Questions About Training

Training
841

hey coach

For the last 6 weeks I’ve been following Poliquins -Winning the Arms Race-. This is my 3rd week of Phase 2. It is the Patient Lifters Phase…

: The Patient Lifter’s 6x4 Method
This method requires that you start off with a weight that you can handle comfortably for 6 sets of 2 reps. Depending on how neurologically efficient you are, the weight will be anywhere from 80 to 87% of your 1-rep maximum. The goal is to be able to eventually use the same weight to do 6 sets of 4 reps. Why is it called the Patient Lifter’s method? Because you don’t get to increase the load until you can do all 6 sets for 4 reps, using a weight that you could initially only do for 6 sets of 2 reps. You’ll either get stronger or bore yourself to death by using the same weight over and over.

Don’t worry, though. You’ll get stronger quickly and graduate to a higher weight. The system works by the law of repeated efforts. You’ll force the nervous system to accept the new load as being ‘normal’. Be sure to take at least 4-5 minutes in-between sets, though, to allow full recovery of the nervous system. However, you can still pair exercises for the agonist and antagonists together during the 4-5 minute resting period to maximize the return on your training time. In other words, if you do a set of 2 (or 4) reps for biceps, you can do a set of 2 (or 4) reps for triceps while you’re waiting for the 4-5 minutes to tick away.

I have made continous gains in my workload up until now. I brought my original 2rm to almost 3 in 2 workouts but this week I could only lift that weight once and that was even a struggle. My diet and schedule have been consistent. I’ve tried doing the workout twice this week and I’m still not able to complete anymore than 1 rep. I’ve been making gains every workout since I started the program till now it seems like im going backwards. I was wondering why this might be? thanks for your help

842

Thib,

Internet exercise videos/ideas are obviously hit or miss, so I wanted to get your take on a few exercises I’ve seen floating around in the online world. Any input you might be willing to offer as to their relative utility and value or general lack of value as a tool would be very helpful.

  1. Tire “Battles” where two athletes push a tire back and forth between one another…purportedly for developing upper body power, with one coach suggesting them as a better alternative than using medicine ball work for the upper body.

  2. Band-resisted tire flips…these seemed particularly peculiar to me, as the band would seem to detract from the desired explosiveness needed to flip the tire properly, but perhaps I am just clueless.

  3. Band-resisted broad jumps…these seemed counter-intuitive for the same reason as with #2.

  4. Overhead Medicine Ball Slams…these have been around for a while, with some coaches seeming highly enamored of them. However, on Coach Poliquin’s site, he lists these as a rather silly exercise and shows a “blooper” clip of a guy getting smacked in the face on a rebound. So the response to these seems to be quite mixed.

843

[quote]ThorsHammer wrote:
Thib,

Internet exercise videos/ideas are obviously hit or miss, so I wanted to get your take on a few exercises I’ve seen floating around in the online world. Any input you might be willing to offer as to their relative utility and value or general lack of value as a tool would be very helpful.

  1. Tire “Battles” where two athletes push a tire back and forth between one another…purportedly for developing upper body power, with one coach suggesting them as a better alternative than using medicine ball work for the upper body.

  2. Band-resisted tire flips…these seemed particularly peculiar to me, as the band would seem to detract from the desired explosiveness needed to flip the tire properly, but perhaps I am just clueless.

  3. Band-resisted broad jumps…these seemed counter-intuitive for the same reason as with #2.

  4. Overhead Medicine Ball Slams…these have been around for a while, with some coaches seeming highly enamored of them. However, on Coach Poliquin’s site, he lists these as a rather silly exercise and shows a “blooper” clip of a guy getting smacked in the face on a rebound. So the response to these seems to be quite mixed.[/quote]

To me, exercises 1, 2 and 3 are dumb or at least somewhat potentially dangerous. They all seem to come from the “combine to look cutting edge” phenomenon. What am I talking about? Here ya go…

As a coach/trainer, to make money you need to separate yourself from the field. This means either getting great results with a lot of clients OR being seen as an innovator.

Now, to look like in innovator you need to come up with new techniques and methods. Smart coaches will indeed be able to develop novel approaches; but those lacking smarts, experience or both will need to resort to an easier method… take two popular methods and combine them into one.

In the case of the first exercise you mentioned… I can just imagine the would-be-coach think “Well, medicine ball throws from the chest are good… tire flips are good… let’s combine them!”

In the case of the second exercise, the same coach probably thought: “Lifting for bands is great for building power and flipping tires is a great overall exercise, so if you combine both you’ll have great exercise!”

Or with the third one: “Squatting with bands is a great power exercise… so are jumps… why not to jumps with bands?”

This is the same way to thinking that brought us power cleans on a swiss ball and other junk like that.

But why stop there?

Depth jumps are great to build power and so is the power snatch… why not a depth landing power snatch (stand on a box holding a bar; jump down on the floor and as you touch the ground, power snatch the bar)…

What about hurdle power cleans? Set a series of low hurdles and you jump over them as you power clean the bar!

Heck why not do a depth jump squat with bands? Stand on a box with a bar on your shoulders, jumpstretch bands attached to the bar and the floor. Let yourself fall down and jump up.

See how easy it is to look innovative while being totally clueless?

BTW IF I SEE ANY OF YOU DOING THESE EXERCISES I’LL PERSONALLY SHOOT YOU DOWN.

Surprisingly, contrary to coach Poliquin (which I really respect), I don’t hate exercise no.4. Sure the blunder/outake potential is great. But any non-motor moronic individual can do this exercise safely.

844

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

BTW IF I SEE ANY OF YOU DOING THESE EXERCISES I’LL PERSONALLY SHOOT YOU DOWN.

[/quote]

LOL

I do love it when you are like this.

845

[quote]taleb wrote:
Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

BTW IF I SEE ANY OF YOU DOING THESE EXERCISES I’LL PERSONALLY SHOOT YOU DOWN.

LOL

I do love it when you are like this.

[/quote]
Agreed, a very rare moment. I’m just glad I was here to witness it.

846

Thib,
a discussion was just started over in strength sports about block periodisation and the application of it. one of the posters said you had some info about it in your writings but i cant find that anywhere. so, if you could, let me know if and where im wrong about any of this.
accumulation-preparing the body for the heavy lifting. higher volume, lower intensity.

transmutation- where the work is done. volume is lowered but intensity come into the 80-95% range. technique is dialed in.
realization- test/meet day. where all the work comes to a head.
restoration-deload, active recovery, etc.

?'s:
Can i run two trans blocks consecutively? for my meet cycle i had planned two raw accum weeks. one 4 weeker in the trans block in only briefs. another 4 weeker in briefs and suit(straps down) for two weeks, one week straps up, one week full gear. follow this with meet prep/openers then the realization on meet day.

a poster brought up the question about having a great workout and exceeding your work ranges. while this is a percentage based program of sorts, the percentages wouldnt need to be altered in any way, right? say i want 18 total reps at 85% but im blasting the weight up.

i could hit one more set at 90% or exceed my rep range and chalk it up to a great workout and not worry about altering the percentages as the main goal is to peak performance for the realization block.
Sorry this is long and thanks in advance.

847

Hi coach.
Can you give us some explain and useful details about the NBA players? They have amazing physique and total body conditioning (of course because of genetics, years of training, professional preparation, maybe doping etc.). You have a lot of experience with athletes (amateurs & professionals) training, diet and supplementation. Could you please give us an example about the usage of supplements because they are giving 80-120 games yearly (3 per week) and they have high performance, great physique and many others skills.
Thanks again.

848

Thib, how different is working up to 1RM against working up to 2-5RM in CNS overload ? Which one is more straining - working up to lower or higher reps ? What sets do you consider “working” when ramping up? Starting from 75-80% of max I guess ?

Also how taxing is such work as straight sets 8-12 x 1 with 4RM compared to the above?

849

Thib,

How long does muscle protein synthesis typically stay elevated above baseline after a training session? And what impact should this elevation and eventual return to baseline have on determining training frequency? Depending upon the nature of the session, is it possible that MPS can return to baseline levels and yet you may still need further time between the previous training session for those muscle groups and the next one (CNS stress is another factor to consider, I am assuming)? A study mentioned in Monday’s article says it is elevated for about 48 hours, and that this likely makes hitting a muscle group every 48 hours ideal. But lifters throughout time have had success on a lower frequency than that, so it seems like 48 hours between sessions for a muscle group is anything but set in stone.

It’s often said that you can train with low-to-moderate volume and high frequency or high volume and low(er) frequency. Specialization seems to allow for both high volume and frequency for a given area during a specific phase. Two-a-day sessions seem like another compromise where you get some of the benefits of higher frequency along with the other benefits of training less often and with higher volume. But of the low-to-moderate volume and high frequency or high volume and low(er) frequency options, which usually lends itself “better” to hypertrophy?

You often say that the more often you can train without exceeding your recovery capacities, the more progress in terms of strength and size you will make. So where does the volume/frequency debate and the magnitude of the growth stimulus from lower volume and higher frequency sessions versus higher volume and lower frequency sessions leave someone who works with a variety of people and wants to do whatever it would take to optimize progress? Many varied approaches (training a muscle group once every 5 days, training a muscle group 2-3 times/week, training a muscle once a week, etc.) have yielded results for lifters over the years, but currently it is popular to do what will work with the largest number of people and eschew empirical evidence in favor of research-based guidelines.

As another example, take the study being quoted saying that if volume and intensity are kept constant, then dividing sets over multiple sessions is superior to doing those all in one session when seeking size and strength…now a number of lifters have made great progress going high volume and once a week for a muscle group, albeit it with some overlap between groups in different sessions). While this is not to say that many more haven’t failed on this approach or that the lifters who thrived on it couldn’t have done EVEN better on another approach, it does show that that approach can produce results that any client would be happy to have. And isn’t a main reason for choosing a split with low frequency over a high frequency approach to allow for more volume? If so, comparing equal volume and intensity with a low versus high frequency approach doesn’t seem applicable to the real world.

While I recognize that you cannot reduce such a massive topic to one tidy paragraph in a forum, any of your typical training wisdom on these matters would be fantastic.

850

[quote]Jack Slater wrote:
Thib,

How long does muscle protein synthesis typically stay elevated above baseline after a training session? And what impact should this elevation and eventual return to baseline have on determining training frequency? Depending upon the nature of the session, is it possible that MPS can return to baseline levels and yet you may still need further time between the previous training session for those muscle groups and the next one (CNS stress is another factor to consider, I am assuming)? A study mentioned in Monday’s article says it is elevated for about 48 hours, and that this likely makes hitting a muscle group every 48 hours ideal. But lifters throughout time have had success on a lower frequency than that, so it seems like 48 hours between sessions for a muscle group is anything but set in stone.

It’s often said that you can train with low-to-moderate volume and high frequency or high volume and low(er) frequency. Specialization seems to allow for both high volume and frequency for a given area during a specific phase. Two-a-day sessions seem like another compromise where you get some of the benefits of higher frequency along with the other benefits of training less often and with higher volume. But of the low-to-moderate volume and high frequency or high volume and low(er) frequency options, which usually lends itself “better” to hypertrophy?

You often say that the more often you can train without exceeding your recovery capacities, the more progress in terms of strength and size you will make. So where does the volume/frequency debate and the magnitude of the growth stimulus from lower volume and higher frequency sessions versus higher volume and lower frequency sessions leave someone who works with a variety of people and wants to do whatever it would take to optimize progress? Many varied approaches (training a muscle group once every 5 days, training a muscle group 2-3 times/week, training a muscle once a week, etc.) have yielded results for lifters over the years, but currently it is popular to do what will work with the largest number of people and eschew empirical evidence in favor of research-based guidelines.

As another example, take the study being quoted saying that if volume and intensity are kept constant, then dividing sets over multiple sessions is superior to doing those all in one session when seeking size and strength…now a number of lifters have made great progress going high volume and once a week for a muscle group, albeit it with some overlap between groups in different sessions). While this is not to say that many more haven’t failed on this approach or that the lifters who thrived on it couldn’t have done EVEN better on another approach, it does show that that approach can produce results that any client would be happy to have. And isn’t a main reason for choosing a split with low frequency over a high frequency approach to allow for more volume? If so, comparing equal volume and intensity with a low versus high frequency approach doesn’t seem applicable to the real world.

While I recognize that you cannot reduce such a massive topic to one tidy paragraph in a forum, any of your typical training wisdom on these matters would be fantastic.

[/quote]

I would gladly do so if you can say all that in 3-4 sentences. I have a rather hectic schedule and while I’m sure that your stuff is fun to read, I really can’t do it right now.

851

[quote]Thy. wrote:
Thib, how different is working up to 1RM against working up to 2-5RM in CNS overload ? Which one is more straining - working up to lower or higher reps ? What sets do you consider “working” when ramping up? Starting from 75-80% of max I guess ?

Also how taxing is such work as straight sets 8-12 x 1 with 4RM compared to the above?[/quote]

There are so many factors involved in CNS stress that giving you a complete answer would take 2-3 articles!

What I can say is that the closer an effort is to your maximum, the greater is the impact on the CNS. Now, that doesn’t necessarily means that the heavier the weight is, the more stressful on the CNS it is (although, in general, heavier sets are generally more CNS-intensive).

For example a 1RM effort is very stressful on the CNS because it is the most you can do for that rep. Doing 8 reps to total failure is also stressful on the CNS, but only those last 1-2 reps are actually stressful because they are close to, or at, the point of maximal effort. In other words as the set progresses you get more fatigued and completing each rep requires the CNS to work harder and harder.

So doing 6 reps with your 8RM isn’t that stressful but getting those last 2 reps would be hard.

Lactic acid accumulation is also very hard on the neuromuscular system, but more so at the neuromuscular junction than at the CNS portion of the system.

852

Hey Coach,

How long should a method like the wave loading 3/2/1 method be used and how would you fit it in a training cycle? Just at the last phase or block? And would you use the method in a movement/lift split scheme or with a 2 times per week for the same lift scheme?
Also, since the two to three sets wouldn’t last long, is there any supplementary work you can do with it?

Sorry for all the questions, but any answer would be great, (except for f*** you).

853

[quote]ryoshi wrote:
Hey Coach,

How long should a method like the wave loading 3/2/1 method be used and how would you fit it in a training cycle? Just at the last phase or block? And would you use the method in a movement/lift split scheme or with a 2 times per week for the same lift scheme?
Also, since the two to three sets wouldn’t last long, is there any supplementary work you can do with it?

Sorry for all the questions, but any answer would be great, (except for f*** you).[/quote]

  1. You do not see to understand what a wave 3/2/1 method is. It is not ONLY 3 sets as the second portion of your question would imply. 3/2/1 waves can be anywhere from 3 to 9 sets depending on how ‘‘in shape’’ you are in on a given day.
  • ONE WAVE lasts three sets (1 x 3, 1 x 2, 1 x 1)
  • You increase the weight at every set within a wave (e.g. 200lbs x 3, 210lbs x 2, 220lbs x 1)
  • IF YOU SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETE A WAVE (are able to complete each set for the prescribed number of reps) you start a new 3/2/1 wave
  • The second wave is started with a bit more pounds than the first one (e.g. 210lbs x 3, 220lbs x 2, 230lbs x 1)
  • IF YOU SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETE THAT SECOND WAVE you start a third one
  • The third wave is started with a bit more weight than the second one (e.g. 220lbs x 3, 230lbs x 2, 240lbs x 1)

In a normal workout you should be able to complete 2 waves. Completing 3 waves is a great workout (unless you started out with not enough weight). If the third wave was easy it means that you started out with not enough weight…

The first wave should be a challenge, but a sure thing.

The second wave is hard and leads to a maximum or near-maximum lift.

The third wave is hell and would lead to a new PR.

854

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
In a normal workout you should be able to complete 2 waves. Completing 3 waves is a great workout (unless you started out with not enough weight). If the third wave was easy it means that you started out with not enough weight…

[/quote]

Hi Coach

Could you outline your take on adding additional exercise(s) immediately following the wave-loading part of the workout? For example, by following bench waves with 1-3 sets of dips in the 6-12 rep range, etc.

Many thanks in advance for your time.

JB

855

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
ryoshi wrote:
Hey Coach,

How long should a method like the wave loading 3/2/1 method be used and how would you fit it in a training cycle? Just at the last phase or block? And would you use the method in a movement/lift split scheme or with a 2 times per week for the same lift scheme?
Also, since the two to three sets wouldn’t last long, is there any supplementary work you can do with it?

Sorry for all the questions, but any answer would be great, (except for f*** you).

  1. You do not see to understand what a wave 3/2/1 method is. It is not ONLY 3 sets as the second portion of your question would imply. 3/2/1 waves can be anywhere from 3 to 9 sets depending on how ‘‘in shape’’ you are in on a given day.
  • ONE WAVE lasts three sets (1 x 3, 1 x 2, 1 x 1)
  • You increase the weight at every set within a wave (e.g. 200lbs x 3, 210lbs x 2, 220lbs x 1)
  • IF YOU SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETE A WAVE (are able to complete each set for the prescribed number of reps) you start a new 3/2/1 wave
  • The second wave is started with a bit more pounds than the first one (e.g. 210lbs x 3, 220lbs x 2, 230lbs x 1)
  • IF YOU SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETE THAT SECOND WAVE you start a third one
  • The third wave is started with a bit more weight than the second one (e.g. 220lbs x 3, 230lbs x 2, 240lbs x 1)

In a normal workout you should be able to complete 2 waves. Completing 3 waves is a great workout (unless you started out with not enough weight). If the third wave was easy it means that you started out with not enough weight…

The first wave should be a challenge, but a sure thing.

The second wave is hard and leads to a maximum or near-maximum lift.

The third wave is hell and would lead to a new PR.[/quote]

Yeah I get that you do waves and quit when you can’t complete the next one i was just wondering if you would end your workout after you can’t do any more waves or is there other stuff to do to help work on that lift. Or would you even do another wave set for another lift, it just seems like the workout would be too short after a two or three wave set. And still, my other question is how frequently you could use the wave sets a week and how many weeks should you use it for before it becomes stagnant.

856

Coach Thibaudeau,

I asked you before, what periodization scheme is best for bodybuilding purposes and you answered “no periodization”.

Do bodybuilders need some kind of a “deload”? Or do your bodybuilding clients hop from a program to another without some kind of a resting period in between programs?

857

[quote]fighter1157 wrote:
Coach Thibaudeau,

I asked you before, what periodization scheme is best for bodybuilding purposes and you answered “no periodization”.

Do bodybuilders need some kind of a “deload”? Or do your bodybuilding clients hop from a program to another without some kind of a resting period in between programs?[/quote]

I sometimes use deloads; when they are truly needed. But I find that 90% of the people you see hitting the gym (and sadly that includes many TMUSCLE readers) do not train anywhere near hard enough to actually require a deload.

858

[quote]ryoshi wrote:
Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
ryoshi wrote:
Hey Coach,

How long should a method like the wave loading 3/2/1 method be used and how would you fit it in a training cycle? Just at the last phase or block? And would you use the method in a movement/lift split scheme or with a 2 times per week for the same lift scheme?
Also, since the two to three sets wouldn’t last long, is there any supplementary work you can do with it?

Sorry for all the questions, but any answer would be great, (except for f*** you).

  1. You do not see to understand what a wave 3/2/1 method is. It is not ONLY 3 sets as the second portion of your question would imply. 3/2/1 waves can be anywhere from 3 to 9 sets depending on how ‘‘in shape’’ you are in on a given day.
  • ONE WAVE lasts three sets (1 x 3, 1 x 2, 1 x 1)
  • You increase the weight at every set within a wave (e.g. 200lbs x 3, 210lbs x 2, 220lbs x 1)
  • IF YOU SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETE A WAVE (are able to complete each set for the prescribed number of reps) you start a new 3/2/1 wave
  • The second wave is started with a bit more pounds than the first one (e.g. 210lbs x 3, 220lbs x 2, 230lbs x 1)
  • IF YOU SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETE THAT SECOND WAVE you start a third one
  • The third wave is started with a bit more weight than the second one (e.g. 220lbs x 3, 230lbs x 2, 240lbs x 1)

In a normal workout you should be able to complete 2 waves. Completing 3 waves is a great workout (unless you started out with not enough weight). If the third wave was easy it means that you started out with not enough weight…

The first wave should be a challenge, but a sure thing.

The second wave is hard and leads to a maximum or near-maximum lift.

The third wave is hell and would lead to a new PR.

Yeah I get that you do waves and quit when you can’t complete the next one i was just wondering if you would end your workout after you can’t do any more waves or is there other stuff to do to help work on that lift. Or would you even do another wave set for another lift, it just seems like the workout would be too short after a two or three wave set. And still, my other question is how frequently you could use the wave sets a week and how many weeks should you use it for before it becomes stagnant.[/quote]

I would use waves once a week for a muscle; if you train it a second time you should use a different loading scheme.

3/2/1 waves are used for the primary movement of a muscle group only, the secondary/assistance work uses other schemes.

859

[quote]JamesBrawn007 wrote:
Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
In a normal workout you should be able to complete 2 waves. Completing 3 waves is a great workout (unless you started out with not enough weight). If the third wave was easy it means that you started out with not enough weight…

Hi Coach

Could you outline your take on adding additional exercise(s) immediately following the wave-loading part of the workout? For example, by following bench waves with 1-3 sets of dips in the 6-12 rep range, etc.

Many thanks in advance for your time.

JB[/quote]

When doing heavy/near maximal work I normally have 3 exercises… the first one using the near-max loading approach (could be wave loading, clusters or working up to anything between a 3 and 1RM) and the other two using different loading schemes.

Here is a possible example:

A. Bench press 3/2/1 wave

B. Floor press 5 x 5

C. Dips (bodyweight only) 2 x max reps

860

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

C. Dips (bodyweight only) 2 x max reps
[/quote]

Do you steel acknowledge the use of such “classical” potentially high rep finishers ?
May I ask what is the reasoning behind this ? Is it good for strength or for some extra hypertrophy only ?