I pretty much had this pegged after the first few lines. But reading deeper, I can see that this guy gives up what experienced trainers should be able to recognize pretty quickly.
Let's start by calling a spade a spade. This isn't anything new. It's just a fancy way of doing isometric exercises. We know you can get results - and can get big - by doing isometrics. But it isn't a silver bullet by any means.
Next, examine this statement.
I am a firm believer in static contraction training after participating in this routine for only 60 days.
This is the most laughable statement in the whole article.
If you were doing a routine and plateaued, ANY change for 60 days would result in improvement. This is the reason for applying the concept of periodization. Using that philosophy, you change you number of reps per set every two weeks. You start with lower weight and higher reps in the beginning of a 12-week cycle, and evolve to higher weight and lower reps towards the end. Obviously this author is totally clueless to the concept. Note the following statement.
Most of us have been taught to workout with the weight with which they are capable of performing 8-12 repetitions, and to increase the weight when you can do more than 12 repetitions.
Bullschit! "Most of us" does not include ANY properly-trained strength coach. They understand the concept of working in 12-week cycles, rest periods, training to peak, etc., etc.
Keep doing this kind of training for much more than 60 days, and you're in for some big surprises. First, you will eventually plateau. Second, you'll eventually injure yourself in a way that ONLY big weights can injure you. (I can name names...) Then you'll tear a muscle or joint, and be weaker than a couch potato for half a year. Oops!
Next... The author suggests doing exercises ONLY in the sweet spot for this kind of training. This is a very bad idea. Why? If you're involved in any kind of activity, you don't have the luxury of ONLY operating in your "sweet spot." You try to return to that as much as possible in Sanchin, but you must vary about that median position to accomplish everything. Ideally you have good strength through a very broad range of motion. This allows you to do things like standard karate kicks, keeping your elbows inside in Sanchin, extending your techniques out in whip-like fashion, being able to survive a match with a BJJ expert, etc.
Let's not forget that you use different muscles in different parts of a range of motion for something like a bench, a squat, and even an isolation exercise like a leg extension. Only working part of a range is to work only parts of your body.
If all you cared about doing was getting big, fine. Become a bodybuilder and strut your stuff. But if you want to do something other than flex in a static position, this kind of training will get you nowhere. I know, because I did a version of it (isometric training) when I was younger ( age 18 ). I gained 30 pounds of muscle mass and looked great. But I gained absolutely nothing that I could transfer to my martial arts in terms of power, coordination, or "usable" range of motion. Those require a very different approach to your training.
Nautilus and Strive have worked the concept with the variable cam machines. These are designed to make your body "feel" maximum resistance through an entire range of motion. The big problem here is muscle isolation. You do better when you work multiple muscle groups as the "core" of your training. So Nautilus or better yet the Strive (adjustible variable cam) should come in after the basics (squats, bench, power cleans, etc.).
There's nothing wrong with mixing this stuff in for short periods in a cycle just to "shock" your body. You should always be changing your routine. Otherwise the body will find ways to do more with less. Then you plateau. Also, change prevents injuries, and teaches your body more in ways that you can take to the field and to the battle.