Pure Strength or Slow & Heavy?

Well, I'd have to agree with Marietta. But not for the same reasons. I love SH and don't think it's too slow. I find it more effective too. But I hate the leg workout. It's too short and I can't really go heavy enough, no floor work, and I don't like the preexhaust sets or the plie squats with the one huge dumbell. I LOVE PS Legs. It is the most effective Cathe workout for building mass in my legs. And the upper body stuff is pretty good too.

If I could give you the perfect combination, it would be PS Legs and the upper body stuff from S and H. And S and H is a lot more modern looking, with better music. But overall, I'd go with Pure Strength.
 
IMO S&H is better for upper body. I personally find Pure Strength too fast and therefore you are limited with the weight you can lift -Slow&Heavy is quite the opposite and provides better muscle development.

Michelle
 
It depends on what you already have and what your goals are. PS is more of a typical gym-style workout like the Pyramids whereas S&H is altogether different and more focused on building muscle.

I like S&H a lot, but like the others here, am not crazy about the Legs workout - I just substitute Leaner Legs or one of the other workouts instead.

Good luck,
Marie
 
I love them both but if I could only have one it would be S&H. I've been waiting for an S&H II for years! ;-)

I know a lot of people aren't impressed with the S&H leg workout...I can see their point, but I actually built a lot of strength rotating it with the MIS leg workout at one point. Then when I had to go back to working out after a long lull (sigh) I started with the S&H workouts as presented. It got me going again very well.

We're all different of course. They're both great workouts.

Ruth
:)
 
S&H hands down. Those workouts change my body wayyy more than PS. I still love PS though, it doesn't have the dread factor! ;-)

Heidi
 

Our Newsletter

Get awesome content delivered straight to your inbox.

Top