Now, this could be for a couple of reasons:

So you’ve been hitting the gym for a few years, you’ve had some fantastic results at times, but you feel like your progress has stalled. You reach the same point and don’t seem to be getting any stronger, you’re not building muscle, and it’s hard to stay motivated. Sound familiar? Well, you’re not alone.

Now, this could be for a couple of reasons:

1. The first reason could be that you haven’t followed a proper training program, in which case I recommend you start by using one of the many great programs on this site.
2. But let’s assume you have followed a program, and it worked. But now it’s not working anymore, why? Well, as I alluded to in one of my previous articles, The Main Reason You Aren’t Getting Any Stronger, the results you see in the gym are an adaptation to stress or stimulus. What has happened to you is that you have run the course of your program, and the stimulus is no longer causing the adaptation.

This is, of course, assuming you are eating well, sleeping well, and doing the things you should be doing to get stronger and build muscle.

Most beginner programs fall into linear periodization, which means the training volume goes up linearly. What is the reason so many programs use this basic template? Because it’s incredibly effective, aka—it works. But, another option is non-linear periodization. And that’s what this article will cover.

Daily Undulation Periodization (DUP) has regained popularity in recent years. Many incorrectly assume it’s a new concept. It isn’t. The most famous application of DUP is probably Louie Simmon’s Westside Barbell style of training.

DUP doesn’t need to be that intense, however. It also doesn’t need to be reserved for the sport of powerlifting.

Everyday gym-goers and athletes can also benefit from an intelligently designed DUP program.

DUP as a concept revolves around high-frequency training while changing the stimulus on each training day.

As the name implies:

• Daily = Each day
• Undulating = Constantly changing
• Periodization = The systematic planning of the training program

This has several distinct advantages.

1. First, specificity. Because of increased exposure to the motor patterns of each exercise, the competency or technical skill increases. This specificity is also referred to as greasing the groove and popularized by Pavel Tsatsouline of RKC fame.
2. Second, each lift in each training session can have a specific goal: Strength, power, hypertrophy.

A simple traditional DUP setup would look something like this:

Monday

Wednesday

Friday

As you can see, the rep ranges and intensities are different for each lift on each training day.

Take a minute also to consider how your current training program compares in both volume and intensity. I’m willing to bet you’re not currently doing 75 reps at above 70% on your deadlift each week, right?

Now you’re not limited to the above exercises either. If you were using the above template, I would recommend an assistance day and focus on unilateral exercises and upper body pulling exercises. You can switch out any of these exercises for another.

I would recommend always using compound movements, however. I would also advise against using two different variations of any exercise (back squats and front squats, for example).

You are better off increasing your training volume on the one variation for one cycle and then switching after 3-4 weeks.

The rep ranges are also not set in stone; however, you want to stay within specific ranges and intensities. The 5 x 5, 4 x 8, 6 x 3 rep ranges are tried and tested for strength, hypertrophy, and power, and I would advise against going too far off the reservation here.

If you’re new to this form of training, use these rep ranges, which you can modify after you’ve had experience using the program.

Don’t be the guy who butchers a program before even starting it, please!

The post An Intro to Daily Undulating Periodization appeared first on Breaking Muscle.

Ted Sloan – Strength and Power Diminish at Different Rates

The degree to which a trainee can be set up for the highest potential for success is reliant on many factors. As with any trainee, time is of the essence and a great periodization program is only truly as good as the commitment and attention afforded by the athlete.

Young trainees require a significantly different form of exercise in order to perform to their maximum potential, and in theory are truly far from their potential. It’s important to ensure that the advanced trainee is as powerful and strong as possible going into the most important parts of the season and to an extent, this can be a goal or attempted with a younger trainee. Unfortunately, this can be a difficult task with many trainees in the private sector, considering most trainees will cease training as the season for the sport begins.

Trainees of under a year of training age will require significantly more attention to movement and reactive agility, while strength and power can often be increased at a rapid pace with minimal attention in these untrained groups. The ability to predict and react to an opponent can make a greater difference for these trainees than attempting to max out their squat and deadlift.

When working with a trainee who can commit at least 12 weeks, I will begin their training program by going through a grueling preparation phase, Then, I will have them perform a maximal strength phase that I’ll combine with some basic power exercises and culminate with a maximal power period. If my trainee can make it to the gym consistently, I would hope to finish this phase after 9 weeks and use 2 weeks to condition my trainee in a manner congruent with power and strength.

During our final week I like to taper my athletes down by performing high intensity movements with a significant drop in volume. If limited on time, and my athlete has an advanced training age, we will often be forced to combine training styles by either using Westside’s Conjugate Method or Contrast training, in which both strength and power are often combined back to back.

The taper will consist of only one week of lower volume, but continued use of high intensity in this situation. Different trained attributes such as strength and power diminish at different rates, with power declining most rapidly. As a result, power should always be a focus towards the end of a training period leading into a season, the playoffs or a championship game.

Giulio Palau – Focus and Determination are Finite and Exhaustible

Any well-designed periodization program will include phases of increased and decreased stress on the body to allow for proper breakdown and subsequent recovery, ultimately resulting in adaptation and increased performance.

One often overlooked aspect of periodization is the tapering of acute variables between phases of the program or before competition. If executed properly, tapering can allow for the subject to properly recover from an intense training phase without de-conditioning.

A tapering phase can last anywhere between 1-4 weeks. This brief period of calculated rest has been shown to increase performance by 2-5% in trained athletes, which can be a major advantage in high-level competition. The most important training variables to consider in tapering are: volume, frequency, and intensity.

Studies have shown that athletes tend to respond favorably to tapering of volume and frequency after a phase of high intensity training. However, significant reductions in intensity (as usually measured by % of 1RM) have been associated with a loss of overall strength and power. A phase of high intensity training before tapering is crucial to ensure that significant adaptations are occurring during the de-loading period.

A well rested athlete at the end of a proper tapering phase should be ready for peak performance, and tapering should be coordinated accordingly to rest and prepare for competition or another phase of high intensity training. Often overlooked are psychological factors that correlate with physical exertion and recovery.

Focus and determination should be considered as resources that are both finite and exhaustible. Just like the more concrete components of physiological stress, mental preparedness should correlate with the peak and tapering of physical exertion. A trainee can only be at peak performance very briefly, and the relevant acute variables should be adjusted strategically to ensure that peak performance is achieved when necessary.

The psychological state of a trainee is not only relevant to their performance, it is key. The strategy of manipulating stressors (exertion) to peak and taper for optimal performance and recovery is, therefore, key to any discipline, and should not be underestimated in the abstract forms of discipline, focus, and motivation.

Antonio Squillante – Peaking Happens for a Limited Time

Athletic performance is a beautiful combination of skills, strength, speed, and endurance. Cognitive and physical attributes need to be developed in order to improve athleticism, the ability to perform sport specific skills with the highest chances of success and the least amount of effort. This is, in its very essence, the definition of “talent” in sport – when it all comes down to a handful of fundamental motor skills – but also as in music, art, maths and any other form of intelligence. Therefore, ultimately, the condition sine qua non for improving performance in sport becomes a question of dedication and commitment.

With that being said, a great deal of time needs to be invested in training different aspects of athleticism:

A very complicated orchestra of physiological systems led by an absolute prima donna: the endocrine system, the kingmaker in the process of adaptation and supercompensation that leads to an overall improvement in work capacity. Peaking, tapering and even periodization itself are nothing but axioms (theories, to a certain extent) based on the fundament process of “stress management” also known as fight or flight response or GAS, general adaptation syndrome.

For each physiological system involved in the process of supercompensation that ultimately leads to an improvement in sports performance, there is a certain amount of stress (training) that needs to be provided for adaptation to occur. A process that is, by definition, reversible and therefore temporary and transient.

No matter how good a periodization system is, a trainee can only be at the very peak of his/her preparedness for a very limited amount of time. A consequence of a great deal of asynchronism between the physiological response of different systems, that makes challenging to time loading and unloading in such a way that positive transfer of training is maximized while deterring is minimized.

So many concepts to provide only one answer. What I feel comfortable saying is: trainees, no matter how advanced they might be, can only peak for a very limited amount of time (48-72 hours) and they can only peak for a limited amount of events per year (2 to 3). The question is then: “when is it really necessary to peak and when is it not?”

The post Managing Strength Training Stressors: Maximizing Peak Performance appeared first on Breaking Muscle.

Antonio Squillante

Complexity in periodization is a relatively recent concept. Regardless of what model of periodization we decide to take into consideration, both qualitative and quantitative variables are manipulated over time to create adaptation. This is, in its very basic, the essence of periodization itself.

Intensity, volume, frequency, and density affect what is called “external load”, namely the amount of stress placed upon the body to induce adaptation; it is a quantitive assessment of the training process, easy to monitor. At any given time during a microcycle, a mesocycle or a macrocycle the external load is calibrated to accommodate the process of supercompensation, the increase in functionality of the main physiological systems, neuroendocrine and muscle-skeleton in primis.

The “internal load”, the individual response to the training load based on the level of fatigue, ultimately dictates adaptation, the delicate equilibrium between success and failure in the adaptive response of the organism. Where does quality come into play when it comes to periodization? Quality, in training, is synonymous with “transfer of training” – sometimes called “transfer of learning”, a relatively new concept in sport psychology and neuroscience – the process of improving performance in the sport arena by bridging the gap between general and sport specific training.

How can we measure quality, then? Well, quality reflects a very delicate topic: motor learning and control, the “behind the scene” in the process of acquiring mastery in sport. It is more than just progressing from general to special exercises, and from special exercises to sport specific exercises.

It is progressing from general, fundamental motor skills (FMS) to sport-specific motor skills (SSS), a process that involves the learning, practicing and mastering of complex motor patterns that reflex the kinematic and kinetics features encountered on the field or the court of play.

Complexity, therefore, pertains to the process of selecting and implementing exercises, moving from general to specific motor patterns, from closed kinetic chain (CKC), slow controlled movement to open kinetic chain (OKC), fast action-reaction, from discrete to serial skills, from predictable to unpredictable environment in the effort to promote optimal motor development and carry over from training to competition.

Let’s reframe our approach to periodization then so that movements can actually be considered as skills; let’s implement a pedagogical approach in training that takes into consideration not only the physical development of an athlete but also the fascinating process of learning and mastering new skills.

Complexity calls for a more comprehensive approach to training that considers performance in a sport as the end result of a myriad of factors including the acquisition of new motor patterns and the strengthening of those physical attributes necessary to execute them in an efficient and more effective way.

Ted Sloan

Complexity in training can be defined by a multitude of factors. A semi-new common phrase that many experienced coaches use is to “K.eep I.t S.imple” and with the “S.tupid” occasionally thrown in.

Sport coaches and parents often want the advanced, more complicated movements to be performed with their youth athletes immediately, however, it is important to take an athlete’s training age into consideration before becoming too complex with their training.

Complexity can be defined as the difficulty of movement being programmed, it can be defined as the goals being trained for, it can be defined as the factors being taken into consideration when programming for a client, such as their strength, their training age, their understanding of movement and how to manipulate their bodies.

If attempting to complicate training protocols too quickly, an athlete can be placed in a dangerous and potentially harmful situation. The KISS principle is a very important approach to live by and as your experience increases, your coach’s eye and your art of coaching will improve to the point that you will understand better, exactly when it is ok or important to complicate the training process.

Safety, better movement and strength/power are all goals of training, but you should take all of these factors into consideration in this specific order as well.

Giulio Palau

There are several relevant variables in designing a periodization program for your training. Intensity and volume are among the most commonly measured and manipulated for hypertrophy and maximal strength gains.

Here we introduce complexity as another acute variable in manipulating the training stress placed on the body. I like to think of complexity as the level of difficulty of the movement or movements being performed. In other words, we are considering the demand of the task in terms of neurological fatigue.

Movements that are highly dynamic and require intense focus would fall under the category of high complexity, specifically multi-planar or compound-joint movements like the kettlebell Turkish get-up. This is significant because complex movements may be more taxing on the central nervous system, and therefore effect the capacity for volume or intensity that could otherwise be performed.

However, incorporating highly complex tasks in your training can be instructive. It will teach you to approach your training with the intention of practicing movements, not aesthetics. It will encourage you to think of strength as a skill by emphasizing quality and efficiency of movement, or neuromuscular efficiency.

Kettlebell exercises like the swing and the get up, or Olympic lifts like the clean and snatch are excellent examples of what I’m describing. As always, we have to qualify that these exercises may not be for everyone, and the “complexity” threshold may vary greatly from person to person.

Just as performing a push up correctly may be a complex exercise for one person, a 32kg Turkish get up may be too simple for others. This is where other training variables like volume and intensity can be tweaked to ensure that the body has to continually adapt to new stresses.

Keep this in mind when selecting for exercises. You can adjust the complexity depending on your goals and limitations, but don’t stop challenging yourself. Thinking about your training as a practice in movement will give you both longevity and functionality.

The post Complexity in Periodization appeared first on Breaking Muscle.

Every coach worth mettle uses some form of periodization, which is a big word for planning variations in an athlete’s training over a given portion of time. Periodizing a training program effectively allows an athlete to steadily progress and achieve “peaks” in performance when necessary.

Two popular forms of periodization are traditional (TP) and daily undulating (DUP). Traditional is characterized by high initial volume and low intensity that gradually shifts to low volume and high intensity. Undulating is characterized by frequent shifts in volume and intensity, usually on a daily or weekly basis. While a graph of these changes will show many peaks and valleys, the trend line is the same as traditional.

A recent study in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research pits these two styles of periodization against each other to discover which is more effective for increasing strength, power, and hypertrophy in adolescent elite judoka athletes.

While this population appears quite specific, the results of the study reinforce some principles both coaches and athletes should consider during the program planning process. First, let’s look at the study design.

The Study Design

Eleven total athletes ranging from 14.2 to 15.4 years old engaged in strength training three times per week during two, four-week mesocycles separated by a seven week washout period.

The first mesocycle, preceded by a two-week period for baseline measurements, utilized traditional periodization. The second mesocycle utilized daily undulating periodization. The two-week baseline included regular Judo training with no strength training.

Mesocycles one and two had both Judo and strength training, and the washout period had no Judo with only recreational activity. Both mesocycles used the same exercise list, with the goal of improving upper, lower, and total body strength and power.

The exercises selected were the snatch, clean and jerk, squat, knee flexion curl, lat pull-down, barbell bench press, and barbell bench pull. Total and lower body exercises were performed in the morning while upper body exercises were performed in the afternoon.

Tests for the one repetition maximum (1RM) were administered twice during baseline, once after TP, once after washout, and once after DUP. Anthropometric and ultrasonographic measurements were also taken to monitor hypertrophy.

The Study Results

Traditional and daily undulating periodization were equally effective in improving lower, upper, and total body strength, power, and hypertrophy. The researchers concluded that the force-velocity characteristics of the chosen exercises may have been the root cause of the athletes’ performance increases.

In other words, the researchers think that the speed of the bar combined with the amount of force being exerted by the athletes had greater effect on their improvements than the periodization type.

Study Considerations

The group of athletes selected for this study were young in chronological, biological, and training age. All possessed a lot of talent. These factors cultivated a fertile combination for improving performance. When this combination is present, any program that follows the basic principles of strength training will elicit performance improvement.

It is true that some styles are more effective than others, but there is no need to try and get fancy with program planning in this specific population. The low chronological age should encourage coaches to keep things fun in the training environment so the athletes don’t burn out.

The athletes’ biological age places them in a phase of life when anabolic hormone production is high, thus creating a conducive environment within the body for adaptation. Low training age suggests that the athletes should make steady initial improvement as a result of learning new motor patterns and improving neurological efficiency.

In simpler terms, they’re practicing new skills and getting better quickly. Finally, these athletes were categorized as “elite” in the sport of Judo, so they’re highly talented. Talent has too many components to break down in this article, so suffice it to say they most likely achieved proficiency in movement skills much faster than average.

Complicated Periodization Isn’t Needed for Kids

These athletes probably would have improved from any fundamentally sound training program, no matter the type of periodization. Traditional periodization is a common starting point because beginners respond well to it.

Undulating periodization becomes necessary for athletes of higher training age, because it allows for more recovery and the training of multiple performance qualities at once. It also provides a solution to a problem that may not exist yet in this population.

Within this study, both types worked because of the psychological and physiological conditions present in its chosen population. Coaches lucky enough to be given a young and exceptional athlete to develop should aim to keep them interested, injury-free, and constantly improving.

More on youth programming: The Middle School Block Zero Strength Program

Keep your athletes moving safely: Coaches: Learn How to Keep Young Shoulders Healthy

References:

Ullrich, B., Pelzer, T., Oliveira, S., & Pfeiffer, M. (2016, August). “Neuromuscular Responses to Short-Term Resistance Training With Traditional and Daily Undulating Periodization in Adolescent Elite Judoka“. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 30(8), 2083-2099.

Headline photo credit: Vladimir57 via Shutterstock.

The post Traditional vs. Undulating Periodization in Youth Athletes appeared first on Breaking Muscle.

Athletes and trainers have sleepwalked into believing traditional training periodisation and the various iterations it’s gone through over the decades is the key to success. Jump online or hang around a gym long enough and someone’ll tell you about their linear, blocked, semi-undulating programme with a transition into wave loaded concurrently conjugated patterns. Just like the Emperor in the classic tale The Emperor’s New Clothes by Hans Christian Andersen, they’re playing along with traditional ideas of periodisation because they don’t want to appear stupid.

For a number of years, John Kiely has been the little boy shouting from the rooftops that we need to take a more critical look at periodisation. He believes we shouldn’t accept periodisation models as fact because a bunch of coaches back in the day figured out a few training systems that worked for their athletes. Kiely has also shown substantial evidence to challenge the appropriateness of applying generic methodologies, believing many of the periodisation models out there apply overly simplistic decision making to the planning problems posed by inherently complex biological systems.¹

In other words – they’ve got no clothes on.

3 Problems with the Traditional Model

Traditional models believe that established time frames exist for the development and retention of specific fitness adaptations. At best, these time frames are a consensus opinion that can only be applied in general terms. I don’t work in general terms – I work with specific athletes.

Traditional models suggest that various fitness attributes are best developed sequentially (for example: strength before power, endurance before speed). But what if I wanted to flip everything on its head and develop speed first, then add volume to improve endurance performance?

Traditional models believe established training structures work across a wide range of sports, athletes, and competition structures. Really? Will the same structure work for a professional golfer playing twenty-four tournaments a year and a centrally funded and trained gymnast peaking for the Olympic Games?

The Alternative Model: Flexibility and Adaptability

I’d rather write a plan that works for the athlete or team I’m working with, not one that was knocking around Eastern Europe in the 1960s. I’d rather develop structured plans that have continuity running through them whilst incorporating enough variation to elicit performance gains. I’d rather allow time for the athletes I’m working with to recover from the day-to-day demands of training and life, progressively overloading my athletes and not continuously kicking the crap out of them every session – keeping in mind that if we don’t use it, we’ll lose it.

I have no idea if this is a conjugated, semi-blocked, linear periodisation model. But it is a fluid, flexible, and adaptable plan that will result in improved performance. I’m not suggesting we forget all of the pioneering work by Matveyev, Bompa, Verkoshansky, and Issurin. But we must not be constrained by it.

Systems and models developed in Eastern Europe fifty years ago may not be applicable in 2016, so stop blindly believing they are. Rather than wearing the straightjacket of traditional periodisation models, we need to cast a critical eye and figure out what really works.

References

1. John Kiely, “Periodization Paradigms in the 21st Century: Evidence-Led or Tradition-Driven”, International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance 7 (2012) 242-250

The post The Truth About Traditional Periodisation Models appeared first on Breaking Muscle.

I was wrong about linear periodization.

It’s embarassing to look back and see how wrong I was on such a fundamentally important topic. The reason I was wrong involves a key challenge regarding the organization of training for athletes: the development of two or more fitness adaptations over time.

The risk of becoming one-dimensional causes many people to dislike linear periodization. But is it really a risk?

Organization Options for Athletic Development

A successful athlete needs to train to improve a wide-range of skills necessary for their respective sport. Discus throwers, for example, need to develop a number of athletic characteristics, including muscular hypertrophy, power, speed, and maximum strength.

Whenever you have several different training objectives, you are faced with two main options for how to organize your time: 

• Simultaneous Organization: Working on every essential characteristic every week, and possibly during every workout.
• Sequential Organization: Working on one training outcome at a time. For example, spending several weeks or months working on strength then switching to work on speed.

Both approaches have distinct pros and cons. The benefit of the simultaneous method is obvious as you’re always focusing on the things that need work. The downside of this strategy is the risk of becoming a “Jack of all trades, master of none.” Your time and energy have limits, and the development of some adaptations, like aerobic endurance, can hamper your efforts to develop others, like maximum strength.

Sequential organization, on the other hand, fixes the “Jack of all trades” issue, but at a cost. Spending long periods of time working on one training goal means that you’re neglecting others. If you spend all of your time and energy working on maximum strength, what’s going to happen to your speed, power, and muscle mass?

That last question exemplifies the case against linear planning, and it’s exactly why I used to criticize it as a training strategy. But I was wrong, and here’s why.

Phase Sequencing for Potentiation

First, the development of certain fitness adaptations actually serves to enhance the development of others. Dr. Mike Israetel refers to this concept as “phase potentiation.” A common example of this idea is to do a 6-week strength phase after a 6-week hypertrophy phase. The hypertrophy phase will thicken your muscle fibers and the strength phase will teach them how to contract with great force. Thickening your muscle fibers first through relatively high volume will help you get more out of the subsequent training phases where intensity will take precedence over volume.

For the hypothetical discus thrower, his training phases would be organized in the following order:

1. Hypertrophy
2. Maximum Strength
3. Power
4. Speed

In this example, the development that takes place in each phase potentiates what will occur in the subsequent phase. Cool, huh?

Second, you don’t necessarily lose previous training adaptations every time you switch to a new phase of training. For instance, if you were to follow a hypertrophy phase with a strength phase, you’d think the result would be a loss in muscle mass from the significant reduction in volume that takes place during a strength block. To some extent this is true, but not in the time frame we’re talking about.

Sure, if you only did sets of 3-5 reps for a year, you’d lose some muscle. But during the length of a typical strength block (4-8 weeks), the reduced volume of training would be enough to maintain your current levels of muscle mass while you focused on strength development.

When you’re focusing on one adaptation, you likely won’t improve the others, but you will be able to maintain them. 

The same concept applies when you’re working on multiple weaknesses through simultaneous organization. For any given phase, you’ll be developing one trait while simply maintaining the others. You can maintain a specific fitness attribute for prolonged periods of time relative to how long it took to develop.

Changing the focus of your work doesn’t mean you’ll automatically lose all the adaptation you made in the previous phase.

Practical Takeaways

The amount of time you spend in each phase depends on your unique situation. If you have a lot of muscle but aren’t as strong as you look, do (relatively) longer strength phases (typically 3-6 reps per set) and shorter hypertrophy phases (typically 8-15 reps per set). If the size of your muscles doesn’t do your strength justice, do the opposite. Another thing to consider is your goal for each phase of training. Perhaps you stay in a strength block until your bench moves up fifteen pounds before switching to hypertrophy.

Endurance and mobility are also factors to take into account. Mobility work won’t have a negative on your efforts to get bigger or stronger, and may even help. Mobility can be done immediately preceding, during, and after strength work, but as a rule of thumb, avoid prolonged static stretching right before strength training.

Try to do most of your conditioning as far away from your weight training workouts as possible. Pair aerobic development with your hypertrophy phases, and do most of your anaerobic work in strength blocks.

If you’ve got lingering questions about this concept, let me hear from you in the comments below.

This Week’s Training:

Volume: 49,930lb (Last Week: 103, 280lb)

Sometimes deload weeks are planned, and other times they impose themselves on you. This week was an example of the latter. Some unexpected events popped up that cut into my training and I only logged two sessions.

Bodyweight: 198lb

Volume: 31,185lb

Goblet Squat

• Set 1: 10lb × 10
• Set 2: 35lb × 10
• Set 3: 53lb × 10

High-Bar Back Squat

• Set 1: 45lb × 10
• Set 2: 95lb × 8
• Set 3: 135lb × 6
• Set 4: 185lb × 3
• Set 5: 225lb × 8
• Set 6: 245lb × 8
• Set 7: 255lb × 8
• Set 8: 225lb × 8

Deadlift

• Set 1: 135lb × 5
• Set 2: 225lb × 5
• Set 3: 275lb × 5
• Set 4: 315lb × 5

Leg Press

• Set 1: 90lb × 8
• Set 2: 180lb × 8
• Set 3: 270lb × 8
• Set 4: 360lb × 8
• Set 5: 410lb × 8

Standing Calf Raise

• Set 1: 200lb × 8
• Set 2: 200lb × 8
• Set 3: 200lb × 8

Friday, April 29, 2016

Bodyweight: 198lb

Volume: 18,745lb

Goblet Squat

• Set 1: 10lb × 10
• Set 2: 10lb × 10
• Set 3: 10lb × 10

Deadlift

• Set 1: 135lb × 5
• Set 2: 185lb × 5
• Set 3: 225lb × 5
• Set 4: 275lb × 5
• Set 5: 315lb × 5
• Set 6: 365lb × 3
• Set 7: 405lb × 5 (Video Below)

Bench Press (Dumbbell)

• Set 1: 100lb × 10
• Set 2: 140lb × 8
• Set 3: 180lb × 8
• Set 4: 190lb × 8

Pull Up

• Set 1: 5 reps
• Set 2: 5 reps
• Set 3: 5 reps

Bicep Curl (Dumbbell)

• Set 1: 60lb × 8
• Set 2: 70lb × 8
• Set 3: 70lb × 8

More on Styles of Periodization:

• Block Periodization Versus Linear Periodization: Which Is Better?
• A Simple Guide to Periodization for Strength Training
• 5 Basic Training Principles You Need to Revisit
• New on Breaking Muscle Today

Photo courtesy of Jeff Nguyen / CrossFit Empirical.

The post How I Was Wrong About Linear Periodization appeared first on Breaking Muscle.

Stress, Rest, Repeat

While it began as a protocol for elite athletes, periodization holds incredible utility for the rest of us, as well. The original idea was to allow for maximum performance at a single event or series of events, like an Olympic swimmer competing to qualify for the team, and then winning subsequent gold in the Games.

But the effects of alternating periods of programmed stress and recovery are beneficial to an athlete at any level. Periodization provides a systematic way to plan workouts in order to maximize progress while limiting susceptibility to injury. Periodized programming is ordinarily divided into units of time called macro- (yearly), meso- (monthly), and micro- (weekly) cycles. Recovery is purposefully prescribed into each of these cycles.

Periodization began as a concept for elite athletes, but its principles benefit everyone.

To better understand the concept of periodization, it is important to be familiar with the variables used to design a training program. The FITT concept outlines these variables:

• Frequency: How often an activity is done, typically defined as a number of workouts per week.
• Intensity: The level of effort of an activity. Devices such as heart rate monitors, cycling wattage monitors, and running pace calculators can be used to quantify intensity. For cardiovascular performance, intensity is manipulated to stress a specific energy system (i.e., aerobic, anaerobic, lactate tolerance). Intensity can also be manipulated for muscular development (i.e., hypertrophy, muscular endurance, muscular strength, maximal power).
• Type: The type of activity being performed. For an endurance athlete, cardiovascular fitness is the most important focus, and their type of training should be specific to that pursuit. The same is true for an athlete who is focused primarily on strength-related goals.
• Time: How long should work and rest intervals last?

Workouts Are Only Half the Story

Recovery is as important to a training program as the workouts. There are numerous ways to recover, including complete recovery, active recovery, nutritional considerations, and external modalities including soft tissue mobilization and massage. The concept of periodization incorporates complete recovery and active recovery.

Complete recovery is purposely scheduling days completely off from all activity. Active recovery is training at an intensity that causes extremely low stress to both the cardiovascular and musculoskeletal systems. Rowing, cycling, or swimming at an intensity level no greater than a 4 on a scale from 1-10 are great choices. Active recovery typically lasts between 20-60 minutes, depending on your baseline level of fitness. These two approaches to rest are the best ways to allow your body to work its innate physiological magic to recover completely. 

Microcycles

The shortest unit of time in a periodized schedule is the microcycle, or a single week. From a recovery standpoint, most athletes do well with one complete recovery day and one active recovery day per microcycle. Each workout outside of recovery days should be specific to the athlete’s overall goals.

Below is what a typical training week might look like for an athlete whose main goal is to maintain overall health and fitness:

Mesocycles

The next tier in a periodized schedule is a mesocycle, usually a month-long block. I find it most effective to have a mesocycle that consists of four microcycles. Using this template, the first three weeks are used to gradually progress any of one of the FITT variables. The last week, or “recovery week,” will have the same number of workouts on the same days, but to prevent the body from taking too far of a physiological step back, the volume is reduced and the intensity is maintained, or even slightly increased.

The purpose of the recovery week is to allow the body to fully absorb the stress you have placed on it over the course of the previous three weeks. During recovery week, your body will adapt to that stress, allowing you to return to your workouts fresh, energized, and confident that you will continue to develop as the base week of the second mesocycle begins. For strength work, recovery week means keeping your weights the same, but doing fewer repetitions. For cardio, it means working out for a shorter period of time at the same pace or wattage you used in the first week.

Here’s what a simple mesocycle may look like:

Macrocycles

Finally, the macrocycle breaks training down into an annual or seasonal block. Olympic athletes and coaches use this type of organization to monitor yearly training progress, and to ensure peaking occurs when it matters most. Endurance athletes and coaches use these blocks, often a few times per year, to ensure they are as fit and rested as possible before entering their most important races.

The rest component of the macrocycle for our hypothetical athlete may come in a two- to four-week continuous block of time where workout intensity, volume, and structure are reduced. This chunk of time allows for unstructured workouts and play to reinvigorate. It could coincide with a busy holiday season or a planned vacation. Just as the recovery week of each four-week block provides necessary rest for future progress, so does the two-to-four weeks of rest at the end of the macrocycle. 

Smarter Work Yields Better Results

Training as hard as you can all the time is a recipe for fatigue, burnout, and injury. Periodization can be used to safely improve our health, avoid the consequences of overtraining, and balance training with the stresses of everyday life. Periodization is about going farther by working smarter. It’s applying the right stress at the right time, for the right duration, to create the right gains. Using it in your training program will go a long way toward ensuring your continued health and continuous progress.

More on Smart Programming:

• Microcycle Programming: Organize Your Training Week
• Periodize Focus, Not Just Intensity
• The 4 Phases of a Solid Strength Program
• New on Breaking Muscle Today

Teaser photo courtesy of Jeff Nguyen / CrossFit Empirical

Photo 1 courtesy of Mohamed Ashour / CrossFit Stars.

The post Train and Recover Smarter: A Periodization Primer appeared first on Breaking Muscle.

The concept of periodization for athletics is not a new concept, but its usage is of fundamental importance to anyone looking to make systematic improvements in their training and involve the often-forgotten variable of individualization.

Give two athletes of the same sport the same task. One athlete may be able to repeat this task again and again without issue. The other may be unable to complete this task even once.

The concept of periodization for athletics is not a new concept, but its usage is of fundamental importance to anyone looking to make systematic improvements in their training and involve the often-forgotten variable of individualization.

READ MORE: Understanding Periodization: A Guide for Coaches and Programmers

What Does Periodization Mean?

Periodization is defined as the “long-term cyclic structuring of training and practice to maximize performance to coincide with important competitions.”¹

Simply, it is the program design strategy that governs planned, systematic variations in training specificity, intensity, and volume.

The goal with periodization is to maximize your gains while also reducing your risk of injury and the staleness of the protocol over the long term.

It also addresses peak performance for competition or meets. Periodization, if appropriately arranged, can peak the athlete multiple times over a competitive season (Olympic weightlifting, powerlifting, track and field) or optimize an athlete’s performance over an entire competitive season like with soccer or basketball.

Think of periodization as a continuum. When we desire a specific training objective, such as an increase in vertical jumping ability or an increase in 1RM squat strength, it does not matter what phase the training is in.

Rather, we should focus our energy on the training stimulation being applied during this objective, and ensure it features extensive repetitions and volume without the chance of different stimulation that would disrupt the adaptation changes taking place.

“The goal with periodization is to maximize your gains while also reducing your risk of injury and the staleness of the protocol over the long term.”

An intelligently designed training year will encompass smaller blocks of time that each has its own goals or priorities.

This type of overall schedule will encompass all of the aspects of the athlete’s programming and can include strength training, conditioning, plyometrics, and sport-specific activities.

Why Do You Need Periodization?

There are numerous proven benefits to utilizing a form of periodization for your planned progression:

• Management of fatigue, reducing risk of over-training by managing factors such as load, intensity, and recovery
• The cyclic structure maximizes both general preparation and specific preparation for sport.
• Ability to optimize performance over a specific period of time
• Accounting for the individual, including time constraints, training age and status, and environmental factors.

As we move forward it will be helpful to understand the basic structuring of a periodization cycle. See the graph below for a simple breakdown:

Semantics causes problems in understanding periodization. You could have two individuals yelling at each other in a conversation about periodization where one is comparing “block periodization” to some form of “linear periodization” or someone else is comparing “conjugate method” with “concurrent periodization.”

The problem with both of these examples is that linear and block are the same foundational concept, as is the case with conjugate and concurrent.

The underlining goal for any serious competitor is understanding that you cannot say periodization is one way. It has many different profiles and progressions.

RELATED: Block Periodization Versus Linear Periodization: Which Is Better?

Traditional Model: Linear Periodization

The traditional model in the classical sense is simply making changes in both volume and intensity across multiple mesocycles. This model is most appropriate for beginner strength athletes or an athlete’s general preparation for sport.

This model provides a concurrent development of strength, respiratory, and technical abilities.

This model is characterized by longer training periods, less reliance on super compensation, and a focus of more general training over specific. The model lays out planned progression in the following way:

The phases involved are a General Preparatory Phase (GPP), Special Preparatory Phase (SPP), Competition Phase (C), and Transition Phase (T).

The benefits to using this form of periodization are an overall development of multiple qualities that are important to performance, as well as a way of being able to focus more on the general overall training effect of strength development.

That being said, traditional modeling has proven unable to provide a multi-peaking approach to in-season performance or sufficient training stimuli to help intermediate-to-high level athlete’s progress.

This is mainly due to its “mixed” or simultaneous development of motor abilities and skills.

RELATED: Linear vs. Nonlinear Periodization: Which Is Better?

Non-Traditional Model: Undulation

The non-traditional model of periodization, referred to as undulating, has gained traction in recent years.

The undulating design is based on the concept of Hans Seyle’s General Adaptation Syndrome. G.A.S. explains the way your body restores itself to balance, or homeostasis, when faced with stressors.

With undulating design, there is enough variation in stressors to continually make progress without allowing your body to fully adapt to all the stressors taking place. All this while still accounting for the recovery or restoration needed.

In undulating design, the stimulus is varied either within a weekly model (WUP) or in daily undulating periodization (DUP) where daily changes are made to either volume or intensity.

Studies like the Rhea study in 2002 have shown this modeling can be more favorable for increases in strength gains than in typical linear modeling in well-trained athletes.²

This study also purported that DUP may be more beneficial for elite athletes as it helps them avoid the dreaded plateau effect that can happen in well-trained lifters.

DUP modeling has also showed a favorable increase in strength gains and CNS adaptation without the added muscle mass, which could benefit athletes in groups where weight classes are of importance.

More research needs to be done in this area. One of my mentors, Dr. Zourdos, is helping to lead this charge with multiple studies currently in review.⁵

“With undulating design, there is enough variation in stressors to continually make progress without allowing your body to fully adapt to all the stressors taking place.”

Advanced Model: Conjugate Sequence/Block Periodization

Lastly, we need to begin an understanding of the conjugate sequence model, or the model more commonly known as block periodization. This advanced concept model was introduced by noted strength professor Yuri Verkoshansky.

Many individuals confuse this approach with the Westside Barbell system, or conjugate method, developed by Louie Simmons.

Verkoshansky has stated on numerous occasions that Louie took different concepts from different systems, and simply used the term conjugate to mean a marrying of training concepts, or a running of these concepts concurrently.

He did not use the original conjugate sequence system itself as designed by Verkoshanky. There is a reason why, but that is better suited for another article.

Block periodization, or the conjugate sequence, was originally developed by Verkoshansky for Olympic athletes, i.e. the most elite-athletes on the planet.

It consists of a two-block design, accumulation and restitution. In the accumulation blocks, the focus is directed toward supporting motor abilities while simultaneously developing certain strength qualities necessary for the athlete with a limited volume load.

The restitution block is essentially the opposite. They support strength qualities in the athlete, while addressing the development of specific, technical motor qualities with a limited volume load. These training loads must target different abilities (max-strength, explosive strength, max anaerobic power, etc.).

“Block periodization, or the conjugate sequence, was originally developed by Verkoshansky for Olympic athletes, i.e. the most elite-athletes on the planet.”

Basically, in the accumulation block we are looking for unilateral concentrated loading of strength qualities. This unilateral increase in concentration of loading will allow specific systems to achieve a higher level of stress.

This, as we know already, is needed for further adaptation to take place in elite level athletes. While you are focused on this, you are also training to keep the motor abilities necessary for your sport.

In the restitution blocks, we are flipping it around. We are looking to support the strength qualities developed in the athlete while improving the technical motor qualities that are needed for the athlete’s sport.

Putting It All Together

Start simply. If you have been training consistently for less than two years, you are a beginner in training age.

Start with the traditional model and assess the progress and variations within that model. In other words, exhaust your ability to continually make progressive changes to your strength without seeing a decrease in performance or plateau effect.

A basic example of a linear periodization setup is the popular five sets of five repetitions on core exercises such as squat, bench, deadlift, and power clean.

Add five pounds for upper body movements or ten pounds for lower body movements every training session in a progressive fashion until plateau. Reset and begin again.

If you are an intermediate trainee, then look at some form of the undulating periodization model and its progressions. You could undulate your training intensities or volume on a weekly or daily basis.

For instance, utilizing the squat exercise for hypertrophy within the first phase of your undulating block, you could do something like this for volume:

• Week 1: Squat, 3 Sets X 12 Reps
• Week 2: Squat, 4 Sets X 8 Reps
• Week 3: Squat, 5 Sets X 6 Reps
• Week 4: Squat, 3 Sets X 5 Reps

From there, you could move into a strength block using 6/4/2 for example. Then, if you had a competition on the horizon, you can move into a power block.

If no competition is near, you could go into another hypertrophy block. Rinse and repeat. Just make sure you are adjusting volume as intensity goes up. These two things have an inverse relationship.

RELATED: 3 Keys to Successfully Peaking for an Event

This article is not really geared towards the advanced-level athlete so there is no need at this point to lay something out using the conjugate sequence system.

Most trainees fall into the first two categories I have mentioned, and there is more than enough to concern yourself with in those categories.

Putting Periodization Into Practice

Periodization has stood the test of time for the simple fact that there are so many progressions and ways to structure your training so that you can be at your best when it matters most.

Failing to utilize any form of periodization for your training could lead to overtraining, failure to recover appropriately for progression, and the inability to see the progress you deserve from the time you put into training.

If you are interested in learning more about periodization theory and concepts you can check out the works by Tudor Bompa, Vladimir Issurin, Yuri Verkhoshansky, Gregory Haff, and A.S. Medvedyev.

References:

1. Verkhoshansky, Y., “Sport Strength Training Methodology”. Comment on Magnush. 2007

2. Rhea, MR, et al., “A Comparison of Linear and Daily Undulating Periodized Programs With Equated Volume And Intensity For Strength,” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 2002, 16(2), 250–255.

3. Painter, K. “ Practical Comparison between Traditional Periodization and Daily-Undulated Weight Training Among Collegiate Track and Field Athletes,” East Tennessee State University, 2009.

4. NSCA. “Athlete Profiling: Choosing A Periodization System To Maximize Individual Performance”. Conference Lectures. 2012

5. Zourdos, MC. “Optimizing Periodization and Program Design Muscle Performance Adapations,” ISSN Optimal Human Performance, 2014.

6. Baechle, Thomas R., Earle, Roger W. (2008). Essentials of Strength Training and Conditioning. Nebraska. Human Kinetics.

7. Issurin, V., “Block periodization versus traditional training theory: a review,” The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 2008, 48(1):65-75.

Photos courtesy of CrossFit Impulse.

The post A Simple Guide to Periodization for Strength Training appeared first on Breaking Muscle.

What the research says:

What’s the best periodization method for increasing strength? There are a lot of ways to answer that question. A recent a study in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research provided some food for thought.

What the research says:

• In a review of seventeen studies, both linear and undulating periodization programs increased strength.
• The researchers recommendeded alternating programs every two to six weeks for maximum effectiveness.

Types of Periodization

The researchers compared the classic linear periodization to the more modern undulating periodization. Let me explain a bit about what both of those terms mean.

Linear periodization: An entire training cycle, often a year or a large chunk of a year, with a sliding scale of intensity and volume. Most often the volume is high while the intensity is low. These eventually flip-flop as an athlete gets closer to a season or specific competition.

Undulating periodization: The intensity and volume change more frequently, often on a weekly basis and sometimes even on a daily basis. This would be the more contemporary style in which you may work both strength and speed in a single workout or in a given week.

Study Design

To make their research more effective, the researchers decided on a meta-analysis. This means they didn’t conduct the research directly on participants themselves, but rather put together research from a collection of relevant studies. Analysis like this can help to increase the statistical power of existing information by bringing it all together.

Specifically, the researchers were looking for studies on healthy people that examined the strength improvements of undulating periodization versus linear periodization. After performing a search for relevant research, seventeen studies fit the inclusion criteria.

RELATED: Block Periodization Versus Linear Periodization: Which Is Better?

Results

The final analysis suggested that although progression is important for some reasons, which program you choose (i.e. how you progress) is a less important factor. In other words, it didn’t matter which plan was chosen, the results were the same. In the words of the researchers:

“The meta-analyses determined there were no differences in the effectiveness of linear versus undulating periodization on upper or lower body strength.”

The researchers did note that most of the studies were fairly short, so a true difference between types of periodization might crop up, given enough time. But they also emphasized that novelty and variety are both important for strength. Changing your training up from time to time is an effective way to make strength gains.

Recommendations

Whichever plan you choose, it’s best to stick with the same exercises for only a short period of time. The researchers recommended blocks of two to six weeks, after which you consider new exercises and intensities. They also suggested that switching periodization plans might provide the proper stimulus for strength development.

In addition to variety, it’s important to pay attention to how trained the athletes you coach are. The more training an athlete has undertaken, the slower his or her strength will improve. But for beginners and elite lifters alike, the bottom line seems to be variety.

References:

1. Simon Harries, et. al., “Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Linear and Undulating Periodized Resistance Training Programs on Muscular Strength,” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 2014, DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000712

Photo courtesy of Shutterstock.

The post Periodization Increases Strength, Regardless of the Method Used appeared first on Breaking Muscle.

The first kind of periodization studied is called traditional periodization, and is sometimes called linear periodization. Traditional periodization is when the load of your lifts gradually increases over the course of a cycle, typically one that’s planned for a training year (usually referred to as a macrocycle). As the load increases, the volume decreases as a result.

The traditional method was compared to block periodization. The basic idea of block periodization is that each macrocycle is divided up into three distinct mesocycles. A mesocycle is a chunk of the training year that focuses on a specific goal. Each mesocycle is lined up in a specific order so that the results of the first mesocycle feed into the next in a logical pattern. Hypertrophy is developed first, followed by a mesocycle of strength, and finally a third mesocycle of power.

In the study, researchers compared traditional periodization to block periodization using a four-day-per-week workout over the course of fifteen weeks. They tested the participants both before and after the program in a selection of strength, power, and explosiveness exercises. The lifts used were the same between both programs (two pressing days, a pulling day, and a leg day that included a few upper body lifts), and the total workload was the same as well. This means that the volume multiplied by the load for each program was identical. Because of this study design, the only difference between the programs was a timing of the intensity and volume to fit into the framework of each design.

Overall, block periodization won the day. The athletes improved bench press performance significantly more in both strength and power when compared to the traditional periodization. There was, however, no difference between the two in leg strength or power. The researchers speculate that because the participants were well trained, the frequency of training was too low for the legs to see a difference.

It should be noted that the mesocycle of traditional periodization is usually a year long. However, this program lasted only fifteen weeks. While the evidence in favor of block periodization is strong here, it’s possible that the traditional periodization is getting short shrift. Block periodization, by design, is made up of shorter mesocycles that may get superior results in the short term, but perhaps not the long term.

That said, it certainly seems as though working with block periodization is the way to go, at least over a fifteen-week period. Without some major failing, it isn’t likely that a program that shows better results in the short term won’t also be better in the long term, but it is possible.

If you aren’t currently periodizing your workout plan, it may be a good time to start based on this information. Bear in mind there are other forms of periodization as well, like the conjugate method employed by many powerlifters, in which more than one trait is worked at a time. Whatever plan you choose, having a plan is better than having none.

References:

1. Sandro Bartolomei, et. al., “A Comparison of Traditional and Block Periodized Strength Training Programs in Trained Athletes,” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 28(4), 2014.

Photo courtesy of Shutterstock.

The post Block Periodization Versus Linear Periodization: Which Is Better? appeared first on Breaking Muscle.

There are many things I do daily in the course of my job. One of the things I’m best at, courtesy of having some of the best mentors in the field of exercise science anywhere in the world, is writing training plans. I’m not talking about workouts. Those are single shot deals that get you hot and sweaty and make you feel like you’ve accomplished something. I’m talking about the kind of thing that takes you from a skinny, weedy kid and turns you into a powerful juggernaut that can crush your opponent’s head like a grape.

This is one of the most misunderstood areas of training for most people. They seek to constantly change things up, to vary. Unfortunately for most people what they fail to realize is that this is actually slowing down their progress. Yes, I know bodybuilders have been telling you for years that you need to “confuse the muscles” and split the body into parts. But they also think ingesting truckloads of steroids and standing onstage in your underwear with a bunch of other guys in their underwear is okay, too.

So let’s try to map out some sensible ways to program to actually prosper from your training rather than just get sweaty. Because any idiot can you make sweaty. It takes intelligence to make you improve. And isn’t that the whole point of training? To improve? To build the body?

Continuity of the training process is vital to long-term success. And continuity implies daily, or near daily training. The first thing to realize is that the body can be trained wholly every day. As Dan Gable said “If it’s important, do it every day; if it isn’t, don’t do it at all.”

However, trying to train daily means that load/effort needs to be cycled up and down. You can vary the load, the proximity to failure, the volume, or the density. It is simply a myth that you can go all out every time you train. People who propagate it have never competed at elite level in strength or endurance events, nor trained for combat. Top athletes hit their max only once or twice per year – when it counts. And you should consider the same.

So enters periodization. So few people truly understand this word, yet everyone knows it can give a massive performance boost if used correctly. Periodization is all about planning, about cutting the year up into chunks to focus on individual qualities of performance. But what if your life defies planning? What if you’re a soldier or a single parent?

The answer is tactical periodization. Tactical periodization takes advantage of certain laws of adaptation that Russian coaches keep in mind when they plan their athletes’ training. The important element is that adaptation is cyclical in nature. Every complex system operates the same way – lower valleys tend to be followed by higher peaks and vice versa. Even the stock market operates this way, as discovered by Ralph Elliot over a century ago.

In order to be controlled, nature must be obeyed. A friend of mine, a guy who has been around the training world even longer than me, Mark Reifkind, has this to say:

• If you seek your limits, you’ll always find them.
• The next step off a peak is always down.
• One should step down and not fall off.

He also has makes fun of “tough guy” periodization, as in “heavy, heavier, even heavier, injury, light, light, heavy…” Take note from a man who has been counted amongst the best lifters and strength coaches in the world.

In Russian there is no word for “periodization” they refer to it as “waviness of load” and it is this concept that is most useful to a tactical athlete, whether they be combat or sport oriented. It’s a classic wave loading method that has been around for decades and works exceptionally well to pack slabs of muscle onto even the hardest gainer. In my work with grapplers I found that near random weight changes led to less muscle soreness and less fatigue the next day – essential for those who need to be on the mat. This simple method allows the trainee to experience the chaotic nature of combat without actually having to go to war every time they train.

A side benefit of this type of training is that it almost virtually guarantees occasional overtraining. While many may think this is a bad idea, the fact is that the body adapts to stress such as this and learns to recover and adapt faster. Not only that, but remember what I said about peaks and troughs? A dip in ability is swiftly followed by a new peak.

Consider the candidate during Special Forces selection. If he were to wait until full recovery before every PT session he would still be in bed while his teammates were out busting their humps. And not only that, but by the end of the course, despite sleep and food deprivation, these same candidates are not only fitter than previously, but they have often gained muscle, too.

This deliberate decision to train in a state of incomplete recovery at least some of the time is necessary for any combat training personnel. But how do you plan this all out and not wind up tearing yourself to pieces? Let’s put this in martial terms:

Let’s say you’re an avid MMA competitor and train five days per week in striking, grappling and MMA where you put it all together and spar. An easy sparing session on Wednesday wouldn’t destroy you for Thursdays BJJ class, provided you kept the tempo easy and went at roughly 70%.

However, if you did go all out Wednesday you would be sore and stiff for Thursday. Now, this option can be useful, as you could then elect to go all out again on Thursday. While you would be likely to perform sub-optimally on Thursday you could then have an easy day Friday and the body would likely recover. This back-to-back hard session concept can be used once a month or so to see how recovery improves, as well as performance under fatigue.

Let’s look at combinations of volume (sets x reps) and intensity (load lifted):

• Medium/Medium – Pavel’s “to a comfortable stop” or as Joe Lauzon’s trainer, Steve Baccari, says, “putting money in the bank for fight nights.” These workouts are the bread and butter of training.
• High/ High – can lead to great gains if followed by a taper, however be cautioned by Mark Reifkind’s sage advice and do not stay on High/High for long.
• Low/High – sets PRs in strength.
• High/Low – sets foundations for stable gains.

Intelligent application of these concepts will bring far more improvement from your training than random changing of exercises. In fact, the exercise itself is the very last thing the body adapts to.

“Tactical Periodization is short term training planning characterized by sharp and near random variation of intensity and volume and showing a bias towards high density. Its purpose is greater fitness, reduction of injuries and simplification of the training process.” – RKC Manual, Pavel Tsatsouline

It must be stressed that tactical periodization does not apply to beginners. They will make better gains on low volume/low intensity, nearly daily practice for a long time.

Photos courtesy of Shutterstock.

The post Tactical Periodization: What It Is and How to Do It appeared first on Breaking Muscle.

That said, to me, much of Bompa’s book and the concept of periodization is akin to Descartes’s Discourse on the Method. In the latter, Descartes wrote probably the most famous sentence in the history of philosophy, “Je pense, donc je suis.” I think, therefore I am. It was one of the most brilliant and influential works in philosophy ever. But ultimately, Descartes was wrong in much of what he wrote. Similarly, and not in any way to discredit Bompa, but much of Theory and Methodology of Training is brilliant but flawed.

Before continuing on, let me clarify what is meant by periodization for those who may not be completely familiar. Simply, periodization is dividing training goals into blocks of time, usually a month or longer in length. For example, many athletes have diverse needs like strength, muscular endurance, and cardiovascular endurance. To prepare for competition, coaches who use periodization might focus on developing mostly strength for a month or two and then switch to another goal afterward.

Periodization is rooted in the concept that you can’t effectively develop competing fitness goals simultaneously as well as you would if you separated them out over time. The criticisms of periodization, however, center on the loss of those attributes while not working them. In other words, when I stop my strength cycle to focus on cardio, I won’t be as strong once my cardio phase is done. Considering the success of the conjugate method, so named for working two athletic traits within the same week of training, alternative methods such as this have all but squeezed the life out periodization.

A recent study in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning would agree with eliminating periodization, at least where similar exercises are concerned. In the study, researchers looked at three methods of training athletes. One in which they periodized exercises into 3-week blocks for some athletes, 1-week blocks for others, and another group in which they trained each exercise daily. The tested the athletes before and after on a series of exercises and each had made similar improvements.

I have a few thoughts on this study. First, some of these results could be accounted for by what Bompa calls General Physical Preparation (GPP). The researchers took active soldiers who, to some degree, were already trained, but probably had some general acclimations as a result of the study. In the study also, the exercises trained were not as diverse as the goals I listed above. The study used various jumps and weighted squats – a little different from periods of “strength” and “cardio.” These exercises likely had some carryover for each other due to their similarities, reducing the impact of separating them out over time.

Ultimately for athletes who focus on basic lifts, such as powerlifters, periodization is probably all but unnecessary. For athletes in sports with larger skill sets such as ball sports, combat sports, or CrossFit, periodization could have some legs under it still depending on how effectively the sport itself maintains the traits you aren’t working on. However, as an example anecdote, I need to keep up my cardio work for my own training all year or it will suffer. Depending on your sport, your goals, and your genes, periodization may have a small place in your training but mostly needs to be left in the dust.

References:

1. Irineu Loturco, et. al., “Distinct Temporal Organizations of the Strength- and Power-Training Loads Produce Similar Performance Improvements,” Journal of Strength & Conditioning, 27:1 (2013)

Photo courtesy of Shutterstock.

The post Periodization Is a Thing of the Past appeared first on Breaking Muscle.