|
2007/08/15, 10:38 PM
Ok, so far here's what I think I understand about strength training:
It seems that strength is built mainly by stimulating the central nervous system by activating as many motor units in a muscle as possible through resistance and mental focus. Subsequently, through frequent stimulation, your CNS adapts by forging neural pathways which activate more motor units, increasing strength. Now as you all know, most strength training routines use high-resistance, low rep, low set workouts and going to failure more or less infrequently to avoid getting prematurely fatigued.
Now say I tried a routine that had the same resistance but I only did about 1-2 reps instead of 3-5; not even coming close to fatigue or failure. Say I increased the rest intervals as well. Couldn't I get out more sets and more reps in total before packing it up for the day, thus increasing the overall stimulation to my CNS?
Maybe I'm making no sense here, but if anyone could tell me why this doesn't work, it'd be appreciated.
|
|
|
|
2007/08/15, 11:16 PM
Then you wouldn't be able to use low sets, as you would not be getting in enough volume.
Also, it would be pointless to increase the rest intervals. Rest intervals are long when doing high intensity because the CNS takes a while to recover, 3-5 minutes being optimal. That means that after 5 minutes, you are taking to long, and it is either detrimental or has no additional effect on your subsequent sets. If you are not working close to maximum, then you would not require longer rest periods. It's not like long rest periods make you stronger, but long rest periods allow you to lift heavier.
Also, you'd end up spending a lot of time in the gym. If that's not a problem, then by all means... A lot of european olympic teams train similarly (only going to maximal weights in 2-4 workouts per week), but they are also training 3x a day 6 days a week. Also, this works better in Oly lifting because there is such a huge technical aspect, and frequent practice at low intensities allows you to focus on technique.
If you're going to train that way, then it either needs to be high frequency or high volume. also, your focus should be on rep speed.
Of course, why wouldn't someone want to train heavy?
--------------
SQUAT MORE ~Jesse Marunde
Mortal by birth.
Strongman by the grace of god.
Blood Guts Sweat Chalk
|
|
2007/08/16, 09:11 AM
That doesn't make any sense to me. If you lower the intensity and lower the # of reps per set then you definitely don't want to raise the rest intervals. If anything, you want to decrease them. Furthermore, it is necessary to train the CNS with a high intensity. Doing sets of 1 or 2 with your 3-5 rep max and long rest intervals is sub-optimal. You might be able to get more volume in, but what is the point when you can get better results in shorter amount of time with less sets.
|
|
2007/08/16, 02:19 PM
I never said anything about lowering intensity just the reps in a single set.
What I meant is keeping the weight but doing more reps over a longer period of time.
I think maybe I havn't explained myself well here.
|
|
2007/08/16, 02:30 PM
Oh, hang on, are you saying that it would just be better to do fewer reps in a shorter time frame rather than spreading it out?
|
|
2007/08/16, 02:31 PM
by lowering the reps in a single set without upping the weight you effectively decease intensity.
|
|
2007/08/16, 02:32 PM
When I say intensity, I'm talking about 1RM%
|
|
2007/08/16, 02:35 PM
But I think I see what you're getting at. Spreading it out would effectively make the stimulus less effective?
|
|
2007/08/16, 02:36 PM
============
Quoting from Tinnuk:
Oh, hang on, are you saying that it would just be better to do fewer reps in a shorter time frame rather than spreading it out?
=============
Yes.
|
|
2007/08/16, 02:38 PM
============
Quoting from Tinnuk:
When I say intensity, I'm talking about 1RM%
=============
What you mean is load. Although intensity and load are related, they are not exactly the same thing.
|
|
2007/08/16, 04:31 PM
============
Quoting from Tinnuk:
When I say intensity, I'm talking about 1RM%
=============
That is correct. And a 5rm is a low intensity lift. Doing it for sets of 1 wouldn't serve much point, unless you were getting in some serious volume.
I think you've been reading too much Russian literature. I'd bet my PWO shake on it. Comparatively, the Russians know everything and we know nothing. But what you are forgetting, is that in Russia, powerlifting isn't just a sport, it's a PROFESSION.
If you've got 4 hours a day to put towards training and 12 hours a day to sleep, then by all means...
--------------
SQUAT MORE ~Jesse Marunde
Mortal by birth.
Strongman by the grace of god.
Blood Guts Sweat Chalk
|
|
2007/08/16, 04:33 PM
you're backwards shawn.
--------------
SQUAT MORE ~Jesse Marunde
Mortal by birth.
Strongman by the grace of god.
Blood Guts Sweat Chalk
|
|
2007/08/16, 04:38 PM
My bad. I always get the definition of intensity confused in my head.
|
|
2007/08/16, 04:40 PM
So that you understand what i'm talking about when I say serious volume...
According to Yessis "In Russian Olympic lifting 75 reps per week is minimal. Light lifting volume per week is 76 ? 210 reps. Medium lifting volume per week is 211 ? 345. Heavy weekly volume is 346 ? 480 reps. Super heavy weekly volume is 346 ? 480 reps. Maximal weekly volume is 616 ? 750 reps. Stress volume is anything over 751 reps."
--------------
SQUAT MORE ~Jesse Marunde
Mortal by birth.
Strongman by the grace of god.
Blood Guts Sweat Chalk
|
|
2007/08/16, 05:35 PM
OK, so what you're saying is that the CNS stimulus PER REP would be less effective with the high volume technique than with the low volume technique, but because the volume is so much more, the total stimulus would be more with the high volume method?
I guess the low volume method is really just a time saver like you said.
You'd also win that bet.
|
|
2007/08/16, 06:16 PM
============
Quoting from Tinnuk:
You'd also win that bet.
=============
I don't often make bets I'm not sure of winning.
What I'm saying is the Russians have a dramatically different approach. Work capacity is built from the time these kids run. However, it works.
But, the opposite approach also works. There are coaches, VERY SUCCESSFUL coaches that are prescribing 3 days a week, 3 sets per day ME workouts. Ferrugia comes to mind, as he'll tell anyone who will listen that the less his kids do, the more they progress.
Now to start ranting...
I personally feel that when it comes to athletics, the low volume high intensity approach is VASTLY superior. If I've got a hockey player that has a game in 5 days, and I tell him "don't work so hard in the weight room, I really need you to hold back" he's gunna look at me like I'm nucking futs. This is a highly motivated athlete, and that motivation is GOOD. How am I to expect someone to perform in season, if I'm constantly telling them to hold back out of season? I'd rather limit them to 3 sets of 3 and know those 3 sets were balls to the wall then have them do 10*3 at 75%.
However, I am biased. I don't generally talk about what I haven't used extensively, and I have never training with a russian oly team, so I could be completely off base. But, I've wrestled internationally, and I'd take the cuban team over the russian team any day.
--------------
SQUAT MORE ~Jesse Marunde
Mortal by birth.
Strongman by the grace of god.
Blood Guts Sweat Chalk
|
