Earlier I started a conversation about eccentric- only training; I’m not program searching, I’m speaking with individuals who make a statement on how they train which causes me to do research. Then I wonder how common their approach is. So I’m curious if anyone has based their training on the principle of Occam’s Razor?
In this case, what sort of assumptions are you wanting to minimize?
I like to think the majority of my training is made without assumptions, but there are still some we take for granted. Like, if I build a 3 day a week training plan, I’m assuming I’ll live through the week to get to day 3, and that the sun won’t explode. So perhaps a crossfit style WOD would actually make more sense, as every day I just show up and do a workout.
1 Like
Right. My definition was a little broader in that when there are multiple explanations available for a phenomenon, the simplest one, requiring the fewest assumptions, is usually the best.
He said he used this principle to derive his one set to failure (without set extenders) training method. It’s the only way he’s trained in 30+ years. Once he hits 20 repetitions of any particular movement, he increases weight by 2.5 pounds, regardless of the lift. And he’s a monster.
This is where I am getting hung up. What assumptions are normally being made that we are removing?
1 Like
20 reps is very sub-optimal
Personally adding some eccentric only sets can have some benefit but no way would I structure my whole training around it.
I think you’re getting in the weeds here. Just do what works for you. If you like doing these types of movements then incorporate them and see how you do.
Everyone reacts differently to different stimulus. They key is to be open minded an experiment.
I do emphasize eccentrics on every set, whether it’s HIT, powerbuilding or accessory work. This has proven rewarding for me, relying upon low to medium volume training.
Ever try it with weightlifting?
Hahaha! I wouldn’t as I couldn’t! That said, explosive training do have it’s merits. But, isn’t weightlifting very specific in terms of technique and outcome? Meaning, you train to be better at the specific/desired movement, in order to lift more weight? Negatives seem to be the least of weightlifters worries…
Personally, emphasized negatives gives me better control over the weights - Meaning you truly own the weight when performing heavier lifts 90-95% 1RM (not weightlifting). 