Let’s say an athlete manages to stay within the 90% parameter (measured by the tendo-unit) in a 3x180kg squat and continues with one more repetition that fails the bar velocity limit. The information is then available only post set. That means the only adjustment being made is in the next set. But isn’t this also normally done? If you really have to squeeze your last lift, it’s kind of natural that you either: a) stop completely; b) lessen load for the next set; or c) lessen reps for the next set.
The tendo-unit is quit interesting, and I know athletes like Carlina Kluft and Kajsa Bergqvist use it, with success apparently. However, I’m not sure if the unit is a guiding factor in their weight training or if it’s a tool mainly used for testing purposes? The idea about quality at each rep is fair thou. However, I still think there is room for pushing the whole organism envelop forward with going near failure once in a while (weight room testing), this doesn’t entail going near/to failure every time, not even closely. In this context, overtraining is not an issue at all.
I think structural changes in fibres starts after more than 8w of heavy weight training, so either way a 5-7w strength period will not affect that much. It’s more about how fatigue will affect other modalities.
What I have found is (using your example) that the rep that fails to be maintaned is usually not that far off the spectrum. It may for example be 85% lets say and often time if the coach has subsequent reps planned in the set then it will most likely continue to fall. However, if the last rep is on the border line then that can be used as modivation on the next set to get all reps within the 90% range.
I think the tendo is a great training device to give the athlete feedback. I have had athletes who have actually dropped below 90% and then got it back above on a subsequent rep. It can be used a a modivational tool to “drive” harder on lifts. IMO
I also think it give the coach feedback on the state of the athlete on a particular day.
When I state fatigue I dont mean failure. I rarely go to failure. I mean fatigue as to ensure all IIb motor units have been stimuted. If you are still fairly fresh a the end of a set then all motor units may not have been recruited especially in athletes of younger training age.
Also I do mean to perform each rep as powerfully as possbible. Just because the rep is relatively slow does not mean that you are not performing as pwerfully as is possible.
Asbury park, you will not be stimulating growth of the ST fibres at these %s since the rep no. is far too short ie. arounds 8 or less. IIa yes but we know we can convert them back to IIb if desired.
Weights such as we are discussing are only used for perhaps the latter half of GPP and for part of SPP; longer rest and less fatigue will be used when closer to competition and fine tuning of the fibres is desired.
Weights in general, especially of several reps and definately 10s as in GPP, shifts them to IIa. We need tapering of weights and the track to decide the balance.
If to develop strong IIb they first become IIa so what? They change very quickly back to IIb ie. around 2 weeks as long as the track is right.
Trying to keep them only IIb by doing only very low reps fast and only speed work is too hard and in the end will be less productive with the possibility of injury
Take a look at this article (http://www.coachr.org/tpjrs.htm) — Nelio Moura and Tania Fernandes de Paula Moura (2001):Training principles for jumpers: implications for special strength development. This article is based on a lecture presented at the I. Congress of South American Coaches Association, Manaus, May 2001.
Here’s some highlights from it:
A) Even though the traditional approach of developing strength by following the sequence of strength endurance => maximal strength => special strength still dominates, new data shows that training transformations are not as straightforward as previously thought. In actual fact, when the stimulus to the development of strength endurance or maximal strength lasts more than eight consecutive weeks, deleterious effects on special strength (BOSCO, 1985) and on the muscle’s microstructure (WIEMANN Et TIDOW, 1995) can be noticed. (at http://www.coachr.org/tpjrs.htm)
B) On the other hand, ANDERSEN, SCHJERLING Et SALTIN (2000) found that when muscles are subjected to a heavy weight training programme, the number of type llb fibres decreases (from 9% to about 2%), as they convert to type Ila fibres. However, after a period of detraining, rather than just returning to initial levels, the relative amount of llb fibres increases up to 18%. (at http://www.coachr.org/tpjrs.htm)
C) This data is very interesting, and justifies the use of heavy strength training for 6-9 weeks but no longer than that, in order to avoid type I fibre development. This should take place in the SPC block and also be repeated for the brief periods (2 or 3 weeks) during the year devoted to the development or maintenance of maximal strength. A tapering phase will later on provide an opportunity to reconvert Ila muscle fibres into faster llb types. (at http://www.coachr.org/tpjrs.htm)