Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
A couple of thoughts.
First, Finaplix (or Finny, as in Winny?
), it's too bad people at your gym don't understand what you're doing. Ignore them. Unfortunately, though, there are lots of lifters who have never heard of PFT and exclusively do partials, so they give guys like you a bad name. For instance, there are muttonheads at my gym that do partials on everything--light partials, no less. One of these fellas, a big dumb smooth guy, must've done 10 sets with 4 or 500 on the leg press using jerky quarter-reps when I needed to get in and do a knees-to-elbows set with 1,000. Of course, when he finally finished, he strutted around like he was the shit; and here I was, thinking, wow, I'm only "okay" doing 950-1,000 for a set.
Ahhh...if I was still a hot-headed 18 year old I would've...been less restrained LOL.
Anyway, I've had some experience with HEAVY partials, and I found them to be excruciatingly intense. It's my opinion that extremely hard muscular contractions, along with progressive overload of course, are the best way to ensure growth. A rep that you can finish in a half-second, with far less than maximal effort, won't do you a lot of good...but a rep that, in spite of giving it everything you've got, takes ten seconds to get up...now that's something that'll yield growth.
Partials provide a means by which we can get these kinds of contractions, and with a whole lot of weight to boot. I think in the short-term, they can be a very effective means of adding size for that reason...but for reasons of which I'm not entirely aware, I do *not* think training exclusively with partials is good long-term.
Why?
For one thing, my own experience makes me believe this. When I did partials, I found that, after I came back to full-range training, I had gained *zero* strength. Nada. I didn't *lose* much, if any, mind you. And yes, I did gain some new size almost immediately. The trouble is, after the first three workouts or so, the noticeable size gains stopped altogether. All of the partial-based workouts I did after that did nothing to further my development or to increase my full-range strength, even though I attempted to use ever-heavier poundages.
Many things work great initially, not for the oversimplified virtue of simply "being different" necessarily, but great nonetheless. That's what I think static and partial-only styles are best for: to accrue a little new size, then move on to more conventional training.
First, Finaplix (or Finny, as in Winny?
), it's too bad people at your gym don't understand what you're doing. Ignore them. Unfortunately, though, there are lots of lifters who have never heard of PFT and exclusively do partials, so they give guys like you a bad name. For instance, there are muttonheads at my gym that do partials on everything--light partials, no less. One of these fellas, a big dumb smooth guy, must've done 10 sets with 4 or 500 on the leg press using jerky quarter-reps when I needed to get in and do a knees-to-elbows set with 1,000. Of course, when he finally finished, he strutted around like he was the shit; and here I was, thinking, wow, I'm only "okay" doing 950-1,000 for a set. Ahhh...if I was still a hot-headed 18 year old I would've...been less restrained
LOL.Anyway, I've had some experience with HEAVY partials, and I found them to be excruciatingly intense. It's my opinion that extremely hard muscular contractions, along with progressive overload of course, are the best way to ensure growth. A rep that you can finish in a half-second, with far less than maximal effort, won't do you a lot of good...but a rep that, in spite of giving it everything you've got, takes ten seconds to get up...now that's something that'll yield growth.
Partials provide a means by which we can get these kinds of contractions, and with a whole lot of weight to boot. I think in the short-term, they can be a very effective means of adding size for that reason...but for reasons of which I'm not entirely aware, I do *not* think training exclusively with partials is good long-term.
Why?
For one thing, my own experience makes me believe this. When I did partials, I found that, after I came back to full-range training, I had gained *zero* strength. Nada. I didn't *lose* much, if any, mind you. And yes, I did gain some new size almost immediately. The trouble is, after the first three workouts or so, the noticeable size gains stopped altogether. All of the partial-based workouts I did after that did nothing to further my development or to increase my full-range strength, even though I attempted to use ever-heavier poundages.
Many things work great initially, not for the oversimplified virtue of simply "being different" necessarily, but great nonetheless. That's what I think static and partial-only styles are best for: to accrue a little new size, then move on to more conventional training.
