This doesn't seem to be a particularly well thought out prediction in terms of weight machines.
First of all, it would be dangerous. Say I'm on a leg press machine and my contribution is some function of the weight I move and the number of reps I do per unit of time. If I wanted to win the game, I'd be trying to bang out as many reps as possible as fast as possible. Now say I've loaded on 200kg (440lbs) and I start trying to do this. Say I'm on a Smith Machine and I'm squatting as fast as I can. Say I'm on a bicep curl machine and I start trying to rep too fast. These examples would expose a person to the potential for a whole range of nasty injuries. Now imagine the kind of litigation implications that would arise if the gym members started looking for someone to blame for their injuries. In fact, these types of games (when applied to weight training) look like a perfect candidate for a class action lawsuit.
The games that Scott is suggesting seem to indicate that they would encourage poor exercise form. I challenge anyone to find a significant body of sports science literature indicating that the faster one completes their reps (set), the better it is for them.
The only way these games could be good for a person would be if they somehow encouraged good form. Even if they did, the games would have to encourage good workouts, e.g. appropriate exercises, appropriate rest between sets, an appropriate number of sets, and appropriate number of reps and an appropriate amount of weight. Even if this requirement was satisfied, the workout and all relevant parameters would have to be tailored to the individual.
In summary, Scott's suggestion, if applied to any sort of weight training machine, could be one of the worst things to happen to weight training since the Nautilus circuit.
I'd be interested in your approach to competing with services like Delizzy (http://www.delizzy.com/). Easy full text search of my Delicious bookmarks is a huge draw-card for me.
The main advantages I see you having versus Delizzy are:
- Privacy (they require your Delicious username and password)
- Being able to snapshot the page as you read it
The main disadvantages I see you having versus Delizzy are:
First of all, it would be dangerous. Say I'm on a leg press machine and my contribution is some function of the weight I move and the number of reps I do per unit of time. If I wanted to win the game, I'd be trying to bang out as many reps as possible as fast as possible. Now say I've loaded on 200kg (440lbs) and I start trying to do this. Say I'm on a Smith Machine and I'm squatting as fast as I can. Say I'm on a bicep curl machine and I start trying to rep too fast. These examples would expose a person to the potential for a whole range of nasty injuries. Now imagine the kind of litigation implications that would arise if the gym members started looking for someone to blame for their injuries. In fact, these types of games (when applied to weight training) look like a perfect candidate for a class action lawsuit.
The games that Scott is suggesting seem to indicate that they would encourage poor exercise form. I challenge anyone to find a significant body of sports science literature indicating that the faster one completes their reps (set), the better it is for them.
The only way these games could be good for a person would be if they somehow encouraged good form. Even if they did, the games would have to encourage good workouts, e.g. appropriate exercises, appropriate rest between sets, an appropriate number of sets, and appropriate number of reps and an appropriate amount of weight. Even if this requirement was satisfied, the workout and all relevant parameters would have to be tailored to the individual.
In summary, Scott's suggestion, if applied to any sort of weight training machine, could be one of the worst things to happen to weight training since the Nautilus circuit.