Train, Don't Strain (To Cheat or Not to Cheat) - 1951

 

See if you can figure out what's really going on 

in this Weider-commissioned article. 

We have chosen three "basic" exercises, the press, curl, and squat to illustrate the concept behind the body being as strong as its weakest muscle. The proof of the pudding is in the eating thereof. 

Try cheating exercises for yourself and gain in strength, endurance and bodyweight. 

Some twenty years ago Sigmund Klein popularized the slogan, "Train for shape, strength will follow." In line with this viewpoint, he insisted that all his pupils followed a strict style of exercise form, using weights which they could employ properly for a given number of repetitions.

Such famous physique stars as Frank Leight, Johnny Garan, Paddy Pimblett at light-heavyweight, Jack Kent, the Ritter Brothers and dozens of the most celebrated champions of that time frequented Klein's gym and were influenced by his training ideas. Klein himself exercised in flawless style and possessed the power to smash lifting records at that time. He also boasted one of the world's finest physiques, which has endured all these years, and still ranks among the best. 

Recently we have grown disturbed with the school of thought now popular among many bodybuilders which makes the relative performance of an exercise incidental, with emphasis being stressed on the use of ever-heavier poundages, cheating in any way possible with back bends, incomplete movements and bouncing actions, just so that more weight can be utilized.

Their conclusion is that

hang on a minute . . . this is all starting to sound familiar here in 2026, with all our "scienced" lifters and their minions spouting on about anything but full range of motion under total control being a less efficient way in all circumstances, at all times of your life and for all purposes  to make a violin string, er, skin this cat called bodybuilding. So she takes Fluffy her cat to the symphony and something just ain't right with that feline. Oh, the moans eminem-inating from Fluffy and the guts of her deceased Mother. Anyhow . . . 

The users of "imperfect" and "incomplete" range of motion conclude that in doing so, they are forcing the muscles to grow larger, are gaining more power and are more directly tying in a cooperative aptitude among associate muscles. We are happy that Joe Weider is sincere enough to permit freedom of idea within his publication so that all bodybuilders can learn both sides of this subject. 

In our opinion CHEATING is WRONG, your honour. Here are our arguments . . . whether you agree with us or not, at least you will have food for thought, and constructive thought will help everyone. 

Good cover article in The Atlantic's latest issue.

Okay then, without overly becoming technical with this issue, your honour and members of the jury, the secret of physical efficiency depends upon a normal balance between tissue breakdown and tissue growth. 

If more tissue is broken down than can be readily replaced by the individual a condition of fatigue sets in and the bodily processes are overburdened, reducing their efficiency and making you physically under par. If more tissue is rebuilt than the body requires, much of this tissue will be stored in fatty deposits, giving a smooth look to the body and reducing its muscular appearance. 

It is this day-to-day normal balance of breakdown and repair which keeps the individual looking his best and functionally most fit. Any disbalance in either direction is harmful and should be avoided. 

During physical exercise the amount of tissue utilization increases. With steady training the body adapts itself to contend with this abnormal tissue breakdown and to dispose of the waste material more rapidly. However, it is functionally impossible for the body to adjust itself beyond a certain point (drugs are bad, m'kay) with exceptional breakdown causing an overload and creating a toxic condition of over-fatigue. 

Even in moderate exercise the best that the body can do is to dispose of the waste, and little or no reconstruction of fresh tissue is possible. This must wait for some later time when there is less physical activity during rest periods.

Even here, there is a definite limitation upon how much new tissue can be built in any given period of time, and the more strenuous the activity, the longer the recuperative period will be. 

Less intensity allows more frequency.

More intensity demands less frequency. 

More or less, depending. 

It is also known that surface muscle fibers are utilized first during exercise. As fatigue renders them incapable of constructive support to the rest of the muscle mass, lower and more deeply-embedded fibers get the brunt of the activity, which all adds up to breaking down more and more tissue which must be replaced before the next exercise session if the bodybuilder is to have his full energy and power. 

Since these deeply-embedded fibers are called on only as a last resort by the muscle after the other more conveniently located fibers have been sapped of their usefulness, obviously only prolonged physical exertion of requires their activity. 

Being that the very basis of physical power as associated with weight training is of a spontaneous, short duration type, the cultivation of these inner fibers is not important unless the bodybuilder wishes to excel in endurance feats, which most bodybuilders are not interested in. For normal physical activity, the surface fibers are more than adequate. 

A strong argument in favor of cheating exercises is that these inner fibers are influenced, thereby tapping a new source or power and potential growth. 

It is important that the above be reviewed carefully since it is apparent that the bodybuilder will have little need for the cultivation of these inner fibers, since they will for the most part remain dormant during his exercise sessions, regardless. They will only be a potential storage receptacle for fatty accumulations, and as the surface fibers grow stronger through regular training with correctly performed exercises, it will become harder and harder to exhaust them to the point where the inner fibers will be influenced. 

This means that being that they have been stimulated from time to time, due to your performance of heavy cheating exercises, they will have become growth conscious, and lacking continuation of regular stimulation, funnel this desire for more growth into the only possible channel . . . the formation of fat. THIS, is one of our main objections to cheating exercises (and it actually makes no sense). SURE, it will cultivate bulk, but at the expense of muscular definition.

Looksee here . . . I can do nothing but very heavy cheating, partial movements and through diet become leaner. I can also eat like a pig, do nothing but full-range, concentrated and under control movements and become a fat fuck. Go figure! 

Anyhow . . . 

Now, let's look at a few more objections. When you cheat in an exercise, such as the curl for example, you immediately reduce the contractile desire of the muscle at the start of the exercise and throw the major strain of the movement into the belly of the muscle, which in this case is the biceps. 

This means that the ligament attachments which start the arm to bend do not receive correct stimulation and development. Obviously, a form of lop-sided development which must be avoided. [This goes along with the belief that if I, for example, did nothing but seated barbell curls that make it impossible to start at full arm extension, well, my biceps ligaments would become lopsided in their development. Oh really. Oh, those poor attention-lacking lower biceps attachments and ligaments. Why, oh why did I neglect their pleas! Please tell me why!]

It is important to realize that the tone of a muscle depends upon the pull this muscle and its opposite one (agonist/antagonist) place on the ligament attachments. If this pull is strong, the muscle will possess fine tone, speedy reflex action and complete usefulness. If this pull is sluggish, the muscle will be more flabby, be slower and will only function adequately when the belly section is being utilized. Of course such a muscle is handicapped when it comes to all-around activity. 

OH REALLY? 

This also brings about a puffy, bulky appearance, for the overdevelopment of the belly of the muscle, along with the lack of contractile powers at the edge of the muscle makes impressive muscle display impossible and a thick, bulky arm is the result (the argument for never cheating is weakening horribly here).

Strict exercise style does not permit this condition. The muscle carries the full load of the weight every inch of the way, and this is how it should be. Such a muscle possesses tremendous contractile powers, and when tensed has rich fullness and great height as evidenced by the arm of Melvin Wells who maintains strict style in all his exercises (just when you thought the argument couldn't get any weaker!)

The contention that cheating exercises, using a much looser style build more power is also questionable. Melvin Wells is reported as being capable of a 285-pound standing press, which certainly calls for a lot of power. Sig Klein was the best (strict) presser in his weight in the world years back, and the 16 reps in the alternate DB press with a 100-pound dumbbell in each hand certainly needed lots of strength (he often gets credited with doing same with 110's). Weightlifters cannot cheat in their lifts, and must rely on perfect form, and John Davis is the strongest man alive.  

Wait a second here. "Cheating" on the rules of an Oly lift and using the "cheating" style in an exercise are two different animals, no? The difference between a lift and an exercise seems to have been forgotten here. Good grief. 

The contention that the cheating style of exercising will build unusual cooperation between muscle groups is a fallacy. It is natural, and indeed anatomically imperative that the whole body works as a muscle chain. It is almost impossible to restrict the action of any particular physical activity physical activity to a single set of muscles. However, in the (")correct(") style of performance, the burden of the physical act is not indiscriminately thrust upon another muscle group at a time it least expects it and is indeed in the worst position to accept it. 

For instance, in the two-arm cheating curl the lower back practically swings the weight up and down, with the arms serving as pivots. There are various degrees of cheating to be sure, but I have seen some bodybuilders practically performing a reverse-grip clean with a weight in cheating curls. Naturally, a back bend is necessary in this exercise. This imposes a strain on the lower back, and many an aching back among bodybuilders can be traced to cheating curls . . . I'm guessing it's right up there with injuries, aches, and pains related to isolating the biceps over a full range of motion with heavy weight on a preacher curl bench . . . just a guess though.  

It is natural that stronger muscles, or ones situated in a better position take over the brunt of the physical action at the time such cooperation on their part is most needed. Correctly (there's that word again) performed exercises will certainly develop muscular coordination without danger of strain through forcing a stronger muscle to work before it is ready to, and from an awkward position. 

Finally, your honour, since cheating exercises do rely upon probing deep into the inner muscle fibers, and since such an influence can only be accomplished after the surface fibers are exhausted, a workout which will reach them must necessarily take a long time . . . as indicated by the fabulous three and four hour workouts of the advocates. If they aren't reached the muscle does not feel pumped up as it should and psychologically the workout is a flop. In time these long workouts drain the reserve and the bodybuilder gets stale, and takes a layoff. 

Advocates of the cheating style take frequent layoffs (OH REALLY!). During layoff periods fat accumulates (clutching now at straws). So what do you have? A vicious cycle of over-exercise, sometimes dangerous exercise, long workouts, enforced layoffs, accumulation of fat and bulky, not completely efficient muscle (cut that out, I can't stop laughing). If this is what you want, then the cheating style is fine, BUT -

if you want perfect unison between the body processes without extremes in either tissue breakdown or repair, if you want muscle tone with a healthy pull on the attachments and speedy reflexes, if you want muscles that have form and height and if you want to stay away from being too bulky in later life (!), THEN - 

train correctly . . . don't strain with the cheating style which will rob you of the value of your workouts. 

THIS - is our argument. 

What do YOU think? 

I think I made my view clear already. 

This article was Weider fighting Hoffman again, this time over the use of cheat-style training. The same mag issue had an article on several "Weider Trained" bodybuilders who actually weren't; they all seemed to use some form of cheat-style exercises . . . and this article was likely written by a staff writer who had been told to make the argument quite lame. 

Does not matter! There's all manner of degrees when it comes to cheat-style training. The article had three fine examples with illustrations showing this . . . 

Enjoy Your Lifting!