Mag is a pretty big group, but covers explosive and reactive work in the 51-73% AW range as far as PIM goes. But closer to 73% AW transfers over to strength and 51% AW to speed
You could say start at 60% AW and work up to 73% AW. Once you can do 73% AW fast then you keep adding weight and bumping it up all the time, while maintaining the same speed and what do you know your 1RM goes up
Then you go and do a block of max strength work to see where your 1RM is, or do a hypertrophy block before going into the strength block, and then go back to 60% AW and work back up to 73% AW and repeat.
That’s how I’ve been doing it lately, one of many approaches I suppose if your fairly balanced. Working well so far.
FDA you just drop and absorb the load then bring it back up, REA you drop absorb and react out of the reversal point. Think of the difference between altitude drops and depth jumps, but with weights
You will probably need to get into some prep work to prepare your body for the forces involved though…
(is this 51-74% AW of PIM squat max?) --> yes
4 days usually. workout on Monday then rest, resume on Friday for example
You can but I wouldn’t, do the core work in the workout in rotation with a the other exercises. I do it all the time and I have had very heavy weights on core exercises - ie 120lb dumbells on ISO lat machine situps for over 20secs togther with heavy squats and deadlifts.
I usually workout 3 times a week alternating between upper and lower session. So sometimes I get 4 days rest and others I get 5. I think fluctuating the rest days is a good idea.
Do your upper body on a separate day, and the stuff in it will reflect your weaknesses and goals! Don’t ask for cookie cutter prescriptions.
For a sprinter, I would do some Mag and RFI type work
Thanks CoolCol. Are you saying that you can do an upper body workout between two lower body workouts, e.g.
monday: lower body
wednesday: upper body
friday: lower body
or do you mean that you alternate between upper and lower body workouts every 4 days or so?
So in the REA squats you explode up right after the shock absorbtion and in FDA you just absorb the shock and come up slowly? Do you pause before coming up in FDA squats?
These things clarified I think I have enough information to come up with a plan to try out this system.
Now, if you were actually contributing and not being a troll you’d understand that I asked him to reference that because what he said is entirely counter to the very common sense you claim to possess.
“A powerful athlete is always strong, but a strong athlete is not always powerful.”
That addage always has and always will hold true, no matter how much you try to make it otherwise.
I have a feeling that the debate would reconcile itself more efficiently if everyone were to quantify the strength/power parameters which they are referencing.
We must identify specifically what we are talking about when we say strength, power, explosiveness, etc, in regards to what these components of strength are being trained for or compared to.
How about everyone identify the required ‘strengths’ which are specific to various training goals and make an effort to quantify all relevant parameters, eg, for goal X the athlete should be required to squat,chin, bench X times bodyweight, VJ X amount of inches, clean X amount of pounds/kilos, etc.
In order to attack this strength vs RFD debate I feel everyone would benefit by being as specific as possible and adding context to any particular arguement (eg sport being trained for, or training goal, etc)
I am guessing that this is heading in the direction of a topic which Kelly B and myself discussed some time ago; the premise being that although there may come a point in an athletes career when the further development of max strength will cease to further the ability to express sport skill (ESD) the reality of the situation is that 99.9 percent of athletes are so far from reaching this level that most would benefit from the continual development of max strength.
All strengths along the curve are relative to max strength. I say this with the context being that we are discussing sports/activities which require abilities to the left (strength/power development) as opposed to those with a more aerobic/oxidative/long duration-low intensity component (eg triathalon, middle/long distance events, etc).
However, in order to minimize the academic nature of this concept we must speak to the specific sport or goal in question and balance this against the abilities of the athlete in question.
IMHO it is more likely an athlete will gain too much non functional hypertrophy before they get too strong for their activity. Too many people still equate strength with size and don’t know how or wont train purely for strength.
I would think that even if an athlete reaches their max level of strength that it isn’t a constant and would continuously degrade and therefore need to be continuously brought back up to the max level. So in any case you are right James in that “the continual development of max strength” would be necessary for not only 99.9% of athletes, but in fact 100%.
Unless you are talking about cardiomyopathy, there’s no such thing as “non-functional muscle hypertrophy” at all.
The question is: Is it the right function?
I was talking more in general but some specific examples could be middle distance running, golf, cricket, certain positions in rugby and probably basketball, high and long jump and cycling.
I guess it comes back to the old issue of a high number of athletes still training like bodybuilders.
I need the extra rest day and I like fluctuating rest days. But you can train every 2nd day alternating between upper and lower if you wish
Yes, a 1-2 sec pause is a good idea, get some ISO in then, which you will need when reacting out anyway
You can actually use more weight in the FDA, just like in Altitude drops you can use higher heights, but use common sense. FDA is the first step to REA
Yes, but strength training (like anything) provides diminishing returns as you improve. To get to 80% of my strength potential may require 20% effort, while the next 20% may require 80% effort. (The old 80-20 rule!) So the question then becomes “Is developing the balance of my strength the most effective use of my training time and CNS reserves?” The answer to that question will vary based on sport and individual athlete. Note that I think this question comes into play singificantly sooner than the strength limit with respect to ESD (see above.) That is, even though athletes may be able to effectively use more strength in their sport, the time it would actually take to develop that strength (and the skill training/CNS expenditures that they would have to sacrifice to get it) makes the pursuit of the extra strength inappropriate.
However, I tend to agree with you that most of the people worrying about this stuff really haven’t even gotten their baseline levels of strength to the point where it makes sense to consider it.
Anyone who has been training it for a while will know, that as you get more advanced and higher in jumps, the dip will get faster and faster. So the time to jump gets shorter over time. Contribution of strength diminishes significantly. You just don’t have time to use anywhere near maximal concentric strength. What you need is lots of isometric strength to brake the forces so you can react out of the eccentric faster and get the stretch reflex helping you more.
I find doing regular reps doesn’t do much to address that as specificly doing as ISO work. Especially rate/speed dominate lifters like myself. When I was fullsquating 365lbs I could barely hold 245lbs in the weakest joint angle just around parallel. But with ISO work I was able to get up to 315lbs for 8secs in a couple of months when I last did them
Along the same lines, a block of ISO frontsquat work helped me to absorb an altitude drop off 1m and bounce out of it with much shallower knee bend compared to when I started doing them. Along with just doing the drops themselves off course.
This is task specific strength, which usually doesn’t show up in increased 1RM capability in regular reps, although it can do that sometimes depending on the person’s CNS inclination
Agreed. I believe that the individuals who throw around the term "non functional muscle mass’’ are in actuality refering to athletes who develop excessive muscle mass in muscle groups which are not the prime movers in the sporting action (eg in sprinting- overly developed biceps), or in muscle groups which may negatively affect mechanics/leverages (eg in sprinting-overly developed gastrocnemius).
Anyone who has been training it for a while will know, that as you get more advanced and higher in jumps, the dip will get faster and faster.
From a greater height, ground contact times will get longer. “The dip” is a knee and hip flexion? Wouldn’t that become greater and also lengthen the SSC?
What you need is lots of isometric strength to brake the forces so you can react out of the eccentric faster and get the stretch reflex helping you more.
If you’re holding a load isometricly, how does that contribute to the SSC which requires a quick eccentric contraction followed by an explosive concentric contraction?
