‐Physiology Part 2‐
REMEMBER TO REST A FULL 5 MINUTES BETWEEN EACH
For the deadlift, starting with the first session mentioned above and continuing on for each of the next 3 sessions (a session is a single lifting day) increase each set as shown in the following chart:
Session Set 1 Set 2 Set 3 1 3 reps @ 50% 2 reps @ 75% 1 rep @ 100%
2 3 reps @ 85% 2 reps @ 110% 1 rep @ 120%
3 3 reps @ 120% 2 reps @ 130% 1 rep @ 140%
4 3 reps @ 140% 2 reps @ 150% 1 rep @ 160%
REMEMBER TO REST A FULL 5 MINUTES BETWEEN EACH
SET!
You can use a similar scheme for the bench press, using smaller percentages of bodyweight.
What happens if you fail to complete a rep in any of the sets?
No problem! The point at which you failed to complete a lift will allow you to discover your first 1RM.
Here’s how it works: Assume you weigh 165 lbs and you did not complete the in the final set of the 4th session listed in the chart above: approximately 265 lbs (1 rep @ 160% of 165 lbs bodyweight). Assume that you did complete set 2 of the same session, 2 reps @ 150% (1.5 times bodyweight). 1.5 times 165 lbs is 247.5 lbs.
Recall that 100% 1RM is the maximum weight that can be lifted for 1 rep. Completing 2 reps means that 247.5 lbs is below your 100% 1RM level. Since the attempt to complete 1 rep at 260 lbs was not successful, 260 lbs is above your 1RM level.
What is your probable 1RM? It’s not the midpoint between 247.5 lbs and 260 lbs (253.75). It is approximately 260 lbs.
The Completed Reps chart shows that your completed set of 2 reps represents 95% of a 1RM.
% OF 1RM REPS
100% 1 95% 2 90% 3-4 85% 5-7 80% 8-12 70% 18-25
Completed Reps As % Of 1RM
Dividing the last completed weight, 247.5, by .95 equals approximately 260 lbs (do this once for an initial 1RM for the deadlift and once for an initial 1RM for the bench press).
The following chart shows some other possible results of the sessions suggested above (all weights are adjusted to the amounts of weight used on a standard barbell set.)
Notice the last row, where completing 3 reps in the first set shows a higher 1RM then completing 1 rep in set 2. How can this be?
Completed Bodyweight Percent
bodyweight Weight Percent
1RM Actual 1RM
2 reps of set 2 165 150% 247.5 95% 260.0
1 rep of set 2 165 150% 247.5 100% 247.5
2 reps of set 1 165 140% 230.0 95% 245.0
1 rep of set 1 165 140% 230.0 100% 230.0
3 reps of set 1 165 140% 230.0 90% 257.5
Weight training is about the individual, not the chart.
The average lifter able to complete 3 reps at 90% should be able to complete 2 reps at 95% but no lifter is the “average” lifter, especially not the inexperienced lifter. At the beginning level there is little consistency in performance between each rep in a set and each set in a session so 1RM will have more variation then with an experienced lifter. There will be much more consistency and little variance between the 1RM for each lift after 8‐12 sessions.
If you are an experienced lifter and have been training but are not sure of your current 1RM, then start the testing process with an estimate. The first test lift should be around 80% of the estimated max followed by a 5 minute rest. The next lift should be at 95% of estimated max followed by a 7‐9 minute rest. Allow the same amount of rest for all subsequent attempts.
Use the following chart until a lift is missed (percentages are based on original estimate).
It is unlikely that this process will continue for more than three or four levels if the original estimate is reasonable. When failure to make a lift occurs, assume the failed attempt is your 1RM.
This helps to account for fatigue from the preceding attempts.
The process should be repeated for the bench press if the your sport requires a pushing motion.
Now that you know how to find your 1RM for the deadlift (and the bench press if you need it), it’s time to start building a training program based on the six step order previously shown.
1. Dynamic stretching 2. Pushing motion exercise 3. Deadlift with plyometrics
4. Extra exercises (if desired or time permitting) 5. Core exercises
6. Static stretching
80%
Make Make
Miss = Max
95%
105%
Make 110%
Miss = Max
Miss = Max Make
Miss = Max
‐Recycling‐
From the preceding chapters you now know: MSF is a major factor of excelling in most sports and is the main factor in sports that include running or jumping. The toughest competitor, gravity, works in an unseen realm to steal power. The secret of muscle physiology shows how to work within the boundaries of the energy systems to gain superior strength with minimal mass; the only combination that reduces the effects of gravity.
Weight training exercises that best fit muscle physiology use less training time in the weightroom and on the track or field.
Plyometric exercises develop a high performance delivery system to fully utilize strength increases.
What we have not covered to this point is a method for designing a workout plan that will continue to reap benefits throughout the course of an athletic career. Since there are few exercises in the workout, planning is easy.
The plan should be designed around the concept of recycling.
Some may use the term “periodization” rather than recycling and there are some elements of periodization in recycling, but they are not the same in practice. Let’s take a look at where the two concepts, recycling and periodization, differ.
In their book on the subject, Periodization Breakthrough! ,
Steven J. Fleck, Ph.D. and William J. Kramer, PH.D. state, “In sum, planned training will help ensure continued gains, prevent injuries, keep the training from becoming boring, and help you avoid training plateaus.”
The “garage” routine was based on an older model of strength training where every session was of maximum intensity.
Volume was never a consideration. As mentioned earlier in this book, we hit “sticking points” (plateaus) that often took several weeks to break.
Periodization (planned training) is simply breaking down a year‐long training regime into smaller intervals with varying intensity and volume. Intensity pertains to the difficulty of the lift in relation to a 1RM, with 95‐100% at the upper end. Volume can be either the number of reps or total amount of weight lifted in a given time period, with the latter most often used.
On the surface, the concept of periodization looks like a winner but examination of periodization plans reveal major problems.
For example, Fleck and Kramer cite the results of earlier studies of periodization versus non‐periodization strength programs, then make an observation of their own: “Importantly, the periodized training resulted in a significant increase in lean body mass, indicating both an increase in muscle mass and a significant decrease in percent body fat”.
An increase in lean body mass? With what you know about its evils, you should be outraged at even the mere suggestion of gaining mass!
Fleck and Kramer’s quote implies that body fat was replaced by lean body mass, which is good. Not replacing the weight of lost body fat would have been better. In case you’re thinking that the “significant increase in…lean body mass” is a mere by‐
product of periodization, it isn’t. It is a stated goal!
Periodization plans generally include four phases: Phase 1 is the active pursuit of hypertrophy (sarcoplasmic) in order to gain lean body mass, followed by strength and power gains in phase 2,
performance peaking during in‐season competition in phase 3, and active rest in phase 4, the off‐season.
Some plans include macrocycles, microcycles, and mesocycles (are motorcycles next?).
The basic periodization plan offered by many trainers and coaches often goes like this:
Phase 1. Work to the point of muscle exhaustion with high reps/low weight to increase hypertrophy (sarcoplasmic).
Phase 2. Work to the point of muscle exhaustion with medium weight/medium reps to increase strength and power.
Phase 3. Work to the point of muscle exhaustion with high weight/low reps to peak performance at season end.
Phase 4. Take some time off to rest from the entire ordeal.
Even those who avoid lifting to exhaustion allow depletion of the phosphagen pool, which some researchers believe increases muscle size by disrupting the equilibrium between
consumption and remanufacture of ATP. Referred to as the ATP deficiency theory (Hartmann and Tunnemann, 1988), the
protein content of muscles used during maximum strength training becomes very low or even completely exhausted by the depletion of ATP. Recovery between training sessions helps protein return to previous levels – or go to even higher levels. A result of the increase in protein could be correspondingly
greater muscle size. In other words, more mass.
Is the standard phase form of periodization (other than building mass) practical for everyone? Not really. It works better for
professional and most college athletes because they are involved in a single sport with a single season. But it is not suitable for athletes participating in more than one sport during the year, including some college and a large percentage of high school athletes.
Periodization works better when applied to the specific needs of each individual athlete than to a group of athletes. Not
everyone is ready to switch phases at the same time, nor is everyone is ready to max on the same day.
Periodization must be viewed in the context of how strength training is performed in general. In other words, strength training for sports is a modified version of bodybuilding, so current forms of periodization are planned to provide for the rest and recuperation needs of muscles subjected to a
bodybuilding routine. If that is the case, what form should periodization take when there is no work to exhaustion, even with workouts of 90% or greater 1RM? What if there is a
planned program of preserving the phosphagen pool built into the program? What if increasing mass is never a goal?
Pavel Tsatsouline, in Power To The People, endorses the concept of periodization but provides several simplified versions of periodizing that he refers to as “cycling”. He describes cycling as, “…a gradual buildup of intensity to a personal best, and then starting all over with easy workouts.”
Since Pavel is a strong proponent of building myofibrillar
hypertrophy, none of his versions of recycling include phases of increasing useless mass.
The format we use, recycling, is simple: attack the 100% 1RM often, but not in a linear fashion, and vary workout sessions in no particular pattern. It is not a far‐reaching plan but the effects
of it are. The focus is on what has happened in the previous 2‐3 sessions, not what might happen 3‐6 months from now.
This may sound disturbing to anyone who looks down the road to a particular event, then plans a workout in phases to reach the peak of power on the exact day necessary. If only it was that easy. Of course, it would be easy if there were no injuries or illness, no bad weather, no problems in getting to the gym, workout area, field or venue, no other challenges or outright failures. But, there are.
The chart on the following page is a portion of the actual deadlift workout used by a female sprinter/jumper.
Keep in mind that this is not a professional athlete, just a young female athlete willing to work. The results are similar to both male and female athletes at various levels of ability. She was not in competition during the dates listed on the chart, but it would not have mattered if she was.
She deadlifted a best of 225 lbs the previous year (with a different coach), but had not lifted for several months prior to July, 2005. She weighed 145 lbs when we began and had not gained any weight through September of 2005.
She resumed deadlift training at bodyweight to make sure form was correct, then quickly returned to her previous max of 225 lbs by the end of July and increased to 240 lbs by early August.
Date Sets Reps Weight Completed Sets Total
Daily Volume 18-Aug-05 3 1 250 3
18-Aug-05 1 2 240 1 1230 22-Aug-05 3 1 260 2
22-Aug-05 1 1 250 1 770 23-Aug-05 2 1 260 1
23-Aug-05 1 2 245 1 750 25-Aug-05 3 4 235 3 2820 30-Aug-05 3 3 245 3 2205 31-Aug-05 2 1 250 2
31-Aug-05 3 3 240 3 2660 06-Sep-05 3 2 240 3
06-Sep-05 2 3 230 2 2820 07-Sep-05 3 5 230 3 3450 09-Sep-05 3 3 240 3 2160 13-Sep-05 2 1 250 2
13-Sep-05 1 2 240 1 980 14-Sep-05 2 1 250 1
14-Sep-05 1 3 240 1 1220 15-Sep-05 1 1 265 1
15-Sep-05 1 2 235 1 735 20-Sep-05 1 1 270 1
20-Sep-05 2 2 235 2 1210
As the chart shows, she proceeded to hit new 100% 1RM’s of:
250 lbs on August 18 260 lbs on August 22 265 lbs on September 15 270 on September 20.
A total of four new 1RM’s in 13 workout days.
From the beginning of training, she never attempted more than 3 sets although up to 5 sets is reasonable. She exceeded 3 reps twice, but never did more than 5. There was no attempt to build either mass or a pyramid.
It is likely that progress will continue near this pace until she is able to deadlift about 290 lbs; double her bodyweight. Progress will be slower as the amount of weight increases after that, but significant gains will continue over time.
In the Completed Sets portion of the chart you will see that she failed to complete a set on August 22, August 23 and September 14. Each missed set was comprised of a single rep and each of the missed reps were less than 10 seconds duration. Daily volume ranged from 735 lbs to almost 1.5 tons.
Looking at the chart does not show a pattern that can simply be copied by another athlete, but the concept can.
The workout included 7 sets with lifts close to or exceeding 95%
1RM on 5 of the 6 days listed for August. Included in that time frame were 2 incomplete sets on 2 different days, both of which were 100% 1RM days. That’s an intense 5 days of training!
On August 31, every set was completed, but she did not
accomplish them easily. That is a good indication to back off the intensity for a few session, then attack the 100% 1RM again.
On September 13, she tested the old max of 250 lbs without any problem. September 14 included a miss at 250 lbs, but the 3 lifts at 240 lbs were, according to both her and my own visual
assessment, easy. What happened to the 250 lbs set? No one will ever know!
The 3 reps at 240 lbs equate to a 1RM of over 265 (see above to do the math). In other words, a new max. She attempted and easily completed a 265 lb max the following day, September 15, establishing both a new 100% 1RM and a reason to try for a new max on September 20. That attempt was also a winner, and established a new 100% 1RM at 270 lbs
By the look of the chart and her most recent performance (which she said felt good), she might be ready to max at 275 lbs in the following 1 or 2 sessions. Regardless of whether she succeeds in establishing yet another 100% 1RM, she will have a minimum of 2 new 100% 1RM’s and several sets at 95% 1RM or over. It will be time then to back off the intensity once more for this athlete.
Please note that backing off intensity does not mean dropping below 85% 1RM. As the chart shows, the lowest amount of weight used for training was 230 lbs which represented more than 85% of the 260 lb 1RM at that point in time.
It should be clear that the athlete is determining how the lift felt, while the coach watches to see if this is indeed the case. If the athlete continues to move the bar up at a steady pace (even if it is a slow pace) while keeping good form throughout, then the lift is good but not necessarily easy. If the athlete moves the bar at a more rapid pace, form is excellent, and there is no sign of struggle at any point, then the lift is easy. However, if the lift begins to stall, where there is no movement for more than 2‐3 seconds, then the lift must be aborted immediately. Continuing the lift to exhaustion is not an option even if the lift is ultimately successful. Burning out the phosphagen pool and creating a lactic event is not justified for any single lift!
The method of determining the ease of a lift sounds subjective because it is subjective. It should be subjective if there is a desire to keep the athlete free of injury.
We use this form of recycling year‐round, even during the most competitive part of the season. Allyson Felix ran the fastest 200 meters in the world on May 5, 2003 after a high intensity max day on May 3.
If you are concerned that performance will not be at peak strength on the day of the season’s most important meet or game, don’t be.
Keep in mind that this workout is primed to keep performance at no less than 85% of the last max all of the time. There is no need for several days of rest and recuperation from lactic acid and muscle failure because work did not progress to the point of producing either one of them. In addition, as you know, the number of repetitions expands dramatically as the weight (more specifically, the amount of force required to move it) is reduced from typical loading during workouts.
If you’re still concerned, because old habits and thought
patterns don’t disappear easily, then stop strength training one or two days before the competition.
You now have the tools to develop your own workout, based on the deadlift, a pushing motion lift, core exercises, and
plyometrics. The only other tool you need is a log of what you’ve done. Without a log, creating a workout each day is baseless. If you are a coach, you must require that each athlete keep a log of their workout if you want to get maximum results from training. Remember that no two people will respond the same to the stimulus provided by weight training, so there is no
legitimate cookie‐cutter routine. I’ve worked with as many as 45 athletes at a time without any problems. If they did not have a log with them, they did not get a workout that day.
Base all sets and reps on 1RM’s, staying at or above the 85%
level at all times and between 90% and 100% as often as possible. Randomly select between intense days and high volume days. Keep attacking your max when the numbers dictate. For example, if your 100% 1RM is 300 lbs and you easily completed a set of 3 reps at 275 lbs, you should be ready to attempt a new max at 305 lbs (275/.90 = 305.5). Go for it!
Back off and recycle after several intense days.
Be prepared for incredible increases in strength and speed!
‐Ockham’s Razor‐
In the 14th century, William of Ockham, an English logician proposed some interesting and usable principles which can, and should, be applied to tra ining:
“PLURALITY SHOULD NOT BE ASSUMED WITHOUT NECESSITY”
“WHAT CAN BE DONE WITH FEWER IS DONE IN VAIN WITH MORE”
In other words, the simplest or most obvious explanation among several competing ones is the one that should be preferred until it is proven wrong.
Example: A charred tree could be caused by either a lightening strike or by someone using a machine to burn the upper
branches of the tree, then replanted the grass leading up to the tree to hide the machine’s tracks.
William of Ockham would have rejected the second option as irrelevant.
The purpose of his principles was to reject the irrelevant so that science would not be used to justify unrelated ideas and a
The purpose of his principles was to reject the irrelevant so that science would not be used to justify unrelated ideas and a