Adarq.org

Blog Section => LanceSTS's Performance Blog => Topic started by: LanceSTS on February 02, 2011, 03:16:35 am

Title: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on February 02, 2011, 03:16:35 am
  Glenn Pendlay, EXCELLENT progression into full snatch. 

http://www.californiastrength.com/olwete.html


  The first and second videos, of the high hang position into snatch, is very very beneficial to athletes, especially jumping athletes, without having to get into much technical difficulty at all.
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on February 02, 2011, 03:19:13 am
 Great squat by Donny Shankle, one of his athletes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_ki721pSso

Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: BMully on February 02, 2011, 05:08:36 am
This was the most beneficial thing I have ever seen. My oly lifts are drastically going to change

I cannot thank you enough lance!!!
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: Raptor on February 02, 2011, 08:58:12 am
  Glenn Pendlay, EXCELLENT progression into full snatch. 

http://www.californiastrength.com/olwete.html


  The first and second videos, of the high hang position into snatch, is very very beneficial to athletes, especially jumping athletes, without having to get into much technical difficulty at all.

Oh boy, these are GOLD! :highfive:
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: adarqui on February 02, 2011, 11:44:43 am
very nice thread, cool idea!
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: Nightfly on February 02, 2011, 11:55:07 am
Great find. Very helpful  :strong:
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: tychver on February 02, 2011, 04:03:31 pm
  Glenn Pendlay, EXCELLENT progression into full snatch. 

http://www.californiastrength.com/olwete.html


  The first and second videos, of the high hang position into snatch, is very very beneficial to athletes, especially jumping athletes, without having to get into much technical difficulty at all.

Yeah that's a great resource for learning proper technique.
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on February 02, 2011, 10:55:14 pm
 Glad you guys like the videos, Pendlay has a great way of breaking things down in the lifts and structuring progressions that are effective and simple.
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on February 23, 2011, 03:49:23 am
MYO REPS


Myo-Reps by Blade (Borge Fagerli)
Some of you have asked me "What are Myo-Reps" - and I typically respond that it's a fatigue management / activation technique used by my former coach Borge Fagerli (Blade on the interwebs). I usually compare it to DC Training's rest/pause technique.

Anyway - I've been reluctant to say too much because coaching and personal training is Borge's business and I didn't want to step on toes.

But recently a Norwegian gal has translated a couple of his articles and Blade has even commented and clarified. So since that was put out there, I thought I would post it here for those interested.

Myo-Reps - by Borge "Blade" Fagerli

Myo-reps is a method, not a program, so it can be used with most program setups instead of "traditional" strength training. The idea is to achieve maximum muscle fiber activation and then get in as many effective reps as possible while maintaining that activation by limiting the rest periods of the following sets.

There are mainly three ways to achieve full activation:

1. Lifting a light weight explosively. Also called speed-training. As long as you accelerate the weight to the maximum, you can get reasonably close to 100% activation.

2. Lift a heavy weight of approximately 5-6RM or heavier, and try to lift as explosive as possible. Although the movement is slow, you will achieve maximum fiber activation as a result of the load. Heavier weights are primarily lifted by the coordination of nerve impulses, and not by increased fiber activation.

3. Lift light to moderate weight to or close to failure. Muscle fiber activation follows the so-called size principle in which the smallest and weakest (and most enduring) are activated first, and the larger and stronger muscle fibers after that - when there is a need for them. When you reach failure, the activated muscle fibers aren't generating enough tension to lift the load. Fatigue can be neural - which among other things implies a reflective inhibition of nerve impulses to muscles in order to avoid overloading. There will also be varying degrees of metabolic fatigue, the accumulation of H+ ions and lack of ATP.

But you don't want to go too close to failure, because that will limit your training volume too much – you won't be able to do enough reps for an optimal training effect and keep your training frequency high enough. It's a fine line between enough fatigue to reach sufficient fiber activation and too much fatigue causing failure, and it requires knowing your own limits and training tolerance. That's part of why this is not a suitable method for beginners, and you should have a few years of training experience before using Myo-reps. (Another part is that you should have a correct technique on all exercises – critical since you will be training so close to failure.)

So, to achieve full fiber activation, you will first perform an activation set, (typically a longer set of e.g. 10 reps) where you should go close to failure (but not all the way). Stop when rep speed is noticeably slower than the previous repetition, or when you know you might be able to do 1 more rep, but not 2.

Next goal is to maintain the activation so that every following rep is "effective" (that is, expose all the activated muscle fibers to the load), and perform as many of these effective reps as possible, and thus lead to a maximum signal response and training effect. You achieve this by taking only short rests of about 10-20 seconds (5-10 deep breaths) between the following sets. Through the rapid recycling of ATP, you can continue with sets of 1-5 reps using the same load. And this is where you'll need experience and knowing your limits – just enough fatigue to maintain close to 100% fiber activation, but not so much that it will limit the number of total reps too much for necessary volume. It is a delicate balance.

So, from now on you will be more aware of rep speed, or how explosive you can lift the weight. This in itself is helping to provide full fiber activation, but will also act as an indicator of how close you are to failure. So, as soon as the rep speed is significantly reduced from one rep to the next, you are getting too close to failure, and it is time to stop the set.

You should use some method to auto-regulate your training volume, so that you will be training according to your current ability (which depends on stress, recovery, sleep, nutrition, etc).

For example:
Quote:
I've implemented a fatigue-stop method akin to Mike T in his RTS system (he uses a % table) where you use RPE and rep speed to determine how to continue the set. So for example:

10 reps (activation) + 10sec rest, 3 reps + 10 sec rest, 3 reps (third rep slow and grindy) this is Fatigue Stop 1 (FS1)

now... + 20sec rest, 2 reps (so - longer rest and less reps) + 20sec rest, 2 reps etc until 2nd rep slow and grindy - you've reached Fatigue Stop 2 (FS2) so STOP.

At heavier loads, you switch to lighter loads at FS1, as mentioned.

This will auto-regulate your volume, moreso limiting it when your recuperative abilities are limited as I do not recommend going beyond a pre-determined volume by more than 40-50%.
Heavier loads require fewer reps after the activation set because you are close to maximum fiber recruitment from the first rep. Lighter loads require more reps, because the actual tension per fiber unit is lower, and you must let the load "work" on the muscle longer to compensate. At the same time you must consider that it will be beneficial to get more recovery early in the training phase so that you'll be able to push heavy in the end, so you should aim to keep the number of reps after the activation set pretty much in the same area throughout the whole training phase.

General guidelines:

+15-20 when you have only one exercise for a muscle group, for priority muscle groups, when you use lighter weights, or just have a higher volume tolerance

+10-15 when you have two exercises for a muscle group, or have a moderate volume tolerance

+5-10 when you have several exercises for a muscle group, when you’re lifting very heavy weights, or if you for various reasons have lower volume tolerance.

All these reps after the activation set will be more effective than when taking a longer break (typically 1-3 minutes) between the sets and having to "start over" on the next set to achieve full fiber activation again. Also note that when you perform more than one exercise for a muscle group, you will reach full activation sooner due to accumulation of fatigue, so the activation set can be shorter. So, with the second or third exercise, rather shorten the activation set instead of reducing the load.

An example series of Myo-reps might look like this:
11 reps (close to failure) + 3 reps + 3 reps + 3 reps + 2 reps + 2 reps + 2 reps
= 11 +15 reps

As many of you may have noticed, Myo-reps has many similarities to the well-known and efficient DC-method which is also utilizing rest-pause training. The most critical difference is that you want to rather control fatigue than to use it as a goal in itself, as that will allow you to increase the total training volume and frequency.

Now, let's compare Myo-reps to the "traditional" training protocol.
Here's a hypothetical example of a standard 3 sets of 10 reps with 2 min rests between the sets. The "effective" reps near maximum fiber activation are marked with *:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8* 9* 10*
1 2 3 4 5 6 7* 8* 9* 10*
1 2 3 4 5 6* 7* 8* 9*

That's 29 total reps of which 11 was effective with full fiber activation.
And a series of Myo-reps (10-20 second rests):

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8* 9* 10*
1* 2* 3* 4*
1* 2* 3* 4*
1* 2* 3*
1* 2* 3*
(= 10+14 reps)

24 total reps of which 17 effective.

Do you see the difference? Because of the short rests every rep after the activation set was effective. And you used maybe half of the time. You will in other words train as effectively as possible instead of as much as possible.

The extent to which the density (total number of reps performed per hour) plays a role in the training effect, we don't know for sure. There are some indications of a higher density providing a better stimulus.


Let's look at what an example training phase could look like from the beginning to the end. You would increase your weights approximately 5% from week to week.

Week 1-2: 50-55%, 20-25 +15 (20-25 +5+5+5)
Week 3-4: 60-65%, 15-20 +16 (15-20 +4+4+4+4)
Week 5-6: 70%, 12-15 +15 (12-15 +3+3+3+3+3)
Week 7-9: 75%, 10-12 +15 (10-12 +3+3+3+2+2+2)
Week 10-12: 80%, 8-10 +14 (8-10 +2+2+2+2+2+2+2)
Week 13-14: 80-85%, 6-8 +4, reduce load by 10-20% and continue 5-10 +6 (6-8 +2+2 # 5-10 +3+3)

This is just an example, it will obviously depend on how fast you increase the weights, and how quickly your strength increases. And remember to deload at some point, maybe with regular sets and longer rest periods.

Recommended volume is 20-30 total reps for a muscle group, up to 40-50 total reps when overlapping or prioritizing, 2-3 times a week. The simple version has a more or less static approach of 25-30 total reps (activation + Myo-reps series) so e.g. 15 +10 or 10 +15, or with heavier loads 8 +5 and a lighter dropset 10 +5. In the beginning of the training phase it's a good idea to use a full body routine 3-4 times a week, until you get to a little heavier loads and about 12-15 rep range in the activation set, when you might want to switch to a 2-split routine with about 4 weekly workouts.

Remember that a muscle cannot count, as the background for this volume recommendation has a larger context: the weights should be heavy enough to provide the necessary stimulus for the muscle and provide the necessary time under load (total reps), while not overloading tendons, joints and nervous system.

Also keep in mind that the most important requisite for muscle growth will still be progression of load, and to achieve it you need to train exactly enough to provide a training effect, but not so much that you are not able to recover from workout to workout (or you won't be able to meet the primary goal: increasing your weights).

A final note: Back squat, front squat and deadlift (and very often barbell row) are exercises where correct technique is critical to avoid injuries. When you're training as close to failure as you are with Myo-reps, it's easy to get sloppy with technique with these exercises, so to be on the safe side it's better to do standard sets with longer rest periods here.


Oh, and Blade just wanted to add the following, thinking you nerds would be interested:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blade
Both muscle fiber recruitment as well as rate coding seem to be important for optimal stimulation. You may have full fiber recruitment by lifting heavy loads (80%+) or by lifting very explosively, but to achieve higher rate coding you most likely need to work closer to failure (on the first set).


An added benefit of the short rests and short sets in the Myo-rep series is not only that you maintain fiber recruitment/rate coding, but also that there seems to be more stimulation from higher sparks of Ca+ fluxes via calcineurin, and important mediator/modulator of hypertrophy. Wernbom has looked into this and there are a couple of interesting newer studies which elucidates this further. Also, there is a theoretical advantage of having the tissue resetting and sensing separate mechanical strain events vs. a long series of reps which is sensed differently. This probably ties in with allowing the tissue to be flooded with blood and oxygen (hyperemia) vs. a hypoxic condition as in continuous tension and endurance-specific signaling.
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: Raptor on February 23, 2011, 06:07:35 am
Interesting, indeed. It's similar to a MSEM, with the exception that MSEM is much lower in volume usually and it's geared towards heavy weights.
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on February 23, 2011, 04:23:38 pm
Interesting, indeed. It's similar to a MSEM, with the exception that MSEM is much lower in volume usually and it's geared towards heavy weights.

Well its kind of similar but different overall goals, its VERY similar to the rest pause/dc style training, but still different in its own ways.  One of the best things about myo reps, rest pause, etc. is the work you get in the range that is so beneficial to progress and hypertrophy, and how easy it is to make constant progress in your training. 

  I use myo reps alot, even with relatively green trainees, when they are on the verge of a plateau, to be able to break their previous set/rep pr.  Beginners make great linear progress with 3x5, 4x8, etc., but many times, when the 3x5/etc. plateaus, I will add a couple of myo-rep style reps at the end of their last set, which still gives them a pr and some very beneficial extra work.  The more seasoned the athlete the more they tend to benefit from this style of training in my experience, beginners dont need to use these techniques nearly as frequently but they can still have their place in their training if used at the right times. 

  The thing that matters most over time is progressive resistance, beating your previous best.  Using this type of training can enable a higher training frequency if the volume of exercises and total sets are kept in check, progress is much easier ( instead of having 3x5 to beat a certain load/# you now have one extended set via rest pause/ myo-reps, which can be manipulated either by more load or more reps, and a single set using these principles can be enough to stimulate great strength and hypertrophy increases.)

  I use rest pause sets and workouts very similar to what you are using now on your upper body days and some of my best progress has been made using these methods, even though I have been training for several years.  For example, say you have a previous best on military press of 185x7, 5, and 3, for a total of 15 rest paused reps. The next time you perform that exercise with 185, you end up with still 15-16 rest paused reps, you can easily take a short myo-rep style pause, and perform one or two more reps to break the previous pr.  Many times this will be enough to push you over that hump and the next time that particular exercise comes around in your training, you are able to break your previous 3 rest pause set record in 3 rest paused sets, convincingly.  There are about 1000 different ways to incorporate it into your training but those are just a few examples.
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: Raptor on February 23, 2011, 06:08:45 pm
So for a squat myo-workout, you would to stuff like 80%, 8-10 +14 (8-10 +2+2+2+2+2+2+2), and for all these +2s, you'd keep the bar on your back, not re-rack it and unrack it back, right? You only put the bar back at the "fatigue stop", right? So after you reach the 10th rep, you wait say 10-20 seconds with the bar still on your back, do 2 more reps, wait some more with the bar on the back, do another 2 reps etc?

All these +2+2+2 is in reality one grueling long set of reps or you actually, like you said for fatigue stop, rack the bar back when the speed starts to drop? (I think that's the case).

If it's so, then it should be illustrated like this:

80%, 8-10 +2+2
+2+2
+2
+2
+2 etc

For each bar rack there should be a separation as a different set.

IN OTHER WORDS (as I'm not very clear when I re-read what I wrote)

Quote
10 reps (activation) + 10sec rest, 3 reps + 10 sec rest, 3 reps (third rep slow and grindy) this is Fatigue Stop 1 (FS1)

now... + 20sec rest, 2 reps (so - longer rest and less reps) + 20sec rest, 2 reps etc until 2nd rep slow and grindy - you've reached Fatigue Stop 2 (FS2) so STOP.

Do you put the bar back on the squat rack when FS1 occurs?
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on February 23, 2011, 06:49:25 pm
 Yes, you re rack the bar during each pause.  The length and number of pauses will depend on your goals, and you dont have to use 10 reps either.  at times u may end up with 8 + 2+2+1, or 9+3+3+3+2, etc.  You can pause just long enough (10-15 secs) to be able to do another rep (this will be alot less intensive and allow a sooner second workout of the same body part), or you can pause longer like you would for a traditional rest pause set.  
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on March 02, 2011, 04:05:19 pm
 Post from CT on raw bench press form.


Quote
For as long as I can remember every time I started to get really strong on the bench press, my shoulder started hurting. I did everything right, but it still ended up hurting. Until I adopted a benching technique that is almost the polar opposite of what is taught in powerlifting circles.

And this is not a dig at the top powerlifters. But I learned that what is applied to equipped powerlifting technique, training and exercise selection-wise is not always adapted to raw lifting.

In powerlifting you are taught to depress and retract the scapula and spread the lats when benching. This technique takes advantage of the bench shirt, and the bench shirt itself stabilized the shoulder joint, decreasing the risk of injury.

But I found that this technique didn't help me avoid shoulder issues.

What did help is the technique I developed which consists of powerfully contracting (shrugging) the traps when setting up to bench and maintaining that contraction during the whole set. This action stabilized the shoulders A LOT. This helped me to keep my shoulders healthy, even though I'm at my strongest ever, and boosted my bench almost instantly. It did the same with my training partner Nick and all who I've taught it to.

The technique is simple:

- Set-up on the bench... the initial set-up is much like a regular powerlifting bench.
- Grab the bar and lift your butt in the air. There should be as little of "you" touching the bench as possible, help yourself by pulling on the bar if needed.
- From that position shrug your traps forcefully as if trying to touch your ears with your shoulders.
- When this is done, lower yourself back to the bench while keeping the traps contrated HARD. Keep the lower back arched.
- Unrack the bar, stay shrugged and lower the bar to your chest, still shrugged.
- Lift the bar explosively from your chest

This technique has the advantage of protecting your shoulders and making it easier to set up. With the traditional powerlifting bench, when you unrack the bar it is hard to keep the lats tensed and the body in the proper position, not so with my technique.

In my experience this method is optimal for the raw lifter, especially if he has shoulder issues.
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on March 10, 2011, 04:08:41 pm
 Another rest pause variation, specifically geared towards the big lifts, from Christian Thibadeau.









Scheme #1: 5-4-3-2-1 Rest/Pause

I just recently began using this specific method and the gains are quite impressive! I've always been a fan of rest/pause training, especially when it comes to building muscle mass in the advanced trainee (who needs more intense stimulation). It's one of the only ways to combine very heavy loading with moderately high volume without having to jack up the sets significantly.

With this specific rest/pause technique, you end up performing 15 reps with a load that you could normally perform for five or six reps. To do so you'll need to take several pauses during the set to allow for partial metabolic and neural recovery to occur so that you can get a few more reps. A set will look like this:

Perform five reps. The weight should be challenging but not lead to failure. If you reach failure on the first leg of the set, you won't have time for sufficient metabolic and neural recovery to occur before starting the second leg of the set. After you've completed the five reps, rest for 10 to 12 seconds.

After the short 10-12 seconds of rest, unrack the same weight again and complete four more repetitions, then take another 10-12 seconds of rest.

When the 10-12 second break is over, grab the weight and lift the load for three additional reps. As with the completion of the preceding legs, rest for 10-12 seconds once you've completed the required reps.

You're now into the next-to-last leg of the set. During this one you have to lift the weight for only two repetitions (but they'll feel like 30 reps!). Once you're done, take one last 10-12 second break before attempting the last leg of the set.

Okay, you're almost there! Once the 10-12 seconds have elapsed you only have to lift the weight one more time to complete the set. So that gives you a total of 15 reps with a load you could've lifted probably six, maybe seven times during a normal set.

I have no doubt in my mind that this is one of the most powerful ways to train if you want to build a lot of muscle mass, density, and strength. However, understand that this is a very taxing method, both on the CNS, muscular structures, and metabolic processes. You really can't do a lot of such sets on an exercise.

Ideally you shouldn't do more than three 5-4-3-2-1 sets for an exercise, and most people will be better served doing only two (and even just one set!). If you can do more than three it's because you're not putting a proper effort into your sets.


Q & A: 5-4-3-2-1 Method

Q: If one early leg of the set was taken to failure or was particularly grueling, what do I do?

A: The objective of the 5-4-3-2-1 method is to complete all 15 reps of the set. If you reach muscle failure, it should be on that final rep.

However, on some sets it might occur earlier, normally in the second (four reps) leg of the set. If that happens you should extend the length of the interval prior to the next leg to 15 or even 20 seconds to allow a little extra time for sufficient recovery to take place so that you can complete the upcoming legs.

Q: I'm a beginner and I really want to pile on muscle fast!Would this method be a good choice for me?

A: Hell no! This method should be limited to advanced trainees and some strong intermediate ones. I know how the beginner's mind functions: adding muscle is an emotional issue, especially in the newbie. You want to grow a ton of muscle now. So when you read about a method that's as effective as this one, it's normal to be seduced into trying it. The thing is that for a beginner this method is:

1. Not necessary: More advanced trainees require a more pronounced/intense training stimulus to force muscle growth to happen. Beginners are much more responsive because they're starting from a much lower point. The further away you are from your maximum potential, the easier progress should be. It's smarter to keep this method in the toolbox for when it's really needed.

2. Not optimal: The average beginner doesn't have the capacity to recruit the high-threshold motor units as effectively as advanced trainees. This is because their nervous system isn't "good" at activating these powerful fibers yet. This method targets these HTMUs extensively; if you're not good at recruiting them, then the method won't be super effective for you.

3. More hazardous: Beginners who might not have perfect control of their lifting technique yet, or young individuals who don't yet have a fully developed structure, shouldn't use maximal intensity methods since the risk for injury is higher.
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on April 01, 2011, 04:00:49 pm
Yuri Verkhoshansky on Squatting



Quote

to answer appropriately about the effectiveness of a training mean it is important to know the objective for which it is used, in which period of preparation and, the last but not the least, the athlete preparation level.

As a rule, the use of strength mean (here we are talking of exercise with maximal load executed slowly) with articulation  flexion angle equal to the flexion angle of competition exercise is more effective for the development of sport result.

Nevertheless the same exercise with maximal amplitude, can assure:

   1. the increase of level of strength expression in the movements with any flexion angles used in the exercise;
   2. a more reliable strengthening, in the time, of the whole muscular chain involved in the movement .

The half squat is without doubt more specific and more effective to develop the antigravitational strength, but this exercise needs an overload greater than the overload used in complete squat.

For this reason to obtain the effectively, in the time, from the half squat you should minimize its potential risk of accidents. First of all, the athlete must strengthen the muscular chain involved in the movement of the half squat: the muscles of the back and the ligaments of the articulation knee.

The complete squat allows to enforce the muscular chain and, at the same time, to develop the antigravitational strength.

On the base of the preceding considerations, we can say that the use of complete squat is more suitable for the not high level athlete or at the beginning of training cycle of the high level athletes.

There is a basic consideration to be done about the athlete.

Usually the lanky athletes, as can be the jumpers or basket ball players, don’t have a upper body muscular structure very developed, as we can find in the throwers. For this reason, in these cases, I usually recommend the use of complete squat.

For what is in my knowledge, Bondarchuk elaborate programs only for the throwers and this could be the reason of the different approach.

In mine training programs finalized to increase the height of jump (training for vertical jump) I used the combination of both means:

-        the complete squat, executed slowly with the maximal load, as mean finalized to develop the maximal strength;

-        the half squat jump with barbell (30% of maximal load) to develop the explosive strength.

It is probable that the use of half squat in the place of the complete squat, that I suggest, could assure a better growth of the height of jump, but should be very clear to the coach that doing this he could put in high grade of risk the athlete’s back and knees integrity.

 

Yuri Verkhoshansky
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on April 01, 2011, 11:06:32 pm
adarq on bb.com, turns a semi retarded template into a very good plyo set up.




Critique My Plyo Workout (1.3k)
1A. High Object Touch - 3 reps
1B. Broad jumps - 3 reps
^ wearing 20 lb weighted vest, 6-8 sets.

2A. Box Jumps - 3 x 5
2B. Depth Jumps - 3 x 5
^ wearing a weighted vest

3A. Jumping Tucks - 3 x 6
3B. Knee Jumps - 3 x 6
^ wearing a weighted vest

4. Agility Ladder workout and maybe some burpees.

Look good? i also do squats, cleans, push jerks, etc. so the lifting is taken care of, im
cutting in a week so im trying to get everything down. this is a cardio / plyo workout.
i will also be working my core at the end.






FIXED VERY NICELY...





4. Agility Ladder warmup

1A. High Object Touch - 3 reps
1B. Broad jumps - 2 reps
1-info: 3-4 sets

2B. Depth Jumps - 3 x 5
^ bodyweight, no weighted vest

3A. Jumping Tucks - 5 x Technical Failure
3B. Stiff leg ankle hops submax - 5 x Technical Failure



fixed ^^
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on April 21, 2011, 09:10:31 pm
doc hartman on pendlays forum, epic....


Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevemac View Post
What other key physiological factors are required for optimum performance?


Quote
Catecholamine concentrations, muscle fiber composition and pennation angle, profile of mood states, heart rate variability, motor unit recruitment, etc...but mostly just Heart and Balls
__________________
Doctor Hartman Blog / Facebook
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: swans05 on April 23, 2011, 08:48:55 am
i like it
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on July 05, 2011, 10:16:47 am
  
Greg Everett:



Quote
Some argue that beyond the beginner level, the snatch and clean & jerk can't drive increases in strength. This is utter nonsense that can only be genuinely believed by someone who has never actually snatched and clean & jerked heavy weights [/b]


/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////





Its very very annoying to hear this horseshit that olympic lifts and their variations only "express" strength, and I have yet to see it said by anyone who actually has the experience under the bar with these lifts themselves say such a dumb ass thing.  Deadlifts VERY OFTEN will go up SUBSTANTIALLY, WITHOUT DEADLIFTING, from doing power cleans from the floor.  Power cleans WONT go up linearly, from getting stronger in the deadlift.  This is one reason using power cleans from the floor is a great option for team sport athletes, it saves the cns from the burn out of heavy deadlifting, gives a MUCH better carryover to jumps/sprints/power, and yet it still will improve the actual deadlift itself in most cases assuming the athlete can adequately perform the lift.

People hear one thing on a internet forum or in an article, then repeat it like its the law sent from God, when in reality theyre little messenger boys, repeating what they read without any experience in the matter themselves.  


/rant
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: steven-miller on July 05, 2011, 11:29:32 am
Greg Everett:

Its very very annoying to hear this horseshit that olympic lifts and their variations only "express" strength, and I have yet to see it said by anyone who actually has the experience under the bar with these lifts themselves say such a dumb ass thing.  Deadlifts VERY OFTEN will go up SUBSTANTIALLY, WITHOUT DEADLIFTING, from doing power cleans from the floor.  Power cleans WONT go up linearly, from getting stronger in the deadlift.  This is one reason using power cleans from the floor is a great option for team sport athletes, it saves the cns from the burn out of heavy deadlifting, gives a MUCH better carryover to jumps/sprints/power, and yet it still will improve the actual deadlift itself in most cases assuming the athlete can adequately perform the lift.

I think no one would seriously doubt the benefits of the olympic lifts for every strength and power athlete. However, if the olympic lifts are actually sufficient and also efficient in making athletes stronger, why does every weightlifter on the planet feel the need to squat and/or front squat so often then? It certainly is not only because of variety.

The argument whether deadlift increases drive powerclean increases or vice versa is completely artificial IMO. It's neither nor. Serious training will lead to adaptations from the organism and those adaptations apply to similar tasks as well. So there are obviously variables in play that mediate the connection and this will probably work in both directions to an extend. Now, for an olympic lifter there is no need to increase his deadlift unless this increase has carryover to competition lifts. And this is the actual debate and point of disagreement from my perception of it.
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on July 05, 2011, 01:38:35 pm
Greg Everett:

Its very very annoying to hear this horseshit that olympic lifts and their variations only "express" strength, and I have yet to see it said by anyone who actually has the experience under the bar with these lifts themselves say such a dumb ass thing.  Deadlifts VERY OFTEN will go up SUBSTANTIALLY, WITHOUT DEADLIFTING, from doing power cleans from the floor.  Power cleans WONT go up linearly, from getting stronger in the deadlift.  This is one reason using power cleans from the floor is a great option for team sport athletes, it saves the cns from the burn out of heavy deadlifting, gives a MUCH better carryover to jumps/sprints/power, and yet it still will improve the actual deadlift itself in most cases assuming the athlete can adequately perform the lift.

I think no one would seriously doubt the benefits of the olympic lifts for every strength and power athlete. However, if the olympic lifts are actually sufficient and also efficient in making athletes stronger, why does every weightlifter on the planet feel the need to squat and/or front squat so often then? It certainly is not only because of variety.

 I never said that olympic lifts were the only lifts needed.  I said Im tired of hearing that they "demonstrate" strength, and dont make people stronger.  Olympic lifters do the SQUAT CLEAN and SQUAT SNATCH, so the squat is a very integral factor in whether or not they make the lift.  Im not talking about olympic lifters anyway, Im sick of seeing posts about how "olympic lifts only "demonstrate" strength".


Quote
The argument whether deadlift increases drive powerclean increases or vice versa is completely artificial IMO. It's neither nor. Serious training will lead to adaptations from the organism and those adaptations apply to similar tasks as well. So there are obviously variables in play that mediate the connection and this will probably work in both directions to an extend.

Im telling you that increases in powercleans, FROM THE FLOOR, increase the deadlift IN MOST athletes in my experience, im not asking anybody, because ive seen it happen for 15 years.  Without deadlifting, assuming they can powerclean correctly, their deadlifts go up, WITHOUT DEADLIFTING.  Would the deadlift go up MORE with more deadlifting? possibly and  probable, but deadlifting without cleaning does not work the same way in my experience for the clean.  


Quote
Now, for an olympic lifter there is no need to increase his deadlift unless this increase has carryover to competition lifts. And this is the actual debate and point of disagreement from my perception of it.

Im not talking about Mark Rippetoes insane argument with every olympic weightlifting coach on the planet, Im talking about the kids repeating this shit all over every s and c forum on the internet, with a tone of "why should we even do power cleans or power snatches when all they do is "display" strength.  You want to know what helps olympic weightlifters? ask glenn pendlay, listen to every word he says and disregard anything anyone else says about it.



cleans and snatches and all their variations make people strong, on the field, on the court, and stronger in general just like other lifts but at a more sport specific speed.  Its progressive overload against increasing resistance.  You dont have to do them, just like you dont have to do any lift, but saying they dont make people strong is insane.

Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: steven-miller on July 05, 2011, 02:33:37 pm
I agree that olympic lifts are a great way to train, you know that I do.

In how many s&c forums do you frequently read in that you are so pissed off about stupid kids though?  ;D
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on July 05, 2011, 03:31:06 pm
 Go to bodybuilding.com, in the sports training section, and you will see what I am talking about.  Thats a massive forum, but that general attitude is spreading like a slimy plague, and my issue with it is that it can cause some of the young impressionable athletes who couldve benefitted massively from the lifts, not do them.  They dont see the 135lb squatting retard behind the posts parroting what hes read from his "guru", they see "rep points" and take the advice.


tnation is pretty bad about it, though christian thibadeau and pendlay have helped educate some of the parrots.

startingstrength.com is pretty clueless about what exactly the lifts do for the most part, but at least they are doing them, though most of the time I see that said "put the powercleans at the end, theyre fun but they only demonstrate your strength".

there are tons of other places I see that more and more.



  I wasnt posting that as a shot at rippetoe or anything to do with olympic weightlifters, I just hate seeing that repeated over and over by people who couldnt snatch the bar, and have no right to even talk about the lifts in the first place.  Its fine if they are dumb and believe someones word without trying things for themselves, but when it affects others that couldve benefited, it becomes a problem.

  People love to bring up the argument of the olympic lifters having higher verts, faster starts, etc., and then bet your ass the next reply will be some deusch parroting "those guys have elite genetics, bla bla bla".  In that same argument, that same poster will use the example of how high jumpers and sprinters train ironically, which is comical, because obviously the high jumpers and sprinters have absolutely no genetic gifts whatsoever, and gained all their athleticism through their training methods.

 If someone has tried doing something that has proven to be very effective, forms an opinion on it, and finds a better way, Im all for it. AlexV had a good reason imo for using things like kettlebell swings, etc., because of the large group setting he had and the time required to teach the lifts, but he also never made the silly claim that they "only demonstrate strength" .  But thats not whats happening now, its a bunch of people who shouldnt open their mouth talking down things they dont know anything about.

Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: steven-miller on July 05, 2011, 04:45:00 pm
I was able to stand being there for 15 minutes, I have seen, to an extend, what you are talking about. It certainly has something to do with the size of a forum as well. It takes a lot longer to educate a big number of people and when new guys show up every day you will see the same shit being repeated all over again. I don't feel a need to be there, but I can understand your anger about that. The SS forum is big, too, so you see it there as well.
I think the olympic lifts are perceived as something of great technical difficulty, so many shy away from them because of that as well. They might not be easy to execute perfectly, but its really not very difficult to learn them to the degree that you can use them as an effective training tool for quite a while. But it seems that most are not really willing to put in enough time to read stuff, educate themselves and most importantly try things out in the weight room and improve on execution. If that was the case AlexV would not have the problem of having to teach the lifts to the players from the get go, but make slight modifications only.
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on July 05, 2011, 10:40:28 pm
I was able to stand being there for 15 minutes, I have seen, to an extend, what you are talking about. It certainly has something to do with the size of a forum as well. It takes a lot longer to educate a big number of people and when new guys show up every day you will see the same shit being repeated all over again. I don't feel a need to be there, but I can understand your anger about that. The SS forum is big, too, so you see it there as well.

Haha, 15 minutes of torture, now you see the reason for my ranting.


Quote
I think the olympic lifts are perceived as something of great technical difficulty, so many shy away from them because of that as well. They might not be easy to execute perfectly, but its really not very difficult to learn them to the degree that you can use them as an effective training tool for quite a while. But it seems that most are not really willing to put in enough time to read stuff, educate themselves and most importantly try things out in the weight room and improve on execution. If that was the case AlexV would not have the problem of having to teach the lifts to the players from the get go, but make slight modifications only.

Now we get to the root of the problem.  Ive talked about this exact scenario before, but people expect their cleans and snatches to look like pyros dimas, and they obviously dont, so they say, "I just cant get the clean (or snatch), my (insert wrists, arms, feet, ankles, vagina) hurts/is too long/ is not flexible enough to do them".  The funny thing is their squat often looks like something similar to swamp thing, but they have no problem doing them since "its good enough".   

You dont have to be PERFECT at the lifts to get benefits from them, and its not hard at all to learn to jump a weight up to the shoulders or overhead.  I would say that if you cant learn to do this, you are definitely not going to be a good athlete either.  But I think whats discouraging to them is the same people banding together against the lifts will be the first to critique the form, and let them know how much time they are wasting trying to learn them, and how impossible it is/how many years it takes etc. to master them, when they are again talking about something they have no clue about.
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: Raptor on July 06, 2011, 04:44:25 am
But I think whats discouraging to them is the same people banding together against the lifts will be the first to critique the form, and let them know how much time they are wasting trying to learn them, and how impossible it is/how many years it takes etc. to master them, when they are again talking about something they have no clue about.

Haha so true. X2
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on May 22, 2012, 02:15:12 am

  Can you build strength with the Olympic lifts?
 5/11/2011  by  Glenn Pendlay

In a recent conversation with Greg Everett we discussed those who do not believe that the Olympic lifts can build strength.  I have often shaken my head at this, because all the evidence I have seen points to the opposite conclusion.  Greg made an interesting observation that upon further thought seems to go a long way towards discovering the origins of this attitude.  He brought up the example of a man who both squats and deadlifts 280kg, but can only snatch 80kg and clean 110kg. This is an extreme example, but it would seem that such people do exist, and they lack the ability to perform the lifts at a meaningful percentage of their maximum strength.  The quality that is lacking might simply be skill at the lifts.  Maybe he is a complete beginner and has not properly learned the lifts.  Maybe he lacks the flexibility to arrange his body in a position where his strength can be properly utilized on the lifts.  Maybe he simply lacks the athletic ability to apply significant force at a speed of movement required to do the lifts effectively.  In most people, skill and proper movement patterns can be gained with practice, flexibility can be built, and even a person who lacks natural athletic ability can improve his lot to some extent with proper training.

But if such a person formulates his opinion about the worth of the competitive lifts based on the way the lifts “feel” and affect them personally, and never engage in the proper training to correct their deficiencies, they may well walk away from an attempt at learning the snatch or clean and jerk certain that snatching a maximal weight has no strength training qualities whatsoever.   If such a person never witnesses cleans being done by a lifter skilled enough to do them with 80% (or more) of their maximal squat or deadlift, and does not have the imagination to conceive such a thing, then this opinion might be eventually ingrained and accepted as a universal truth.  It is hard to blame them, their experience has driven their beliefs.

Robert Roman believed that the snatch and clean and jerk should be about 60 and 80% of the back squat respectively.  I have seen lifts that best even these percentages.  Having coached lifters who have accomplished things like a 182kg clean and jerk without having ever been able to back squat 200kg, a 182 clean and jerk with a deadlift max of 195kg, or a 200kg clean with a best back squat (and deadlift) of 227kg, I see the snatch and clean and jerk as major drivers of strength gain.  I will admit that cleans with around 90% of a maximal deadlift are rare and the result of extreme technical efficiency, athletic ability, and mental toughness.   But, usually discussions about the training of weightlifters center around how to develop high level lifters, and these are the sorts of things that often happen with high level lifters at some point in their career. This is especially true if they begin their athletic career as weightlifters instead of switching from another sport.  The three different lifters who supplied these examples all competed on the international level and all were more efficient than is the norm, the norm being in my opinion correctly described by Robert Roman.

Consider the fact that the argument used to disparage the Olympic lifts as drivers of strength gain is usually that they use too light a weight, move too fast, and are over with too quickly to adequately provide the necessary stress.  But a lifter who clean and jerks in excess of 80% of their squat or deadlift has, when performing a heavy clean and jerk, racked a bar to the shoulders that is higher percentage of their deadlift than most competitive powerlifters  use to train the deadlift, front squatted a weight that is a maximal or near maximal front squat, pushed overhead and supported a weight that is a higher percentage of their back squat than many popular strength programs use to train the back squat, and completed a lift that lasted longer and had the body under the stress of the weight longer than any back squat that most lifters are ever likely to do.

One of the main sources of the ”Olympic lifts don’t build strength” argument has also stated that one should be able to clean between 50% and 60% of your maximum deadlift, and that anything more than this is the result of extreme athletic ability.  This is difficult to fathom, as I cannot ever recall anyone with percentages so low!  But it illustrates Greg’s point very well.  Such a person, for whatever reason, had obviously not been exposed to lifters with efficient technique or even average talent, or both.  And having not been exposed has formed an incorrect opinion based on a lack of information.

Finally, I will agree with at least part of the argument against using the competitive lifts for building strength.  I will agree that if you train your cleans with only 50-60 percent of your back squat you are unlikely to build strength using the clean.  Luckily this does not, or at least should not, apply to Olympic weightlifters.
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on May 26, 2012, 06:48:58 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bngChUI6fOk


 speaks on the horseshit myth of box squats being dangerous, that poliquin made a video on recently

 speaks on the non sense of the glutes playing a higher role in sprinting than the hamstrings

 several references to some of the exaggerated claims made from poliquin in his articles (excessive hypertrophy in DAYS, fat loss etc.)

good stuff.


  
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on June 06, 2012, 02:27:16 am
Quick question:  I know you said you are asian in another thread, so am I.  Do you feel like you are at a disadvantage athletically speaking in comparison to an african american with the exact same physique as you?

Hm... Bit of an odd question, I'm not sure where you're coming from with this. Asians versus blacks? Blacks probably are more genetically disposed towards having more fast-twitch muscle fibers and maybe higher testosterone, but this really shouldn't affect much since if you train hard enough, you can get to an elite level.

If you're talking about mindset, though, I don't really think about disadvantages. I mean, that's really only negative and contributes nothing. Can you change what you were born with? No, but you can be the best you can be. Every day I thank God for what He blessed me with: a healthy body and mind.

If you see somebody that happens to be quicker, stronger, and can jump higher... then that's on you, right? Gotta train harder, lol.

Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on June 08, 2012, 04:28:12 pm
http://libres.uncg.edu/ir/asu/f/Triplett_Travis_1999_A_Comparison_of_Strength.pdf


Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on June 10, 2012, 11:27:44 pm
 Good squatting series.

http://www.lift-run-bang.com/2010/04/developing-your-raw-squat-pt-i.html

http://www.lift-run-bang.com/2010/04/developing-your-raw-squat-pt-2.html

http://www.lift-run-bang.com/2010/04/developing-your-raw-squat-pt-3.html
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on June 30, 2012, 12:55:56 am
Quote
Bosch and Klomp (2005) wrote that hams, calfs are more pennate muscles bi-articular more suited for reactive work and energy trnasfers (isometrical), while glutes and quads are more parallel and uniarticular suited for concentric explosive actions.
The more the 'elastic' jump, the more the contribution from hams and calfs.... the deeper the jump and slower, the greater the contribution of quads and glutes.


Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on September 04, 2012, 11:35:50 pm

  http://walrusmagazine.com/articles/2012.07-sports-the-race-against-time/
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on September 10, 2012, 04:15:56 am
Chris Thibaudeau wrote:
>
> The autoregulation concept which is closely linked the cybernetic
> periodization and which refers to the actual self-adjustment of the
> training load according to the daily capacity of the athlete. I first
> learned this concept from one of Dr. Siff's article in the Soviet
> Sports Review (1993) on APRE Training and from the work of Dr.
> Ladislav Pataki.
>
> The article by Dr. Siff and the book by Dr. Pataki detailed 2
> different method of adjusting your training load to your capacity for
> that day.
>
> Dr. Siff's method consisted of training using a fixed number of reps
> during a specific workout and increasing intensity until one hit the
> maximum load he could use for the prescribed number of reps.
>
> For example, if the prescribed number of reps was 6, one could have
> the following progression during his training session:
>
> Set no.0: Warm-up
> Set no.1: 6 reps with 50% of his 6RM
> Set no.2: 6 reps with 75% of his 6RM
> Set no.3: 6 reps with 100% of his 6RM*
>
> * If the third set is successful:
>
> Set no.4: 6 reps with an additional 5lbs**
>
> **If the fourth set is successful:
>
> Set no.5: 6 reps with an additional 5lbs
>
> And this goes on until one is unable to complete the prescribed 6
> reps ... the last load achieved then become the new 6RM which is used
> as the basis for the planification of the load to use for the next
> session.
>
> Dr. Pataki's method is slightly different. The load is constant (and
> must be challenging for the prescribed number of reps) throughout the
> training session and so is the number of reps per set and the rest
> between sets. The athlete do as much sets as he can until he cannot
> complete the number of reps prescribed.
>
> For example, if the prescribed number of reps was 6:
>
> Set no.0: warm-up
> Set no.1: 6 reps with 95% of 6RM (completed)
> Set no.2: 6 reps with 95% of 6RM (completed)
> Set no.3: 6 reps with 95% of 6RM (completed)
> Set no.4: 6 reps with 95% of 6RM (completed)
> Set no.5: 6 reps with 95% of 6RM (only 5 reps completed)
>
> If the athlete is able to sustain a lot of work the load must be
> increased in the next session or the rest between sets is decreased.
>
> To these 2 methods one could add the classic bulgarian wave loading
> method where you gradually work up to your maximum capacity for a
> given workout, reduce the load and do more sets, then go back up.
>
> Example:
>
> Set no.0: warm-up
> Set no.1: 3 reps with 60% of 1RM
> Set no.2: 3 reps with 70% of 1RM
> Set no.3: 3 reps with 80% of 1RM
> Set no.4: 2 reps with 90% of 1RM
> Set no.5: 1 rep with 95% of 1RM*
>
> * If successful:
>
> Set no.6: 1 rep with an additional 5-10kg*
>
> * If successful:
>
> Set no.7: 1 rep with an additional 5-10kg*
> Set no.8: 2 reps with 90% of 1RM
> Set no.9: 2 reps with 95% of 1RM
> Set no.10: 1 rep with daily max
>
> ***Of course this is not a real Bulgarian loading pattern, just an
> example.
>
> Still, one could add the 3-2-1 wave loading method of Canadian
> weightlifting coach Pierre Roy where one does sets in wave pattern
> ... each wave comprising 3 sets of increasing intensity. When one is
> able to complete a wave, he starts a new one with the same reps
> scheme but with increased loading.
>
> Example:
>
> Set no.0: warm-up
> Set no.1: 3 reps with 88% of 1RM
> Set no.2: 2 reps with 92% of 1RM
> Set no.3: 1 rep with 98% of 1RM
>
> If all 3 sets are successful:
>
> Set no.4: 3 reps with 90% of 1RM
> Set no.5: 2 reps with 94% of 1RM
> Set no.6: 1 rep with 100% of 1RM
>
> If all 3 sets are successful:
>
> Set no.7: 3 reps with 92% of 1RM
> Set no.8: 2 reps with 96% of 1RM
> Set no.9: 1 rep with 102% of 1RM
>
> If all 3 sets are successful:
>
> Set no.10: 3 reps with 94% of 1RM
> Set no.11: 2 reps with 98% of 1RM
> Set no.12: 1 rep with 104% of 1RM
>
> Regardless of what scheme you use, the thing I like with this type of
> training is that it"s highly adjustable to the ever-changing
> capacities of the athlete. Some days the athlete has not fully
> restored his glycogen or protein structures so he will not be able to
> do as much work ... having him stick to a set loading parameters in
> that case can be overkill and further delay the supercompensation
> process and vice-versa.
>
> IMHO, autoregulating training methods are much more adequate to
> develop high performance athletes than set-in-stone loading schemes
> (even one carefully planned taking all physiological aspects in
> consideration).
>
> References:
>
> Pataki, L., "Autoregulation of Training Load" in Zbornik VR UV CSZTV,
> Bratislava, 1983, pp 233-236.
>
> Pataki, L., Holden, L., "Winning Secrets" (sorry, I don't have the
> full ref. I borrowed the book from a friend).
>
> Siff MC & Verkhoshansky YV "Supertraining" 1999 Ch 6
>
Title: Re: Random Strength and Conditioning Posts/Articles/Info That I Like
Post by: LanceSTS on September 10, 2012, 04:24:38 am
http://www.myosynthesis.com/workouts/apre-strength-size


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20543732