BODY TRANSFORMATION: CALISTHENICS

WORK!
Body transformation without barbells …

David Bolton Q&A Part 2: Building Muscle

Using Sandow’s Light-Dumbbell System
Posted on August 23, 2012

Here it is: part two of a now THREE-PART Q & A with David Bolton, author of The Lost Secret
to a Great Body.

If you missed part one, CLICK HERE.

If you want to read the generously sized preview to his book, CLICK HERE.

If you want to read my articles on the light-dumbbell exercises, CLICK HERE.

 — Eugene Sandow: picture taken with good lighting
by a professional photographer. “Pumping up”
was the norm, as was adding “shading” to
enhance the pictures.

DAVID BOLTON Q & A: PART TWO

Why do you think iron-game historians tend to be so dismissive of such methods?

For the same reasons people have assumed it must have been a con of some sort: on the face
of it, the assertion that you can build muscles training with insignificant

— David Bolton, who is in his forties: picture taken on a cheap

camera, without any “pumping up” or special lighting

weights on a daily basis without increasing external resistance (sets, etc.) seems ridiculous.
Most iron-game historians are aficionados of heavy strength training — its history, practice, and
the impressive feats of its luminaries. They are often serious strength
trainers/bodybuilders/strongmen themselves and know empirically all about the results of heavy
progressive resistance training. They know what sort of verified lifts men such as Sandow were
capable of, and simply assume that such development must be due to that alone.

Thus they often ignore what the men themselves said in black and white when asked about
their training, because on the face of it, it simply doesn’t square with what we “know” to be true
about training today.

What sort of body can a person build using such methods?

If you look through all the different versions of the antique courses promoting this type of
training, many have photos of satisfied customers as testimonials. The type of development
these people got is exactly what their authors promised: a well developed, balanced physique
resembling the classic proportions and definition of Greek sculptures of the classic period.

That translates to a decent but not excessive amount of size in the back, arms, and shoulder
muscles; defined chest, abs, and obliques; and athletic legs and calves.

Most of the results quoted were very similar in size and proportion. For the average man we’re
talking 42-45 inch chests, 15-16 inch arms, 30-32 in waist, 22-23 inch thighs and 15 inch
calves. This is very similar to what I achieved, and my body looks very like those in the books.

— Sandow, striking a back pose. Special

lighting and professional photography was
used. It was also the norm to “pump up.”

I’ve included a couple of photos that are not in the book, providing a rough comparison with
Sandow. Please note that as with the photos in the book, these are taken “cold,” in natural light,
and with a very basic camera. I know nothing about lighting etc., and I am comparing myself to
one of the best built men ever who has been photographed, and who in both cases was
photographed by a professional photographer using flattering lighting.
 — David Bolton, striking a back pose. Picture
taken without any “pumping up.”

Obviously Sandow is uniformly bigger and more muscular than I am, but I hope these show
that the method produces the same TYPE of physique and proportions he sported. This is
really all the courses ever promised.
The look these exercises produce is comparable to an athletic physique of today, but with less
focus on the pecs, and more focus on the deltoids, arms, and abs (especially the obliques).
There is particular focus on the muscles of the back.

Is it a suitable method for older people?

I think it’s a great method for older people. It would fulfill the need to maintain muscle mass,
and avoid sarcopenia while not stressing joints. It actively works on the neurological
communication between the brain and the muscles, maintaining physical dexterity and an acute
awareness of one’s own body in space.

Any thoughts on whether the tension created may raise blood pressure?

Good point, and again an important one.

ANY resistance exercise whatsoever will raise blood pressure during its performance.

If you lift a heavy shopping bag, a 40lb dumbbell, or do a pull-up, your blood-pressure will
spike. Of course it will immediately drop again, and repeated performance and training will
actually lower resting blood pressure, keeping it at a healthy level.

The concern with exercises involving “unnatural” levels of tension is that they will force a
prolonged rise in blood pressure that could be harmful, and lead to a permanently raised
reading.

Performed properly these exercises are not in any way harmful, and will not raise one’s blood
pressure any more than any other form of resistance training.

The very exacting protocol I have laid out in the book ensures that the trainer knows NEVER to
hold his/her breath … NEVER involve or tense muscles other than the ones targeted by each
specific exercise (all other muscles are totally relaxed) … ALWAYS alternate between tension
and total relaxation in each movement … ALWAYS completely relax and shake out each body
part at the end of each section of the routine, etc.

The blood pressure issue is one reason (along with another very interesting neurological one
detailed in the book) why this method doesn’t “pit one muscle’s tension against another” and
why — as mentioned in an earlier question — you don’t want to try too hard to reach muscle
fatigue in the fewest number of reps by using too much prolonged tension.

For what it’s worth, at my parent’s house I recently tested my blood pressure on one of those
home machines with the automatic cuff. I did it in the evening after food, and it came out at
124/76, which is in the normal range. My resting pulse rate is 52bpm.

Also, I know it’s not proof of anything whatsoever but it is at least encouraging that Professor
Attila, Al Treloar, and Lionel Strongfort — all practitioners of this system — lived into their
eighties, in perfect muscular health.

Alan Calvert said that such methods can lead to nervous problems – even suggesting
one man went mad! What are your thoughts?
As you have pointed out on your blog, Alan Calvert was a critic of this methodology, although
even he had to admit that it did what it said on the tin: it grew muscles – perhaps, according to
him, even better than heavy training methods!

Unable to challenge its efficacy, he instead cast aspersions on its safety.

Frankly I think this assertion is nothing more than using something unfortunate that happened
to Sandow (he had a “nervous breakdown”) to attack a rival methodology by association.

Nowadays we are far more understanding and accepting of mental illness/psychological

breakdown/depression, etc. If a prominent figure were briefly institutionalized after such an
episode, everybody would immediately understand that it probably resulted from his
psychological make up, coupled with whatever emotional stresses and pressures he was
enduring in his life at the time. No one would suggest it was due to the way he tensed his
biceps when he worked out.

Honestly, I think the assertion is right up there with masturbation makes you go blind and grows
hair on your palms.

Again, there were many prominent exponents of this method who lived to ripe old ages while
still maintaining good physiques and robust health.

It should also be mentioned that later in his life, it was strongly rumored that Sandow suffered
from Syphilis, which may have been the real cause of his early death. Syphilis, untreated,
causes psychological problems and eventual madness and death.

How is it possible to train the whole body every day without over-training? It goes
against everything we are told.
I know, but EVERYTHING about this method goes against everything we’re told…but it still
works.

If you are using heavy resistance training to enable you to break down muscle fibres, then
fueling your body with protein while you rest and let your body repair, it makes sense that you
can’t do this every day without over-training.

However, with this method of training it really doesn’t feel like you are tearing anything down,
and it doesn’t feel like you need any time to recover either. You can repeat the routine every
day, feel great, and still see results.

Listen to your body though. As Sandow and most of the other authors recommend: have a day
off every week or so if you feel you need it.

The thing is, just as heavy training won’t give the right results without adequate rest, this
method won’t give its results if done sporadically.

It really does work best if done every day. I know because in my early experiments with it I too
tried to implement it in the usual Monday/ Wednesday/ Friday model. I had some results, but it
wasn’t until I began doing it exactly as prescribed in the old books — every day at the same
time — that I started to make real progress both in terms of getting the hang of performing the
exercises, and seeing visible improvements in size, shape, and definition.

In the book I speculate that a different mechanism may be at work here — one that differs from
usual explanation of muscle hypertrophy. I support this with several scientific studies, one of
which concludes that muscle proteins and growth hormones produced by muscle fatigue (and
held in muscle tissue by temporarily occluded blood) may be the key factor to causing growth.

Consider the way a ballet dancer trains releve’ at the barre’ — they rhythmically pump off
hundreds of these in time to music every single day without ever resting that muscle in order to
let it recover and grow.

— Ballet dancer calves

Indeed everything a ballet dancer does in his or her training and performance involves
prolonged and intense use of the calves. So the calves must be over-trained then? Unable to
grow? Have you seen a ballet dancer’s calves? (See pic.)
 “Ah, but the calf is made up mainly of slow twitch muscle because we walk about on it
everyday” I hear you say, and as such is different from other muscles — thus allowing this type
of overloading.

OK, have you seen a soccer player’s quads and hamstrings? Do you think they only run about
every other day? What about an Olympic swimmer’s entire bodily muscles? They are in the
pool twice a day five days a week. An Olympic cyclist with thighs like tree trunks is on the track
every day in training.

It seems to me many of the “rules” we take for granted are recent discoveries that come from
modern bodybuilding, which concentrates on building extreme size above all else.

Sandow, Attila, Treloar, Strongfort, Moss, Desbonnet, and Triat all trained and recommended
training in this way (light dumbbells) daily — just look at their physiques.

CLICK HERE for PART THREE

http://calisthenicsworks.wordpress.com/2012/08/23/david-bolton-qa-part-2-b Go OCT DEC MAY 🗔 ⍰❎
9 captures 25 f 🐦
Part
21 Oct 2012 - 30 three
May 2013 will reveal: 2011 2012 2013 ▾ About this capture

The VITAL thing that you MUST do if you want these methods to work. (If you overlook
this, you’ll be wasting your time.)
What sort of cadence to use.
What to eat and what NOT to eat for great results.
What to do on the negative part of your reps: advantages and disadvantages to the
different methods.
How to gain muscle and lose fat using this method.
Why simply tensing or flexing the muscles isn’t enough.

S HAR E TH I S :

Twitter
Facebook

LI KE T HI S:

Like
Be the first to like this.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized by calisthenicsworks. Bookmark the permalink
[https://web.archive.org/web/20121225202754/http://calisthenicsworks.wordpress.com/2012/08/23/dav
bolton-qa-part-2-building-muscle-using-sandows-light-dumbbell-system/] .

24 THOUGHTS ON “DAVID BOLTON Q&A PART 2: BUILDING MUSCLE USING SANDOW’S LIGHT-DUMBBELL SYSTEM”

Pingback: David Bolton Q & A: Building Muscle with Stupidly Light Weights | BODY
TRANSFORMATION: CALISTHENICS WORK!

Matt
 on August 23, 2012 at 1:51 pm said:

How necessary are the weights? Can you perform the exercises effectively without
them?

calisthenicsworks
on August 23, 2012 at 2:18 pm said:

I think they do make a difference owing to the leverages involved. When

performed correctly, you certainly feel the weight, too.

vinniepaz
on August 23, 2012 at 10:38 pm said:

Does this mean that you are against applying this method with
resistance bands?

calisthenicsworks
on August 24, 2012 at 9:15 am said:

I quite like it with bands, but it does change things a little.

Rob
on August 23, 2012 at 3:01 pm said:

Excellent set of interviews,I have bought the book on the back of them

calisthenicsworks
on August 23, 2012 at 3:31 pm said:

Thanks Rob.
 Rob
on August 23, 2012 at 4:08 pm said:

Take a look at the link provided below. Specifically, read the entire right side of the last
page. Sandow himself tells Liederman about “the only vay to get strong”.
What do you make of these comments, especially since they directly follow discussions
about his spring loaded dumbell in the same article.
http://www.sandowplus.co.uk/S/size&strength/s-s.htm

calisthenicsworks
on August 23, 2012 at 4:15 pm said:

Oh, I’ve seen that before. Liederman hated the light dumbbell systems, and has
distorted things. In one of Liederman’s books he slates them. Sandow’s books
make it clear that if you want to be an athlete, you have to lift heavy. It’s nothing
that he hadn’t revealed in print beforehand.

The ability to lift heavy has always required one to actually lift heavy. The light
dumbbell systems were never meant as a method that would enable people to
suddenly put 150 pounds overhead with one arm.

Rob
on August 23, 2012 at 4:48 pm said:

Here is another link, this one by Maxick. He is much older and clears up
mis-statements that were attributed to him. Further, his remarks closely
resemble those of Sandow, from the link above.

http://www.maxalding.co.uk/maxick/youcan/youcan.htm

calisthenicsworks
on August 23, 2012 at 5:41 pm said:

That’s a different method — not the same thing. Have a look at this book
by strongman Thomas Inch — he used the method for size. His
discussion starts on page 14:
http://www.sandowplus.co.uk/Competition/Inch/ManualPhysicalTraining/
mpt02.htm

Note the baby-weight dumbbells used!

 vinniepaz
on August 23, 2012 at 10:42 pm said:

I believe in the effectiveness of this protocol for muscular development and I can also
believe that this protocol (combined with the appropriate nutrition) can help with some
size development. But the late Mr. Inch claimed to have gained close to 40 lbs. of
MUSCLE somewhere between 6 months or 1 year.

I think if skeptics of this system were to read that it would hurt our cause even further.

calisthenicsworks
on August 24, 2012 at 9:19 am said:

I think a lot of these old timers really underestimated their fat gains. Peary
Rader’s system is often said to have helped people gain 100 pounds in a year! I
think Rader gained something like 100 pounds himself (not sure on the
timescale for him).

calisthenicsworks
on August 24, 2012 at 9:19 am said:

I think a lot of these old timers really underestimated their fat gains. Peary
Rader’s system is often said to have helped people gain 100 pounds in a year! I
think Rader gained something like 100 pounds himself (not sure on the
timescale for him).

dave bolton
on August 24, 2012 at 10:30 am said:

Hi to everyone reading the interview – the strength issue is discussed in the next part –
honestly, I’m making no unreasonable claims about what it can do to increase ones
“general” strength or heavy lifting performance. Actually my answers aren’t a million
miles away from what Maxick said above.
As regards doing the routine with resistance bands – I do this when I go away on
holiday. As pointed out it does change the leverage a bit and I feel it works better if
you’ve already learned to do the routine and foster the right effects in the target
muscles with light dumbbells, and THEN try to get that same effect with bands – I think
it would be much harder to get this protocol to work (to really have an “aha” moment
and get the knack of what it is you’re supposed to be doing) working with bands initially.
Also you need to select the right level of resistance – a medium strength band (green
usually) rather than the strongest sort then go for the same rep ranges/duration as with
the dumbbells

calisthenicsworks
on August 24, 2012 at 11:21 am said:

Hi David. Are the highlighting issues sorted now? I had a couple of people
asking on my forum yesterday. It seems they were still having some issues.
Here is the link: http://calisthenicswork.yuku.com/topic/48/The-Lost-Secret-To-A-
Great-Body#.UDdjfqDAHyI

dave bolton
on August 26, 2012 at 10:39 am said:

Hi – the highlighting issue that was causing a problem on some kindle platforms should
be fixed now – all the highlighting has been replaced by just bold characters. This was
done several days ago now so it’s a little alarming if people are still encountering the
same problem – if anyone is please let me know and I’ll contact Kindle. (incidentally it’s
interesting that kindle has been telling people the problem should be fixed in 5 days or
whatever – they have never contacted me about it at all – the book looks fine in the
preview stage and I only found out there was a problem with some kindle platforms via
feedback on some forums and have fixed it myself) the contact email in the back of the
book is live and should work fine.

dave bolton
on August 26, 2012 at 12:22 pm said:

One more thing on the developing strength issue/ the question of whether or not this
type of training is useful to people interested in heavy lifting or real strength training – I
recently found this article in a past issue of Men’s Fitness in the library and just tracked
it down
online;
http://www.mensfitness.co.uk/exercise/other/7795/little_weights_big_gains.html

the author is an Olympic weightlifting coach and recommends an approach with 2.2lb
dumbbells to improve lifting posture/ STRENGTHEN various links in the lifting
chain/avoid potential shoulder injuries and ultimately facilitate greater gains. This is
pretty much exactly as Professor Attila used the approach in training strength athletes.
There’s no mention here about improvements in aesthetics (not a concern for Olympic
lifters) but in Attila’s day when a strongman had to appear on stage and “look the part”
for the audience this was a very happy and useful side effect of the routine.

Matthew
on August 26, 2012 at 11:29 pm said:

Thank you for introducing this book.

Yesterday I read this book and I tried some exercises.
What a surprise!
I have never had such a soreness for years.
I felt like working out all day long.
I think it’s worth trying.
And I’m very obese.
Although Mr. Bolton said that this programm is not suitable for the obese people, I will
see if it works.

calisthenicsworks
on August 28, 2012 at 8:16 am said:

Yes, the muscle soreness is surprising. found the same thing.

Scott
on August 27, 2012 at 9:24 pm said:

Great thread but why is it taking so long for part 3?

calisthenicsworks
on August 28, 2012 at 8:18 am said: