In the other thread on Barry Ross many subjects get mixed up.
My interest is specifically on the strength training program design rationale and empirical experiences.
So my questions are:
What is the reasoning behind the choice of the concurrent (MxS+Power in each training unit) approach in stead of the sequential one (MxS phase followed by Power phase).
Is max strength work and power work in the same workout all year long a better approach than the sequential one in your opinion?
Have you tried the sequential approach for this method?
According to the example provided in B. Ross’ ebook, the program goes like this:
1 on - 4 sets - 5 reps - Low Volume / PB1
3 off
2 on - 5 sets - 8 reps - PB2
1 off
1 on - 3 sets - 12 reps - High Volume
4 off
2 on - 8 sets - 20 reps - Max Volume
5 off
2 on - 8 sets - 27 reps - Max Volume
1 off
1 on - 3 sets - 9 reps - Mod. Volume
3 off
3 on - 10 sets - 21 reps - Low Volume / PB3
4 off
1 on - 3 sets - 5 reps - Low Volume / PB4
The plan seems quite “random” to me, I might be wrong. What is the rationale behind the variations of frequency, volume and intensity?
How did the plyo work change (volume, intensity) during the same period?
It is kind of weird that you give so much importance to plyometrics, and apparently you don’t use any device to establish the right intensity for the wanted result (which is…). Do you need to advance in this aspect or you witheld the info on purpose?
The comments in the book about periodization, the choice of authors (Fleck and Kraemer) and the practical suggestion regarding the power part of the training depict, IMO, no much knowledge on the subjects.
I guess the answer is pretty much “we are going random but it works”, which I find acceptable, after all. The proof has to be in the pudding for everybody.
But it would be nice to get an answer nevertheless.
Regarding question (1) above, if you do a search on medline you will find that concurrent plyo + heavy weights yields greater improvements in strength than doing them separately. There was also a paper linked by martn76 concerning 1-3 reps weights with ballistic training which showed doing the two concurrently resulted in somewhat less fiber conversions away from IIx/IIb.
But if you’re sprinting as opposed to PL or running distance, I’m guessing Charlie would be opposed to doing weights AND plyos AND high intensity on the track at the same time because the plyos would reduce the CNS resources that are needed for the track during 3-1-3. Seems to me that it’s better to do the plyos either earlier during accumulation (except Bear doesn’t do accumulation of course) or later when the track workload gets cut.
above, if you do a search on medline you will find that concurrent plyo + heavy weights yields greater improvements in strength than doing them separately.
We should check parameters and athletes used in the study. Without knowing that anything can be valid.
There was also a paper linked by martn76 concerning 1-3 reps weights with ballistic training which showed doing the two concurrently resulted in somewhat less fiber conversions away from IIx/IIb.
The comparison is with the bodybuildingish protocols used earlier by the Danish reasearchers. Plyo or not, the strength parameter would have yeld the same results (less convertion of the MHC expression toward IIa).
This thread is not on general training theory or research, it’s specifically about Ross’ system, so please let’s stick to the topic without going toward general/theoretical matters.
No. I did them all on the same day but the number of plyos was very small. Sometimes, for beginners or those early in training (end of GPP or beginning of SPP) some plyo work could preceed speed, ie 6 explosive jumps into the high jump mat while throwing the med ball (check the download films or ask Mortac) and then over to starts. When the athlete is already at a very high level and ready to rock, the height of a previous stimulus two days earlier is enough to prime things for the current session.
iam heavy into squats with big volume, rep range, 4X25 315 2 min recovery … no warmup
to the gound, thats just one, now i do teh barry ross way… allow 5 7 min recovery
i can now do … 4X30 @315 … the gain is there,
but you still need a powerful work-out…
I wouldn’t make a sudden shift of any sort. I’d steadily reduce plyo numbers as sprint intensity rises, making a smooth transition to prevent any adaptation soreness.
