Author Archives: Al Myers

Club Challenge

by Al Myers

MEET ANNOUNCEMENT

2013 USAWA CLUB CHALLENGE

Meet director John McKean "in action" at last years Club Challenge under the watchful eyes of Art Montini and Rudy Bletscher.

The date for the USAWA Club Challenge has been set!  This meet has become the premier meet in the USAWA which features club (or team) competition. It is unique in that it is NOT a personal competition, but instead a 3-person competition of the representatives of each club.  The scores from each lifter are added together to form a club score.  No individual recognition is given in this meet.   The winning club has the bragging rights of having the “top performing” club in the USAWA for the year.  

John McKean, of the Ambridge Barbell Club, has been the meet director for this meet since it’s beginning.  The Ambridge BBC is one of the longest standing clubs in the USAWA, and has had club membership in the USAWA since 1993.  Only Clarks Gym has a longer running membership status.  The patriarch of the Ambridge Barbell Club, Art Montini, has been one of the most influential men in the history of the USAWA.

Eventually I would like to see each entered club in this challenge consisting of only club members (as identified on the membership roster).  This way the challenge would truly represent each individual club performance. However so far, this has not been required for entry into the Club Challenge.   So if two clubs want to “come together” to field a team, that is allowable.  You may also enter if you can’t be part of a three-person team, but when the scoring is done you will be at a disadvantage because the scoring is based on three individuals and it will be difficult to “single handily” compete against the scores of three.

MEET DETAILS:

Date: Saturday, March 2nd

Venue: Ambridge BBC

Meet Directors: John McKean & Art Montini

Entry Fee: None

Start Time: 1:00 PM

Sanction: USAWA

Lifts:

Bench Press – Fulton Bar

Peoples Deadlift

Bent Over Row

There is no entry form for this competition. If interested, contact myself (at amyers@usawa.com) or John McKean.

HMB: THE LIFTER’S SUPPLEMENT?

HMB: THE LIFTER’S SUPPLEMENT?

Fact vs. Fiction and Hype

By Dan Wagman, PhD, CSCS

Publisher/Editor in Chief, Journal of Pure Power (JOPP)

I’m writing this because as a sports scientist, and dedicated barbell bender, I want people to understand that supplement companies realize that most of you hold science in high regard—which is why they use “science” to sell you their products. Of course they also cash in on the emotions and passions you hold for your sport; they know that you want to get the most out of your training and that you’ll leave no stone unturned. Unfortunately, most of the time you’re being taken advantage of. I’d like to share a recent experience with you that highlights this, in hopes that you’ll become a bit more wiser to the game that’s being played.

Background

I was recently contacted by a well-known strength athlete who receives sponsorship from a nutrition supplement company that specializes in β – h y d r o x y – β- m e t h y l b u t y r a t e, or simply HMB. In brief, HMB is a metabolite of the essential amino acid leucine (new research on this amino acid is reviewed in JOPP‘s January issue; (click here for a free sample). Both leucine and HMB have been shown to hold certain properties that could be beneficial to the strength athlete. But of course just holding such properties isn’t enough to conclude that your strength will go through the roof. After all, water holds essential properties our body needs, yet nobody would believe that by drinking more water before your attempt, you’ll end up increasing your Continental to Chest by 50 pounds. But that’s what research is for—investigating something under controlled conditions to see what’s actually occurring.

So this company’s claim is that HMB improves “strength, endurance, and recovery.” The company also claims that they’re all about “science instead of hype” and then go on to cite a lot of research on HMB with their own brief summaries thereof. From what I could tell, all of these research summaries are positive. And that’s where I got curious…

The Science

From previous study on HMB, I remembered that the research was equivocal. Why then, if this company was scientifically oriented, did they only list studies with positive results? In order to refamiliarize myself with the latest findings, and as a first step, I did a quick search of the scientific literature on HMB. Well, they’re still not in agreement on whether HMB will increase your performance or not. Now, before you take that as evidence that science is just a bunch of baloney, please understand that the reason for why studies aren’t always in agreement is because different research methods were used. It should come as no surprise that if you compare men to women, or an upper body exercise to a lower body exercise, or taking a supplement for seven days vs. seven weeks, etc., etc., that you’ll end up with conflicting results.

Anyway, my next step was to look at some of the research the company claims to be proof that HMB will increase performance. I randomly selected a study they cite. Here’s the company’s summary:

This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study examined HMB supplementation in young male and female elite volleyball players for 7 wks. HMB supplementation resulted in improved body composition and significantly increased strength, while also decreasing fat mass percentage. HMB supplementation also increased peak and mean anaerobic power. No changes in hormones or inflammatory mediators were seen in this study.

Sounds good, but my next step was to look at the actual study, referenced below. A rather different picture emerged. First, the subjects were adolescents, as young as 13. That’s a huge flag because there’s an abundance of studies showing that adolescents respond to training, supplements, etc., quite differently than adults. Besides, can you really compare a 14-year old girl’s responses to HMB to that of a 36-year old male strength athlete? Next, the researchers used skinfold thickness to determine changes in fat-free mass, i.e., gains/losses in muscle mass. That method, however, isn’t the most accurate way to measure changes in muscle mass, especially in athletes and young people. In fact, the formula alone used for these calculations holds an error rate of nearly 4%. Consider that the placebo group showed changes ranging between 56.4 kg to 56.3 kg vs 59.3 kg to 61.6 kg for the HMB group. Though the HMB group showed statistically significant gains in muscle, in only considering the approximate 4% error rate for the formula, you end up with around 4.5 pounds (about 2 kg) worth of error. Since we’re talking about approximate error rates, and not even considering all sources of error in this method of determining fat-free mass, there’s no need for my math to be 100% accurate. The point is that you can easily see that as it relates to fat-free mass changes, HMB in this study isn’t much to hang your hat on.

But what about strength? That’s even more interesting. You see, the researchers found that the HMB group increased their strength significantly more than the placebo group—but only in knee flexion (such as in leg curls). No significant gains in strength were seen in knee extension, biceps curls, or triceps extensions. Now, also consider that strength was measured isokinetically. This means that equipment was used in which the speed of movement is held constant, in this case rep speed was measured at 180° and 60° per second. Of course any exercise you perform in the gym or competition isn’t isokinetic, it’s dynamic in that the speed of movement changes throughout the range of motion. So clearly, it’s difficult to generalize from an isokinetic curl to a dynamic squat. But again, please don’t dismiss the science because they used isokinetics to measure strength. You see, it’s very important to make sure that subjects perform an exercise identically, otherwise you introduce error into the experiment. If there’s any complaint on your part, it should be directed toward the supplement company for generating a false impression.

The research team also looked at peak and average anaerobic power via a cycle ergometer. Here some significant differences were noted for HMB. However, for rates of fatigue, aerobic fitness, or any of the hormonal and inflammatory measures taken, nothing significant was recorded allowing you to conclude that HMB might increase strength.

So how does this compare to the company’s summary? Not much. Add to that, that the research team discussed the various limitations of their work, all of which the company left out in their summary, and you can see how the company grossly exaggerated the study’s findings.

Take-Home Message

I’m sure you’re curious about this company’s name. But I’m not going to give it. Why? Because what I’ve shared with you is common among supplement companies. This particular company isn’t any worse than any of the other ones out there. So I feel that their particular name is irrelevant. The point is that you can’t trust any of them, even if they throw the word “science” around and list research. And even if the company employs scientists, that’s no guarantee, either. You see, last year I shined a bright light on how a company that produces mouthpieces and claims it’ll increase your strength, misrepresented what their scientists actually said (Click here and scroll down to Mouthpieces for Peak Performance?).

So are these companies purposely lying to you? That’s a tough question to answer. I would, however, say that they purposely hype their products to make sales. And what about HMB? Based on a quick review of the current science, my personal opinion is that you’d get more out of your training by focusing on a scientific approach thereto. And don’t forget about training the muscle between your ears; critical thinking and a healthy dose of scepticism when it comes to supplements is always in order.

Reference

Portal S., et al. The effect of HMB supplementation on body composition, fitness, hormonal and inflammatory mediators in elite adolescent volleyball players: a prospective randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. European Journal of Applied Physiology. 111(9):2261-2269, 2011.

Dino Gym Challenge REMINDER

by Al Myers

The Dino Gym has been issued a challenge from the Hoghton Barbell Club. Pictured left to right in front of the Dinnie Stones: Josh Haydock, Mark Haydock, Alex Rigbye

The Annual Dino Gym Challenge is now only ONE WEEK away.  I have received several commitments from lifters that plan to compete.  It is looking to be a well-attended meet.  I’m hoping for 15-20 lifters – and I think I might get that many.  The entry form is available on the website, and I’m still taking entries so it is NOT too late to attend!

A new twist has been recently added to this year’s Dino Gym Challenge.  Mark Haydock, of the Hoghton Barbell Club in Preston, England has issued the Dino Gym a “head-to-head” Challenge.  Of course I accepted!!!  We even put up “stakes” for the challenge.  The loser will have to “pay up” gym shirts to the winner.    His club has three members who are going to participate – Mark, Josh Haydock, and Alex Rigbye.   They plan to do the same lifts as us on the same day so the results will be known that same day.  This means that the “top three” placing Dino Gym members of the day will be entered in this challenge against our English counterparts.  All adjusted scores will be added together from the three participants from each club to form a final total team score.  So I’m expecting BIG THINGS out of the Dino Gym members on this one – so come ready to put up BIG LIFTS!!  Mark Haydock is promoting the IAWA World Championships next fall and I don’t want to have to be showing up with my “tail between my legs” paying up the losing bet!!!

If weather permits there may be a shooting contest immediately following the meet for anyone who is interested. I’m thinking of having four different competition categories.

1. 25 target trap shoot
2. 10 shot small bore (.223 and below)- 100 and 200 yards
3. 10 shot large bore (above .233)- 100 and 200 yards
4. 10 shot handgun 10 yards & 25 yards

You can enter one, a couple, or all of these categories depending on what gun/guns you bring. Let me know if anyone is interested in this. This way the Dino Challenge will cover two of my favorite interests – shooting and lifting!!!   I’ll provide the targets but you provide the gun/ammo for which category you plan to enter.   Handguns will be shot free hand, while rifles will be shot from a shooting bench.  Bipods will be allowed.

I am in the process of having some really special awards made for this year’s meet.  I really hope that they will be done in time.  How many times have you went to a meet with NO ENTRY FEE and received an award?   Not many I would guess – but this is the yearly Club Meet that I promote and I like to give back to our club’s membership, so I think it is only the right thing to do. I should also mention that this is a “functioning award” that I know many will like, especially guys like Dan Wagman.

I’m looking forward to seeing everyone next Saturday!!!

National Championships

by Al Myers

MEET ANNOUCEMENT
2013 USAWA NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS

The 2010 USAWA National Championships was also promoted by Denny and Judy Habecker. This shows Denny "busy at work" calculating the day's results while Frank Ciavattone is "looking over his shoulder" to make sure he doesn't make any mistakes!

Denny Habecker, the USAWA National Championships meet promoter, has just released the entry form for this years Championships.  It will be held the last weekend of June, which has become the traditional time of the year for the National Championships.  Denny is a very seasoned Championship promotor and has promoted several Championship events.  Every one that he has promoted that I have attended has always been done with upmost professionalism.  Denny always makes his events truly for the lifters.  Make sure to get this date on your meet calendar right now!

Schedule of  Events

Venue: Lebanon Senior Center , 710 Maple St.  Lebanon, Pa.  

Weigh-ins:7:30 A.M. to 8:30 A.M. –Saturday and Sunday

Lifting starts:  9:30 A.M.

Lifts: Saturday – June 29, 2013

Deadlift – One Arm
Clean & Press – 12” Base
Pullover – Staight Arm
Continental To Belt

Lifts: Sunday – June 30, 2013

Snatch – One Arm
Pullover and Push
Deadlift – Ciavattone Grip

Entry Fee – $55.00
T-Shirt Included

Awards: 1st, 2nd, and 3rd in each weight class and Age  divisions for Masters, Juniors, and Women, Based on total poundage lifted. Best Lifter Awards for each age group in Masters, Juniors, Senior [20-39], and Women by Formula.

INFO PAGE – 2013 USAWA Nationals – info page

ENTRY FORM – 2013 USAWA Nationals – Entry

1 168 169 170 171 172 321