I guess when I think of how a lot of guys I see train for size I think of slow grinding reps to failure in the 8-12 rep range. I’m not saying this is the best way to train, just that that’s how it gets done by many people. I may be wrong but I understood that once you hit that point most of your fast twitch fibers have essentially dropped out of the movement leaving the slow twitch fibers to complete the rep/set.
It seems logical to me that this would train your body to be slower both on a neural level and in terms of the type of muscle fiber it produces. I apologize for my ignorance if I’m way off base here and am open to correction. Again I’m not saying that this is the best way to train size, only a common one.
With regard to “starting speed” I would submit that power to mass ratio is more important than mass alone. Obviously the heavier you get the harder it becomes to maintain a favorable power to mass ratio but just a thought. Obviously a LOT of factors are at play and this is all oversimplification but, there it is. Cheers.
@batman: I don’t agree. I’m not an advanced, or even an intermediate trainer for that matter, but this hasn’t been my experience. I’ve found that I’ve gotten ‘faster’ or more powerful if you will when working in both the 3-5 and 6-12 rep range. I feel it comes down to two things:
a) building new muscle.
b) conditioning that muscle to contract faster for a given movement pattern (a double leg, sprint, Oly lift, hook etc.)
As with the slow grinding rep style you reference, I think it’s attained that reputation for ‘slowing down’ athletes because, let’s face it, that style of lifting fatigues you for some time after, and you won’t be running on all cylinders in your skill work.
@rundymc: I see your point. Honestly I can’t speak from personal experience as it relates to volume training or any other hypertrophy oriented training program and how it affects speed. Like I said in my first post I tend to be a heavier guy, so if I was trying to do anything about my size it was aimed at getting smaller and (I hoped) faster. I had read about different training protocols and the lift slow - move slow/lift fast - move fast concept I mentioned above was just something I came across along the way and never really questioned. Appealed to my overly simplistic brain I guess. I still think there might be something to the proportion of fast twitch muscle fibers you have, which I believe is influenced by genetics (a lot) and training (a little). The nervous system plays a big role as well, I expect. I can definitely buy into the idea that being dragged out during your skill work would have a negative impact.
Myself, I’ve given up on trying to cut way down to build speed. I just keep my strength, explosiveness and conditioning work up keep my diet clean and let my weight do what it does. Of course I’m not super-competitive about it anymore either.
I guess when I think of how a lot of guys I see train for size I think of slow grinding reps to failure in the 8-12 rep range. I’m not saying this is the best way to train, just that that’s how it gets done by many people. I may be wrong but I understood that once you hit that point most of your fast twitch fibers have essentially dropped out of the movement leaving the slow twitch fibers to complete the rep/set.
[/quote]
Performing grinding reps to failure puts a lot of stress on the nervous/recovery system and definitely wouldn’t be the best method of training if someone was looking to improve (or even maintain) speed for athletic events.
Your understanding or muscle contraction is a little off though. Your number of fast twitch fibers does not decrease as fatigue increases, if anything it increases. However, all the fibers capable of producing enough force to lift the weight fatigue (mostly due to metabolic processes) and you hit “failure”. If you were to then lighten the weight though (ala “drop sets”) you could continue as the smaller intermediate/slow twitch fibers would still be able to produce enough force to lift this new lighter weight. You could potentially continue this process until you literally hit “failure” to lift just the weight of your arms or body (not that this would be a good idea, especially for a combat athlete from a cost/benefit standpoint).
If that still is unclear I’ll try to explain it better.
Something like “super slow” or “constant tension” style training would definitely slow someone down, but the simple act of training to failure really doesn’t have much to do with speed (assuming that enough recovery time was added between the lifting and skill training). What causes someone to either increase or decrease in speed is moreso determined by how they teach their body to move. Lift explosively but still go to failure and (again with enough recovery time) you will increase in speed. Lift slowly but stay away from failure, and you’ll slow yourself down.
[quote]
With regard to “starting speed” I would submit that power to mass ratio is more important than mass alone. Obviously the heavier you get the harder it becomes to maintain a favorable power to mass ratio but just a thought. Obviously a LOT of factors are at play and this is all oversimplification but, there it is. Cheers.[/quote]
Yes, true. But like you said, sustaining/maintaining that “starting speed” seems to be much more difficult for heavier athletes than lighter ones, probably due again to it requiring more energy.
Sentoguy: Thanks for the info, I think I understand what you’re getting at and it seems to make sense. I guess I need to crack the books again and revisit some of my ideas about physiology. Thanks again.