Marshall Burt believes in that too. He said something like that the goal of trainign is to activate genetic protein synthesis, and also said to me (when I commented on this) that motor learning is also the result of proteing synthesis (new sinapses) in the brain.
Out of curiosity, what did you commented on adaptive protein synthesis theory, Dejan ?
Dan, I am Mladen not Dejan 
I commented that adaptive protein synthesis therory could not explain motor learning in the brain and thus explain functional adaptations that happens in the CNS. Marshall commented that this too can be explained by protein synthesis. We had this chat on RunTex forum couple of years back.
Here is quote from one of Marshall’s articles
Physiological Premises:
Physiological Premise 1 -----
Improvements in recruitment, recruitment rate, and recruitment duration are the result of causing/inducing the process of gene transcription of specific genes in the brain, nervous system, and muscles that are responsible for recruitment, recruitment rate, and recruitment duration.Therefore……the workouts in the training program should be designed to cause/induce the process of gene transcription of specific genes in the brain, nervous system, and muscles that are responsible for recruitment, recruitment rate, and recruitment duration.
Physiological Premise 2 -----
The only level of gene transcription one must induce is that which is specific to the level of power output necessary to run a goal time. Since recruitment, recruitment rate, and recruitment duration are about power output during the drive phase of the running stride, which in turn is largely about training velocity, it follows that inducing the level of gene transcription necessary to run a goal time is best done by training at or faster than the pace necessary to run the goal time.Therefore….the workouts in the training program should revolve around the concept of training at goal paces. In other words, the training program should be velocity oriented.
Physiological Premise 3 -----
The process of gene transcription in human cells responds well to repeated, —standardized— workloads. And at some point, to continue improving, one will eventually have to increase the standardized workload. Therefore, it is wise to focus one’s efforts on designing a standardized training program consisting of standardized workouts, delivered on a standardized schedule, with standardized recovery periods, with standardized progressions in workload over time.
http://www.powerrunning.com/Training/Marshall%20Burts%20Velocity%20Focused%20Training%20Part%201.htm
And since classic models are mixed-parralel, thus Bompa is more simmilar to concurrent than is to sequential/block model, but this, I agree, can become paralysis by analysis
Thousand apologies. Dejan is one of my good friends, I dont know why I addressed you with this name. Something broke inside my brain.
Thanks for the article link. Ill read it later today.
Apologies accepted Maybe it is because my nickname that starts with ‘D’
[b]Physiological Premise 1 -----
Improvements in recruitment, recruitment rate, and recruitment duration are the result of causing/inducing the process of gene transcription of specific genes in the brain, nervous system, and muscles that are responsible for recruitment, recruitment rate, and recruitment duration.
Therefore……the workouts in the training program should be designed to cause/induce the process of gene transcription of specific genes in the brain, nervous system, and muscles that are responsible for recruitment, recruitment rate, and recruitment duration.
Physiological Premise 2 -----
The only level of gene transcription one must induce is that which is specific to the level of power output necessary to run a goal time. Since recruitment, recruitment rate, and recruitment duration are about power output during the drive phase of the running stride, which in turn is largely about training velocity, it follows that inducing the level of gene transcription necessary to run a goal time is best done by training at or faster than the pace necessary to run the goal time.
Therefore….the workouts in the training program should revolve around the concept of training at goal paces. In other words, the training program should be velocity oriented.
Physiological Premise 3 -----
The process of gene transcription in human cells responds well to repeated, —standardized— workloads. And at some point, to continue improving, one will eventually have to increase the standardized workload. Therefore, it is wise to focus one’s efforts on designing a standardized training program consisting of standardized workouts, delivered on a standardized schedule, with standardized recovery periods, with standardized progressions in workload over time.[/b]
There is a video recording of a symposium given by Ivan Abadjiev, former head coach of Bulgarian national weightlifting team, in which he describes this precise phenomenon and how the training of the national team, while under his supervision, was planned in order to exploit this physiological circumstance.
In short, the training of the weightlifters was frequently of equal or greater intensity than actual contest results. In addition, frequent ‘control’ test were conducted in which an audience was brought in to the training hall in order to approximate the contest environment. couple all of this with the extremely high expectations for success on training lifts that Abadjiev places on the lifters (there is a Bulgarian saying: ‘Training is War’) and we see the practical application of physiological premise discussed above.
To paraphrase Abadjiev, he described how, as a result of the intensive training/control tests/training environment,etcetera, events occur and are solidified at the level of the DNA. As a result, when contests arrive and the same/similar circumstances, physiological, psychological/emotional, and environmental, are experienced that the proteins that were created in the DNA, during training, positively influence the performance capability during contests.
I should note that I am able to speak about Abadjiev’s methods not only because of what I’ve seen and read but also because a weightlifter that I train recently spent 3-4 months training with Abadjiev in San Francisco.
Is that the reality i.e., frequently of equal or greater intensity than actual contest results? How did your weightlifter cope with this training over the time spent with Abadjiev - did he adapt (progress) or is he “dead” (regress)? Did he include any accessory lifts?
Thanks again
To give you an idea of the demand- there was a week or two when my guy was having elbow problems so all Abadjiev had him do was back squat for 4 days.
In 4 days he performed 27 individual squat workouts each one including near maximal and maximal attempts with at least 30 minutes between each session. he went from a challenging 220kg to an easy 240kg on the fourth day. He told me that he easily could have squatted over 250 however his squat strength is his strength and Abadjiev said there was no point in going heavier as my guy’s weakness is his back and generally speaking upper body.
I should note, however, that my guys best back squat is 250 at 85kg which was done 1.5-2 years ago.
Here are some words from my guy regarding the control workouts
The control sessions are extremely intense physically and emotionally. The only assistance work I do is overhead squats with both grips
The only non-classical lifts that my guy perfomed during his time there were power versions and the occasional overhead squat as he mentioned.
All in all the training with Abadjiev was a great experience as the information gained was substantial, however, my guy chose to leave and return to having me write his training.
he gained 7kg on his clean with Abadjiev, performing a strong 160 powerclean and developed a very strong work capacity, however, we both felt that the intensiveness of the program in addition to the minimal exercise selection was not the optimal scenario for him.
I plan the weightlifting training more similarly to the Russians and since leaving Abadjiev I have gotten his squat clean up to 170.
We have had to lay off overhead lifts for the last block because he developed minor case of impingement while training with Abjadjiev.
He front squats 210x3 and hits routine 225.
Once in the past he told me, as a dare, he front squatted 185kg x 20. upon racking the barbell he passed out.
his squat strength far eclipses his back strength (as evident by his 220kg clean deadlift) and shoulder girdle strength so the training is planned accordingly.
his best training lifts of late are 137/170 (the 137 done with Abadjiev)
After bringing up his back and upper body strength we have high confidence in his future results.
James,
What was his squat clean at the 160 power clean under Abadjiev?
Blimey!! Did he build up to his “daily max” each of the 4 days and use this as a starting point of his training?
He performed a 165 C&J and he sustained a minor wrist injury attempting 172. So the 170 is a 5kg improvement and the training block that I constructed for him incorporated a great deal of, in contrast to the loading under Abadjiev, sub-maximal loading.
I should note that my guy is an extremely efficient lifter in that in the past he was able to clean weights that were not far below his best clean deadlift. Hence the 165 C&J at the time he was hitting 160 in the power.
Typically one would, of course, notice a sizable difference between the two.
My guy only specified that every squat session was near limit or supra-limit weights.
Preview of Block Periodization Seminar at youtube.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGkJ4jcdcZM
I’ve read all of the most scientific books on strength training. It’s allll bulllshit. I’ve been doing the same things forever. I lift, I run, I do some plyometrics, progressive gradual overload, I rest, new cycle starts higher than the previous cycle and I try and peak higher than the previous cycle. Your body is not a computer, it knows nothing of a bunch of graphs in some book. Some new sequencing isnt gonna change anything. One guys squats, one guy doesnt. Some guys dont even lift, etc Once you know Charlie’s basic plan, there’s not much else to learn. Taylor it the way you like it. No one does exactly what they have written down. From workout to workout you sort of go
by feel. Sometimes I leave sets out.
Some tempo sessions are longer than the others, etc WHATEVER WORKS FOR YOU. This is such an inexact thing. These scientists are just people, there brains arent that much better than yours. They dont know that much better than you do. It’s alot of bullshit. People have been using the same training programs for 50 years. All the 100meter champions all use different training programs. Powell doesnt squat. English guy from 1980 hits a speed ball. Carl Lewis never did power speed drills. One guy does this, another does something else. The debates here are ridiculous. You have the same people here discussing their traing for years and years. What have you really changed?? Rant over.
I fully agree!
Using different percentages of a max for a lift and changing tiny things around will give you absolutely no difference… Training is very simple and once your general training is correct, anything else wont give you a difference…
Many many athletes have a basic lifting plan, year round and it works, once you get complicated, you’re just wasting time.
I totally agree with you, could not have said it any better myself!
Dan,
Here are some article from Marshall Burt regarding gene transcription and protein synthesis as a goal of training.
http://www.theetgtrackclub.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=packets
has anyone pre order the book recently i am having trouble getting to the site?
Thanks Malden ! Ill take a look, see what this guy has to say !
Dan
Duxx, is the process he is talking about similar to long term potentiation(LTP), like what happens in the brain?