This video is proof positive that you don’t need to hit the gym—or have a ton of time or space—for a truly killer workout. Speed through this routine when your schedule is packed, and don’t worry: With exercises like one-legged squats and moving planks (and only 10 seconds of rest between each), you won’t be missing out on any muscle-building benefits.
I bought this book many years ago and for a while believed that SuperSlow (TM) was the ultimate training protocol. Now I believe that it is just one of many effective training techniques. I also believe that if Hutchins would combine SuperSlow with undulating periodization, also refered to as nonlinear periodization by Fleck & Kraemer in their book Optimiizing Strength Training, he could get many more converts. Charles Poliquin is of the opinion that for advanced trainees using the same loading (percentage of 1RM) will have a plateau effect within six workouts. So, insead of using SuperSlow only for moderate weights, workouts can be alternated using heavier weights with fewer reps per set in one workout and moderate weights in the next workout. The use of heavy weights requires more than one set though. It seems that no matter what training speed one uses there seems to be a minimum amount of work to achieve a training effect. I tried SuperSlow with undulating periodization as an experiment and made good progress for several weeks. I still use SuperSlow for about 20% of my workout, but also have discovered that maximal static holds are very effective too. I know that there are those who advocate training fast, but even Fleck and Kraemer recommend that speed or power workouts make up less than half the training time. Besides, if speed and rate of force development are important, then free weighta really aren't the best option. Isokinetic machines (Minigym), springs, jump bands, and marine pushups, medicine balls, modified Smith machines, some bodyweight exercises, etc. are better choices. Hutchins' book might be overkill if you just want the rudiments of SuperSlow. I kept mine for a while as a historical document. It still might be an interesting purchase just to read from the master himself. The bottom line, I think, is that SuperSlow can be very effective for building strength and size. SuperSlow has its detractors and it's not the only game in town. I'd really like to see Hutchins add undulating periodization to SuperSlow. I'd also like to see some rigorous studies comparing SuperSlow to other protocols. Most studies so far have been flawed. Some people will not like SuperSlow -- especially as a steady diet, but for a lot of others I think it is worth a trial. Training can get boring. A few Superslow sets can add variety.
It is well known that exercise in the older population may prevent several diseases [1–4]. Reduced physical activity impairs the quality of life in elderly people with Alzheimer's Disease [4], Parkinson's Disease [5], and Depressive Disorders [6]. Moreover, musculoskeletal, cardiopulmonary, and cerebrovascular decline are associated with poor physical fitness because of the cumulative effects of illness, multiple drug intake, fatigue, and bed rest [7, 8]. The effects of physical activity and exercise programs on fitness and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in elderly adults have been widely studied by several authors [9–11]. De Vries et al. [11] conducted a meta-analysis focusing on elderly patients with mobility problems and/or multimorbidity. Eighteen articles describing a wide variety of actions were analyzed. Most used a multicomponent training program focusing on the combination of strength, balance, and endurance training. In 9 of the 18 studies included, interventions were supervised by a physical therapist. Intensity of the intervention was not reported and the duration of the intervention varied from 5 weeks to 18 months. This meta-analysis concluded that, considering quality of life, the exercise versus no-exercise studies found no significant effects. High-intensity exercise appears to be somewhat more effective in improving physical functioning than low-intensity exercise. These positive effects are of great value in the patient population but the most effective type of intervention remains unclear. Brovold et al. [7] recently examined the effects of high-intensity training versus home-based exercise programs using the Norwegian Ullevaal Model [12] on a group of over-65-year-olds after discharge from hospital. These authors based their study on the Swedish Friskis-Svettis model [13] which was designed by Johan Holmsater for patients with coronaropathy to promote their return to work and everyday activities and improve their prognoses. This model includes three intervals of high intensity and two intervals of moderate intensity, each one lasting for 5 to 10 minutes. Included in each is coordination. Exercises consist of simple aerobic dance movements and involve the use of both upper and lower extremities to challenge postural control [13]. Exercise intensity was adjusted using the Borg Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE) Scale. Moderate intensity was set between 11 and 13, and high intensity was set between 15 and 17 on the Borg Scale.
×