Page 6 of 14 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 132

Thread: Squats

  1. #51
    I have a few things to say about the questions raised by "hemann" several pages ago about 1)-breathing- and 2)-whether it is possible to make progress too quickly-. I am stating these as my personal opinion, and not as fact. I am speaking from personal experience I have gained in the past year since I have stopped running track and began doing powerlifting workouts.

    1)Breathing...I believe the best way to breathe is to hold the breath throughout the entire lift, pause at the top only long enough to exhale and inhale again, then perform the next rep. This method has allowed me to perform my reps in training with more barspeed because it allows more stability through increased intra-abdominal pressure and my explosiveness in general has improved. I think holding the breath through both the eccentric and concentric part of the lift makes the valsalva maneuver more effective. I believe sprinters should train this way to, because if it increases the quality of the reps performed and allows you to train yourself to recruit more MU's then it could only help.

    2)Can you progress too quickly?...Even if technique and barspeed are not negatively affected I do believe that it is possible to make progress too quickly. I am a strong believer that strength training should be structured and planned in an organized manner to achieve a specific goal. I think the best way to do this is for progressions not be made too quickly, in progressive overload or periodization.
    Adding weight too quickly can cause you to hit a plateau faster when if you had made the additions in load more conservatively you could have progressed right through that level. I am speaking in terms of weeks/months....not days.
    In regards to periodization, I think the overload from week to week prior to the deload week should be similar...(you wouldn't go up 5% one week...then 20% the next)

    I have a few final comments in regards to weight training that I believe are applicable to this discussion...I believe that lifting too close to your max too often can cause injuries, shitty form, and lower levels of MU recruitment....I believe that in training the primary goal should be to recruit as many MU's as possible because the end result will be more power, explosiveness, and strength. This requires not approaching failure IMO. All athletes and strength training individuals should utilize Prilipen's table when designing strength training programs. If you don't know what that is you should look it up and give it a chance.
    Last edited by bobsanchez4321; 07-20-2011 at 12:07 PM. Reason: to specify what the reply pertained to

  2. #52
    I base only my core lifts on Prilepin's table. I still go very heavy on some accessories, but light on others...just depends

    story about Prilepin's table...several months ago I decided to experiment with it. I weighed 225 and my best bench was 405 raw, touch and go, butt on bench...and had repped 300x11. During bench workouts, I would always go up 315 at the bare minimum. I decided to train by Prilepin's table for a while. the first week I used 240 pounds...I am not sure. I could probably rep 240 around 25 times but during my first workout i did 4 sets of 6. That was it for the core lift. I paused some reps, touch and go others. But I performed every rep with perfect form and I pushed it as hard as I fucking could. I then did some close grip with 225 and a couple other accessories. The next week I used 260 pounds and the week after 280 pounds. The reps were somewhere between 3 and 6 per set. Later in the week I was at my friends house and I was sick of lifting light weights and never feeling challenged. We went downstairs to his wobbly bench to start warming up. I warmed up and when I got to 275, it felt like there was absolutely no resistance. So I loaded it up with all the weight he had, 300 pounds and repped it 14 times with perfect form...locking out every time. This was funny because when I was 16 and my max was 300 pounds, I could only bench 275 every time I went to his house because of the instability of his bench. This improvement I made while basing my workouts on Prilepin's table confused the hell out of me because I couldn't see how I could get stronger when I hadn't lifted any heavier than 70% of my max in a month. What I hypothesize is that the lighter weights allowed me to perform the exercises with more efficient form, train myself to recruit more motor units, and increase my explosiveness.

  3. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by bobsanchez4321 View Post
    I base only my core lifts on Prilepin's table. I still go very heavy on some accessories, but light on others...just depends

    story about Prilepin's table...several months ago I decided to experiment with it. I weighed 225 and my best bench was 405 raw, touch and go, butt on bench...and had repped 300x11. During bench workouts, I would always go up 315 at the bare minimum. I decided to train by Prilepin's table for a while. the first week I used 240 pounds...I am not sure. I could probably rep 240 around 25 times but during my first workout i did 4 sets of 6. That was it for the core lift. I paused some reps, touch and go others. But I performed every rep with perfect form and I pushed it as hard as I fucking could. I then did some close grip with 225 and a couple other accessories. The next week I used 260 pounds and the week after 280 pounds. The reps were somewhere between 3 and 6 per set. Later in the week I was at my friends house and I was sick of lifting light weights and never feeling challenged. We went downstairs to his wobbly bench to start warming up. I warmed up and when I got to 275, it felt like there was absolutely no resistance. So I loaded it up with all the weight he had, 300 pounds and repped it 14 times with perfect form...locking out every time. This was funny because when I was 16 and my max was 300 pounds, I could only bench 275 every time I went to his house because of the instability of his bench. This improvement I made while basing my workouts on Prilepin's table confused the hell out of me because I couldn't see how I could get stronger when I hadn't lifted any heavier than 70% of my max in a month. What I hypothesize is that the lighter weights allowed me to perform the exercises with more efficient form, train myself to recruit more motor units, and increase my explosiveness.
    It is also possible that you used to train too much and the improvement simply comes from the unloading.

  4. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by martijn View Post
    It is also possible that you used to train too much and the improvement simply comes from the unloading.
    Not only do I think it's possible but I would flat out agree that I had been training too much prior to my 'experiment'. I think coming from a period of overtraining and going to a period of appropriate training load definitely helped. I think it almost always does.
    Most things that I have read utilize only 1 week of deload at a time. I did not consider the fact that the gains were from a deload affect because I thought the fact that I trained that way for 3 weeks proved it was not from a deload affect. I thought that if working out by Prilepin's guideline was not as potent a stimulus for strength gains as my previous training was, I would have had some amount of detraining within the 3 week period of my new training methods. You have raised an interesting question, which is "Can a deload period of 21+ days still provide an enhanced result?"You have made me realize areas in which I could learn more so that I can improve my methods of training.
    My main question I have is based on my hypothesis that lifting in the manner outlined by Prilepin's table produces a stimulus that is more conducive to strength gains.
    My question is, "If the benefits were from deloading alone and lifting in that manner did not in fact produce a stimulus more beneficial for strength improvements, would 3 weeks at a load lower than I am used to not cause me to lose strength/detrain?" In other words, do you know if there is potentially a benefit to deloading for ~21+ days?

  5. #55
    I can't answer that for your particular situation. Proper loading and unloading is highly individual. You have to find out what works for you.
    But I'm convinced that there is a long term effect. E.g. One athlete I know semi-retired after an Olympic year and surprised herself by improving 0.1s in the short hurdles and suddenly got into the big races. But I'm not sure if that's an unloading effect or just a matter of finally loading properly. I.e. did she or did she not need to train so much in the Olympic year in order to reap the benefits a year later?

    Also: I shouldn't have put it so black and white. Both effects may have caused your improvement.

  6. #56
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Charlotte N.C.
    Posts
    2,249
    Zatsiorsky explained that maximal MU recruitment is possible in small muscles with loads as low as 50% of Fmm and as low as 80% Fmm in large proximal muscles.

    This is why sub-max loading works and I went into depth discussing this in my lecture at South Alabama a couple months ago (will be for sale before too long)

    Beyond max recruitment threshold exists rate coding/firing rate and in extreme intensities- synchronization. When weight training is the means, and not the ends, it is even more justified to train sub-max and leave the highest intensity training to the primary objective.

  7. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by James Smith View Post
    Zatsiorsky explained that maximal MU recruitment is possible in small muscles with loads as low as 50% of Fmm and as low as 80% Fmm in large proximal muscles.....
    He also said the lower intensity weight would have to be moved either explosively (which he stated would result in little strength improvement) or to failure. In other words, according to Zatsiorsky, if you don't lift with high intensity, you must lift to failure for maximal MU recruitment if you are training for strength.

  8. #58
    Member RB34's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    5,156
    What are submax weights? Everything I have seen/heard about Charlie methods displayed heavy weights - maybe not 1-3rm but heavy sets of 3-6.

  9. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by James Smith View Post
    Zatsiorsky explained that maximal MU recruitment is possible in small muscles with loads as low as 50% of Fmm and as low as 80% Fmm in large proximal muscles.

    This is why sub-max loading works and I went into depth discussing this in my lecture at South Alabama a couple months ago (will be for sale before too long)

    Beyond max recruitment threshold exists rate coding/firing rate and in extreme intensities- synchronization. When weight training is the means, and not the ends, it is even more justified to train sub-max and leave the highest intensity training to the primary objective.
    Damn! I'm from Birmingham, Alabama. My grandparents live in Mobile like 5 mintues from USA and my best friend pole vaults for the University of South Alabama. I would have loved that lecture.

  10. #60
    That makes perfect sense to me. A light weight isn't going to produce any kind of stress unless you move it really fast or a ton of times.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •