All my reading suggests GH and T response to training is greatest for higher rep, lower recovery sessions (3x10r, 1min R ‘better’ than 4x5r, 3min R). The suggestion that Jon Edwards goes to max for a hormonal spike is therefore questionable.
THere are also a number of potential reasons for the acute increase in T due to weight training these include:
Increased secretion from the Leydig cells or an alteration in testicular blood flow.
A decrease in plasma volume due to movement of water out of the cardiovascular system, this would cause an increase in testosterone concentration without an increase in total testosterone.
I perfer 3-5minutes rest. But it would be interesting to note that 1 minute rest might help a 200/400m with overcoming lactic acid buildup. Maybe even the 100m sprinter. Any comments?
“But it would be interesting to note that 1 minute rest might help a 200/400m with overcoming lactic acid buildup. Maybe even the 100m sprinter. Any comments?”
There is always, IMO, the danger of falling too far down into the depths of specificity in the gym. I’d tackle specific endurance on the track and use weights to address general strength issues.
Bompa in “Periodisation for Sport” advocates this kind of work, implying such sessions as 48sec. sets in the gym for 400m athlete etc. I can’t remember the exact name he had for this phase of the training cycle but I’m wasn’t too convinced. Comments?
Originally posted by Kyle
a good 400 runner first needs to be a good 200 runner, who first needs to be a good 100 runner… use the weights to help you get faster…
It could also go the other way, a good 400 leads to a good 200 and a good 200 leads to good 100. Weights play less of a role the further you move from the start(CF)
Originally posted by David W
The suggestion that Jon Edwards goes to max for a hormonal spike is therefore questionable.
The Bulgarian weightlifters use hormonal response as follows. Since there is a T spike starting after 20 minutes of training and this spike continues for 30-40 minutes, they do as much near-max and max lifting as possible for these 30-40 minutes. The first 20 minutes are spent with succesively heaver warm-up weights, which is enough to induce the spike.
Then they quit. Total time 50-60 minutes. No point of training outside the “spiked T zone”. Then they rest a few hours and repeat, often multiple times per day.
I guess this is also the theory behind the Greek’s reported use of many short sessions during the entire day.
Originally posted by Kyle
I don’t see how training intensely all day works.
Break a single 2 hour session into two 1 hour sessions, or a 2.5 hour session into three 50 minute sessions. Of course, it assumes you don’t do much else (like having a job) and that you have been conditioned for this by increasing the training load over many years. Most likely it also assumes some pharmaceutical aids.
I doubt warm-up sets would cause much of T spike in the first place anyway…
Originally posted by Kyle
… I just didn’t believe that your description of the endocrine response to their workouts was very accurate.
You might be right, there doesn’t seem to be a whole lot of evidence supporting their scheme. Here is what I found in Arthur Drechsler’s Weightlifting Encyclopedia (1998):
“Some research in Eastern Europe has even suggested that exercise aimed at increasing muscle strength and size is better performed when certain hormones (notably testosterone) are elevated (which, they argue, begins 15 or 20 minutes into a hard workout but seldom lasts an hour). The existence of this precise pattern of hormone elevation has yet to be confirmed by experiments in the West (where equipment tends to be substantially more accurate); nor has a link between the timing of any hormone elevation and a training effect been demonstrated scientifically.”
I think you are getting far too esoteric in your training concepts. Think in terms of the response of the whole body to training. 90 minutes is often considered an ideal length for workouts, though this seems to be a nutritional consideration. (The body will begin to catabalize muscle to supply sugar to the brain if a drop is prolonged) but speed work can seldom be finished in this time-frame, so supplementation may be required.
As for the idea of using weights to simulate an event in duration, I think it’s a bad idea unless you have an injury which prevents you from using means more specific to the event itself. Use weights to get stronger and runs to develop specific endurance.
Hormonal responses from training are overrated. They are transient at best and WILL NOT have a significant impact on performance and recovery. Fastors such as post workout nutrition, restoration techniques and means of training should be emphasized.
Here is a paragraph from the second book I’m working on, it’s related to GH increases during training and fat loss but still applies for any form of hormonal increase from training.
“I’ll say it once and for all: the purpose of strength-training while dieting is primarily to prevent muscle loss while on a caloric deficit diet. A lot of gurus now like to use strength training exercises to burn fat by using long series (15-20+ repetitions) and short rest intervals (30-60 seconds). Their logic is that this form of training increases growth hormone output. GH being a lipolytic (increase fat usage) hormone they argue that a training method leading to a great level of GH will naturally lead to an important fat utilization. It is unlikely that the slight, transient, increase in GH levels from strength training would cause any significant short term improvements in body composition.”
Also keep in mind the following:
Hormonal response from training will strongly be influenced by your nutritional status. For example training after a 8-9 hours fast will lead to a greater GH output … however it will also lead to a more catabolic state.
Siping on a protein and carbs drink during training will reduce the GH response, but research shows that it actually increases the gains from training.
Taking a sauna during training has been shown to increase GH output, however it greatly decreases the execution of the last bout of training.
So as you can see, the increase in GH is a very bad way to establish the efficacy of a training program. Training parameters should be planned to work specific physical capacities, not to elicit a specific hormonal response.
To be able to sustain a higher workload without fatiguing as much (by spreading the volume throughout the day they can be fresher for those last exercises).
Increased synaptic facilitation. There is evidence that motor learning is improved more by frequency of practice than by volume of practice. By training 2-3 times per day, event at equivolume, the motor learning effect is greater.
Spreading the volume across the day makes it easier for the coach to control the athletes. If they trained one per day, the athletes would have a lot of free time, and some of them would not spend this time properly. By training multiple times per day, the athlete must stick to the program.
“Hormonal responses from training are overrated. They are transient at best and WILL NOT have a significant impact on performance and recovery. Fastors such as post workout nutrition, restoration techniques and means of training should be emphasized”.
For the athlete, the key to training is finding the appropriate training effect that will improve specific components (speed and so on), eat well and rest appropriately. Logic tells you that if this criteria is met, the body’s hormonal response will take care of itself.
I am also in agreement with Christian’s comments referring to so-called gurus who “like to use strength training exercises to burn fat by using long series (15-20+ repetitions) and short rest intervals (30-60 seconds)”. A friend once did such methods (high reps, light weights) in preparation for the Mr Universe in England and lost about 25?% strength and a lot of muscle. The next year, I recommended he train the same way when dieting as he did when trying to build muscle, that being heavy and fairly long rests. While he lost about 5% strength, he came in 10kg heavier weighing 104kg (178cm) ripped, after beign 116kg, and placed second.
Again, while I would argue that there are many ways to train in terms of exercises and reps used, I believe it is absolutely crucial that any athlete never get away from the training methods that enabled the improvements in the first place.
In relation to sprinting, this demands that the prime emphasis is always on speed and power. It is far easier to get fit for a training distance than improve speed and power. In fact, for a 100-200m sprinter I would argue that optimal speed endurance can be achieved in around 6 weeks given that such events are primarily anaerobic. In contrast, as I am finding out with my athlete, who is now just focusing on 60m speed and strength, it is extremely difficult to improve power and speed.
A related factor here is training for/under a totalitarian state: the powers that be may be demanding “more training” and the coaches have to figure a way to have the athletes “training a lot” without getting totally fried.
Also, while the search for ideas is a good thing(flash of Martha on training----no, let’s not go there) we should be wary of following Bulgarian programs since:
The information might be mistranslated or misunderstood;
In a related way, we don’t know what else they might be doing to facilitate these w/o’s;
They’re trying to achive a world-class level with one or two out of, what? a thousand athletes? If one or two have the exceptional body composition, recuperative capacity, response to training, etc. to sustain a grueling program for say 7 years and become champs, Mission Accomplished. If the rest burn out, get hurt, or don’t make the gains, so what? they have their champions. My point is that you have to find what works for you, whether or not it works for someone else.
In regards to your last paragraph. The farther to the left on the strength curve you go, the faster the gains- and the faster the losses, BUT the conditions for improvement in the area must be present. Also, how can you define Speed Endurance as optimal if speed is inadequate, as all SE is dependant on the speed of execution?
I take advice lightly from people who have never sprinted before. See the KSU strength coach if your not following me here. CT failed to understand that power is not the only priority in the weightroom. Speed endurance is aslo. Hence why we dont pick all powerlifting exercises to train sprinters. There are times when weightroom sessions have to be dictated towards SE. The weightroom is a way of preparing yourself for the track. John smith has his athletes do reps to failure, exercises with short rest. Arm movements with light weight dumbbells. And as we know he trains for power too. Hey, he has coached the most sub 10 sprint performances in the history of the sport he has to be doing something right. You can manipulate variables as John seems to be doing very well. For example there is no reason why a sprinter could not perform two sets of shoulder press for ten reps then on and the last set -go to failure (most likely will be around 12-15 reps).It could be used as sort of speed endurance preparation. And there is no reason why during specific strength exercises you cant cut back the rest time. When I trained till failure (only one exercise mind you) my finish for the 200 meter and 100 meter dash was vastly improved. Coincidence.Maybe. Why limit the weightroom to just power training. I thought this myth was dispelled in CFTS. It was no suprise that he picks all olympic lifts for his specific exercises on the 9 best exercises for sprinters thread. In my opinion I was the only one that nailed that question. Have all these people missed the point that exersises such as lateral pdowns ect are more specific to sprinting even though they dont recruit as much fiber. Its not about the amount of fiber recruitment. Im glad you realized this in your writings or we would have a country full of mislead sprinters training as ol lifters also.
I will have to disagree with all accept David W and here is why; I do believe increase T due to short rest intervals and reps above 8+ achieve 3 things,
Increase work capacity in the form of lactic anearobic work (i.e. the athlete either does the program or quit bc he doesn’t have the heart to get to the elite level)
Increase the hypertrophy effect which is needed in the AA phase!
Ligament and Tendon strength before muscle strength.
I would only use this type of protocol in the GPP phase and that’s it! I wouldn’t use it at any other time. So the majority of this work would occur in the first 4-7 weeks of the CFTS template.
I agree with the Bulgarian training protocols! When I was lifting in HS and College on 3 day cycle with one day off and then repeat the cycle I noticed huge strength gains! First I would do 2 muscle groups on Mon, 2 on Tue, 2 on Wed, then take off Thur and repeat this cycle on Fri, Sat, and Sun. I would train twice a day with lifting at 11 a.m. for an hour and at 5 p.m for an hour.
With regards to the CFTS training I sprint after being awake for 2 hours say at 12 a.m. (I get up at 10 a.m. everyday). Do Primary Lifts for an hour at 4 p.m. and Secondary Lifts at 8 p.m. If the volume increases or you can’t do all your primary lifts in an hour then include your last primary lift with your secondary lifts at 8 p.m.
If you go by CNS excitibility then sprinting would be done at 11 a.m. and then Primary Lifts at 4 p.m. then secondary lifts at 8 p.m. this corresponds with CNS excitability as shown on Pg 297 “Theory and Training Methodology.” by T. Bompa. This would mean only getting 8 hours of sleep a day! I prefer 9 so my schedule above is short by 1 hour!
The afternoon naps work great (for me at least), after a power and jumps session in the morning, around 9am. Finish at 11:30am, get home and eat, then at around 1-2pm I feel like I need rest. After a one or so hour sleep, I feel really good - not perfect - but good enough to be fresh (to an extent) for another session around 5.
As for the weights, what do you people think is an optimal time frame? For me at the moment, its 2-2.5 hours - including warm-up, stretching and ab work at the end. It’s working for me very well, and my coach says its fine to be for that long in the gym. He was a Yugoslavian Power lifter (in his prime in the 70s) so a lot of the stuff is very Eastern and old school - and I personally think it is much better than a lot of the Western and new age type of “strength” workout.
When talking about higher rep ranges I wonder if anyone ever dared to experiment with multiple short rest singles or doubles,when constructing weights programs as means of general strength training for a sport -something like : 10x1 1 min rest or 5x2 2min rest for example?
I have been approaching similar protocols for years now, and always got better overall results and gains (even in size when needed) with less drawbacks in the sport activity itself .