Cue Arnie voice…‘I’m BACK’ (finally - thanks Rupert)
… and it looks like you’ve taken advantage of my absence! :mad:
Carson
This post was made primarily to stimulate discussion. This forum is both educational and entertainment. Are my points personal? Are they not constructive?
Also, re-read the thread with CT. I made some valid points which on some level he acknowledged. Not to go back over old ground but would Charlie recommend ‘functional’ isometrics? :D. No one else had the balls to say it - does that make me destructive? Is CT above criticism? Obviously I’m not! :mad:
Vash
Look, poliquin is making generalizations under the name “principals”, as with all generalizations you can usually find a scenario that clashes with the generalization.
I disagree. It is not terrifically difficult to write these ‘principles’ more accurately to avoid any possible exceptions. I have done so below.
poliquin seems to say the same thing you are, that is pick a percentage of the 1 rep max (say 80%) and the fiber type of the athlete will dictate how many reps can be done with this percentage.
Exactly I use his principles to disprove one of his principles
Determining Optimum Repetition Number
Research and practical experience suggest that a certain threshold of intensity (percentage of 1RM) must be breached in order to stimulate an increase in strength. There is however disagreement on the value of that threshold. Certainly, novice strength athletes can improve strength using loads as low as 60% whilst conversely, some Russian coaches do not log training loads below 80%!
The relationship between intensity and load is subject to wide inter-individual variation. Athletes with extremely high percentages of fast twitch fibres may only be able to perform 3 repetitions with an 80% load. Conversely, endurance athletes may be able to perform more than 30 repetitions at the same intensity. The relationship also varies for different muscle groups within the body due to differences in fibre composition*. The hamstrings for example have a higher proportion of fast twitch fibres than the quadriceps and hence greater reps are possible at 75% when performing knee extensions than when performing knee flexions (curls!). Finally, training itself can influence muscle fibre ratios hence the relationship is variable over time.
The relationship is not exactly linear. This may cause problems during programs that utilise different numbers of reps (see ‘Fallacies’ below).
Consider 75% to be the threshold for improvements in strength. An athlete can approximate the highest numbers of reps that should be performed in a given exercise as follows:
Maximum Reps = No. of reps possible at 75% 1RM
Test Limitations
Total time under tension is reduced by an increase in the speed of the eccentric action. This reduces the cumulative fatigue caused by each repetition and hence permits higher numbers of reps. It is necessary therefore that the exercise is performed strictly and that ‘cheat’ methods are eliminated.
Certain exercises do not safely lend themselves to the test because stabilising muscles fatigue before the prime movers. In pulling movements for example, the spinal erectors fatigue before the hip extensors.
Exercises that have a high skill component (e.g. Olympic lifts) are rarely performed in sets of greater than three reps. Fatigue negatively effects motor control and hence causes a break down in technique that increases risk of injury. Additionally performing reps under fatigue is detrimental to the complex and precise inter and intra muscular coordination that is required for maximum performance.
Common Fallacies
- Low reps cause overtraining
It is prolonged periods of high intensity (>90%) that cause overtraining. Low repetitions do not necessitate high intensities. Westside powerlifters for example, perform doubles at intensities as low as 60%. Also, as discussed previously; some athletes may have a 3RM of only 80%!
- Low reps do not cause hypertrophy
Low reps can induce significant hypertrophy providing total time under tension (TTUT) is sufficient. Consider the following two workouts:
- 3x8r @ 75%
- 8x3r @ 85%
The greater load in Workout 2 increases TTUT (due to slower movement velocities) and average muscle tension. Granted training density (i.e. Tonnage divided by total time to complete sets), depending on recovery time, will be lower in Workout 2 but this variable is much less powerful. Overall I would expect Workout 2 to provide the greater stimulus for hypertrophy.
- ‘Pyramiding’ is an effective training scheme
Pyramid training is at best an inefficient training scheme. The early high repetition sets fatigue the lifter prior to the heavier sets that require most recruitment, stabilisation and motor control. (to be completed…)
· I recognise that the terms ‘fast’ and ‘slow’ twitch fibres is a significant simplification
