i apologize i just moved back to florida from cali so i didnt see your post. i havent hit the track for time yet but i have seen an increase in vertical of over a 8" in a little over 2 months. my training lately has been toward joint position so the use of defeciets isnt needed at this time. i dont kno if you read some of my other posts but i employ extreme isos which without going to far it to the method behind the methodic can be done almost as much as you want.
what i am talking about is not intesive tempo work becasue all work is done at a maximal effort. the defeciet is trained and is not instituted by the athelete. so if training persrcibes sprints you dont go out and run 5-7% under your maximum speed. you run at full speed.
Yes James I have read a good bit of your posts, thats a pretty decent jump in your vert, what is your vert at now, is this the first time you have trained it?
I just figured you talk about deficiets a decent amount and the benefits of staying in one, I just figured you coached people who used this method or used it yourself.
I understood that you were not talking about using a regulatory method to keep the intensity below 95%. I was just connecting the dots, if you are in deficiet during training, even if not specifically targeted towards running I would assume that there would be some decent crossover into running, and if your training deficient is in sprinting particularly and therefore training in a level correlating to about 93% of your best times while giving 100% effort would this not have a detrimental effect rather than beneficial?
I mean I would imagine that the body would react different to the two types of training, being able to give 100% effort while only actually giving 93% compared to only being able to give 93% of your max effort and giving that full at 100% effort, but wouldnt this be negative both in terms of work being accomplished and effects on the body for the latter?
Great that is the question “be or not to be” :-).
I agree with you.It may occur even months for supercompensate a very (too much)heavy load…if thata would happen.
I had the same feedback some year ago.
My question are:
1- is this supercompensation really so big and massive compared to your previous status,or it appears so big becasue of the long time with very low readiness.
2- would you have gain more in a more controlled way(little fatigue-supercompensation)during this time?
my vert is around 36 - 38" but i havent had a chance to do a completly accurate measurment on a vertec.
let me say this i in know way have the expertise neccesary to use the defeciet system on another people. i dont coach people at all and if i did i wouldnt use this method simply because i am not qualified to. i know of it in general i know of it by its effects. so i cant tell you look for this this and this and you will get this result. but i can tell you the concept behind the method.
as to your last assertion a defeciet does not alway pertain to performance. and since jays athletes dont use track work as a large part of his program i dont kno how he would train it. these levels can be determeined by a v-scope, heart rate body temp and a lot of other factors. jay also believes that there are two ways to become faster, overspeed (please dont start anything off this point i know charlie and many others disagree with its use, i dont want to start a whole thing over this), and moving extremly extremly extremly extremly…(you get the idea) slow. these two methods produce the desired neurological adaptations. so sometimes defeciets can not be calculated by whats going on in the training.
James when you say extremely slow. Are you refering to slow eccentrics. When talking about fast are you talking about how Jay uses the inertia impulse machine or towing devices for speed training.
yes, jays iso-extreme excercises are really super slow eccentrics and they follow the model of an extremly extremly… slow movement, but these are not the only ways these can be used. they can also be used concentrially, say for example walking 400m but moving so slow that it takes you 5 hours to complete it, or performing the “wind up” of a golf swing (from club head on the grass to club head overhead) and taking 5 min to go from on point to another. at first look these movements would seem counterintuitive ie. if you wanna get fast why are you moving so slow, but you have to look at what mechanisms of motor control are instituted by the system during these methods. as for fast movements, yes jay uses the impulse inertia machine but for exactly what purpose, beyond its normal use, im not sure. jay has in the past used towing methods with adam but i do not know to what extent he still employs the method. i agree with charlie that overspeed can be dangerous, that is why it is so important to have firmly installed motor patterns. and the benefit is undeniable, people if they dont get injured using this method get faster. again this is why jay stresses things must be done in stages you must train to train and so you must train to be able to be towed properly and not blow a tire. also jay has levels ove overspeed that he has found to be safe and beneficial, to low and the transfer will be minimal to great and you run the risk of injury.
Single vs. Dual factor model of adaptation
Single factor model of adaptation depicts preparedness (or a single characteristic/ability/trait) as a single line. After the training stimulus, preparedness first decrease, then after some time „supercompensates“ — it returns to normal level and beyond it — thus it is also called „supercompensation“ model. The larger the stimulus, the larger the decrease and thus supercompensation.
I don’t know how the people over time equaled Dual factor model with fatigue accumulation (and provocation of delayed adaptation)!? Dual factor model and fatigue accumulation approach to training to provoce delayed adaptation are NOT SYNONIMS!!! Fatigue accumulation can be also explained by Single factor model too! Fatigue accumulation depends on the stimulus strenght and the frequency.
Fatigue accumulation results in preparedness decrease over starting point, and can be explained by both models. This method is proposed by Verkhoshansky. To be honest, I don’t buy it! Take the sprint for example: your athlete should sprint without being fully recovered between sessions and their performance should decrese over time. And then you unload them and wait for the „miracle“ (long term delayed trainig effect) to come! Again, I don’t buy this approach for training for speed, strenght or power events. Maybe for endurance, but maybe. So, during that „accumulation“ period, your form start to sucks, you are more prone to injury and you are „learning“ to run at poor form. Three words: Avoid this approach!
Dual factor model depicts preparedness as „steady“ component (fitness) and „fast“ component (fatigue). Preparedness at a given instant of time equals fatigue plus fitness levels.
Dual factor model more precisely depicts what is „going on“ and can explain the effect of taper period & unloading while Single factor model can’t — this is because there is allways some minimal fatigue level in athletes wheather or not they tried to train when fully recovered. Thus, there can be increase in preparedness (and thus performance) from training session to training session, while also accumulating some minimal level of fatigue. When we unload or enter taper, fitness component is kept constant and that minimal level of fatigue decreases, and thus preparedness (and thus preformance) jumps even more. This can be depicted by Dual facotor model, while it can’t by Single factor model.
Ok, here is this short article in a nuttshell:
Single & Dual factor models both explain adaptation,altough Dual factor is younger and can explain some things better (like unload & taper effects)
Dual factor model is NOT the synonim with fatigue accumulation approach to training. Fatigue accumulation can be explained by both models
Fatigue accumulation sucks! Preparedness (visible as performance) should go better and not worse over time. Sprinters should run faster, lifters should lift more, jumpers should jump higher/longer over time and not worse over time. Fatigue accumulation is „playing with fire“ — fire is usefull but it can burn!
Do NOT equal Conjugate Sequence System with fatigue accumulation! Training blocks of unidirectional loading are done with elite athletes to provide the adaptation effect while maintaining all other already developed traits. This is a must because they (elites) do not respond very well to sequential approach (one trait at the time) due „Use is or lose it“ law, also, they do not respond well to concurrent approach (all trait at one time), because they cannot respond to larger number of different stimuly (and they get pretty fatigued too)! The solution is to EMPHASISE development of single particular trait while maintaining all neccesary, already developed ones! This doesn’t neccessary mean fatigue accumulation. During that unidirectional loading the performance should go UP instead of down!
Altought the preparedness and thus performance goes UP, the certrain ammount of fatigue is accumulated (but it is pretty low) over time. This is why unloading and taper increse performance before competition. Reduce volume of training allows to decrease fatigue levels while maintaining fitness comonent, the result is increase in performance. This is easily explained by Dual Factor molde, but a little harder with Single factor model
Unloading and taper are not only done to decrease fatigue. Unload is also done to allow various traits/abilities to „synchronize“ because their heterochronic characteristic. Also, it fills C.A.R. or Current Adaptation Reserve which is „depleted“ by preceeding adapatations (which „spends“ it). Unloading allow for „waveing“ progression which is one of the principles of training. You cannot break principle laws, you can only break yourself on them!
I am not creazy, because I spend 4hours to draw this! I enjoy it! But really, I should get a life!
*** Click on the picture to see full size image!!!
it may be important to note i believe that adaption due to defeciet training is neurological in nature though not completly limited to this one aspect of the human system. this may make more sense to those who are having trouble rationalizing this method of load control as the nervous system has a high degree of plasticity.
I think this thread lost the plot a long time ago. What james has to say has nothing to do with CNS fatigue really! And the discussion has been going around circules it seems. Perhaps James should start a whole new thread about Training in Joint angles or Training in deficiet ect ect.
What charlie teaches about CNS training and what this thread is on about are now two different things. This thread should be focusing on CNS fatigue and how it affects training and how to recover from it.
Just my 2cents
I would agree simply because there are too many factors involved and science (as we know it) only evaluates things with one unknown variable. Add to this the problem caused by paradigm shifts… e.g. general strength work is perhaps better than specific work when you already do a highly explosive event like sprinting… and it is often hard to make the leaps between what the research tells you should work and what actually works in real life. Hence, I am more interested in the values and beliefs held by top coaches that underly thier general philosophy than the specific methods they apply.
Yes, you are right… the discussion “went” on something that isn’t CNS fatigue!
So, I am going to create new thread reagrding Sinlge vs. Dual Factor Models and Fatigue Accumulation!
I would suggest concentrating on the topic of this thread: WHAT IS CNS FATIGUE
The mentioed thread is here
I would suggesting that this discussion (fatigue accumulation, defieciet, dual factor model etc) continues there, and that we concentrate on CNS fatigue here ---- I know that the two are interconnected (everything is), but this is the best advice a can give at the moment. Thanks
Awsome Duxx. Thanks.
I have noticed, that instead of working full time, and now studying full time, i have tonns more energy, recover tonns more from harder sessions. its great.
Though i am doing the GPP dvd routine and the CNS really hard stuff has yet to hit, its still pretty hard. Eating well, sleeping well, and not working a physically demanding job has certainly made me recover like a young fella again! lol…
#1: Both, it felt very well after such a long time of crawling in the dirt – which might be one important factor here also. CNS recovery will also result in better mood, motivation and such. However, there were many personal records set in the objective sense also.
#2: Well, it still needed both I guess. After two months of recovery I felt exceptionally good straight from the start of resumed training (close to pr-levels)… BUT… It would take almost two months of “proper CNS application and recovery” (like Charlie said) in order to really fly past old performance levels; which here meant going high intensity every third day.
Basically what was happening was a full recovery from CNS burnout, where the performance standard seemed way better straight from the start, but, more importantly, the body seemed to react to training stimulus – when proper balance was found – in a new mode, which made old records seem like child’s play after one/one and a half moths of proper training.
So yes, the gains came in a very short time, but of course it’s not as simple as that; it included two months of recovery (=4 months total), plus two months of struggling through the latter part of the summer (=6 months), plus four months of progressive CNS overstimulation (= total of 10 months). Fall training not included here. So you can see that time was NOT well spent in the end. Who cares if you set your personal records in December, when your goal was in july-august. So I’m pretty sure proper stimulus and recovery would have yielded much better results, when it would have counted. But still, there is life (sometimes very good) after CNS burnout, if you are able to recover from it properly.
Prolonged exposure to stimulus without supercompensating in time so often yields the results you’ve experienced that it stopped being funny 40 years ago. Unless the collective experience of sufferers shouts louder than the BS artists out there, the waste of years of lives will go on… and on… and on … and on…
And still, off they go on road runs to start the long slogging, painful pursuit of speed?..
Yes that was the conclusion the article made . So when an athlete says, “oh I am running off natural talent because I have never done weights before…” but has about 5-6 years of sprint training, just look at them shake your head in agreement and bite your tongue.
I guess one have to be there before one believes that more might be less at the end. The thing was, it was the first time I was injury free the whole training year – I hade made a reasonably good performance in the Worlds, so my budget was good, and massive physical therapy and massage was affordable – but, of course, I was over-ambitious and didn’t listen to the warning signs in April-May. I’m not sure what you mean by ‘road runs’, but for me, it was more about too much intensity, too often (after a reasonably good indoor season). Well, it’s a long time ago, so I can look back with some amusement today.
:-).
