my bets, I do another buncha sets in the standard sort of cadence and rep ranges (fast push/pull, hold-pause, slow release). And overfeed on lifting days. Good results.

    Maybe the superslow stuff is a waste of time, maybe not. It is definitely hard though, and feels different.

  • Packerjohn
    Packerjohn Posts: 4,855 Member
    Remember someone writing about this probably 30 years ago. If it was that good people would have been all over it years ago.
  • SonyaCele
    SonyaCele Posts: 2,841 Member
    SonyaCele wrote: »
    i never do that unless i'm doing negatives , like for pullups or something. Its time under tension or turning a dynamic movement into an isometric exercise like planking .
    part of my program for gaining strength involves explosive strength, the complete opposite of going slow..

    I sometimes pause (in the hole for squats, half way up for DL, on the chest for bp) as a training aid.

    yeah i do pauses in training too, and the federation i compete in we have to pause at the bottom of the bench until we get the press command.
  • Sam_I_Am77
    Sam_I_Am77 Posts: 2,093 Member
    edited March 2016
    It really depends on what you're goal is. I'd be curious to read a full study and maybe I'll grab one posted above. On the WebMD page the developer ran across this with Senior Citizens apparently. If one is evaluating the benefit to seniors then maybe it is relevant. With seniors, you're generally talking about improving their quality of life without injuring them, rather than getting jacked and tan or prepping for a pick-up game down on the courts. So training a senior versus training an active 25 year old man are two different things. It would be curious to see a study done on seniors.

    The other studies posted above don't really seem to support anything impressive. Super-slow method isn't bad and to be honest if you're using very light intensities then a slower tempo is probably best, but these would have to be really really light. If you're training for athletics then going slow from start to finish is the wrong way to train.

    I'd say Paused Lifts are a different animal. You're still exploding out of the hole, off your chest, etc, it's not a slow movement.
  • Willbenchforcupcakes
    Willbenchforcupcakes Posts: 4,955 Member
    stealthq wrote: »
    I have experience with it. You can gain a lot of strength, but the rate of gain is much slower than regular lifting. It is superb for making sure the stabilizing muscles are nice and strong - I can guarantee that if you do slow lifts and then switch to regular lifting, you will have zero trouble getting out of the hole, LOL. Also good for establishing correct form - plenty of time to observe and correct inconsistencies during the lift. It's not very good for hypertrophy.

    What it is great for are beginners while they're figuring out the lifts, people needing to strengthen stabilizing muscles to advance in regular lifts, anyone injured (slow == control), people with hyper-mobility problems and people who are nervous about lifting free weights.

    This is my experience with it to. I usually only do three seconds as my slow movement, but man do you feel your stabilizers work! The added benefit of smoothing out your movement patterns as amazing.
  • cgvet37
    cgvet37 Posts: 1,189 Member
    In my opinion, you are better off doing high reps.
  • Chieflrg
    Chieflrg Posts: 9,097 Member
    I've revisited this method from with one purpose in mind. To work through pain.

    When my tendons are flaring it's impossible to do certain exercises at any weight that is significant to my natural strength.

    I've only been able to deadlift consistently the past year. With slow controlled movements at very low weights, I've been able to work my muscles, slowly stretch the scar tissues, and draw blood to the flared area to promote healing. First time in my life, I could work it put slow until my body was more cooperative.

    I can see the benefits for the elderly since I deal with many of their issues.


  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,322 Member
    cgvet37 wrote: »
    In my opinion, you are better off doing high reps.

    For strength? No
  • successgal1
    successgal1 Posts: 996 Member
    stealthq wrote: »
    I have experience with it. You can gain a lot of strength, but the rate of gain is much slower than regular lifting. It is superb for making sure the stabilizing muscles are nice and strong - I can guarantee that if you do slow lifts and then switch to regular lifting, you will have zero trouble getting out of the hole, LOL. Also good for establishing correct form - plenty of time to observe and correct inconsistencies during the lift. It's not very good for hypertrophy.

    What it is great for are beginners while they're figuring out the lifts, people needing to strengthen stabilizing muscles to advance in regular lifts, anyone injured (slow == control), people with hyper-mobility problems and people who are nervous about lifting free weights.

    This is my experience with it to. I usually only do three seconds as my slow movement, but man do you feel your stabilizers work! The added benefit of smoothing out your movement patterns as amazing.

    Besides slow weights, isn't this along the lines of yoga and pilates?

  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 49,042 Member
    It's low volume and is a mix to isometric contractions then isotonic contractions of the muscle. It will help with strength, but IMO, it's extremely boring due to taking up to 3 1/2 minutes to do one set (10 seconds up/10 seconds down for 10 reps).

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png
This discussion has been closed.