Tag: Coaching

The Best of This Month’s Strength & Conditioning Research: Time off from Training Spares Gains, Increased Athletic Performance with Contrast Movements and Variable Resistance Leads to Greater Strength and Power Gains.

I know, you mean to keep up with the latest research and read a few of the top journals every month.  You really do mean it but then work happens, and eating, and sleep, not to mention finding time to train.  Well don’t worry, I’ve got you covered here at FitnessBreakdown with a few quick summaries of some of the most interesting and applicable research being published.  That’s why you’re reading this blog anyway, it’s much easier to let us do the dirty work and sort through the hundreds of articles published every month to find the pieces of information that make a difference to your everyday work or training.  This week some highlights from the April 2017 issue of The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.

Short breaks in training do not lead to losses in strength and body composition

Hwang et al. (2017) examined the impact of a 2 week detraining period following a 4 week training period, with a second 4 week training period taking place after the break.  The authors were primarily interested in the impact on muscle strength and cross sectional area (hypertrophy) and how they differed through the training cycle.  Specifically how training gains in strength and mass occur at a greater rate in the early part of training and with a longer training period the gains occur at a slower rate.  The authors hypothesized that if subjects trained for four weeks with the faster rates of improvement and then took a 2 week training break that in the next 4 weeks they would experience the same faster gains that originally occurred as opposed to the slower rate of improvement that is seen with longer term training.  Essentially, does a train-rest-train approach allow for faster overall improvements as opposed to a longer term train-train-train approach?

The authors also used a group that was supplementing with 25g of whey protein post workout and a control group that used a carbohydrate supplement.  Over time they found increases in leg press strength after the training period, the detraining period and the retraining period. They did not note a significant difference between the different training periods or between the groups. There were no significant difference in body composition, lean mass, fat free mass or rectus femoris cross sectional area.  There was no evidence that a break in training resulted in faster gains when training is resumed.

While there were no earth shattering results from this study there was a key takeaway.  The two week detraining period did not result in any reduction in strength, muscle cross sectional area or lean mass.  This suggests that with well-trained individuals it is safe to take short breaks in training without worries about losing the improvements that were gained during the training period.  Many hard training individuals are afraid to take time off and allow their body a fuller recovery period and this study supports the benefit of regular short detraining periods, especially considering the small but positive improvements that happened during the detraining period.  Keep in mind this study used young males who were experienced in training and worked out four times per week.  The results may not hold true for older populations and those who train on a less regular basis or at lower intensities.  There is also a question of the length of detraining periods and the benefit sparing effect of a two week break on this population cannot be extrapolated too much longer detraining periods.

 

In-season strength training, especially with the addition of contrast movements improves athletic performance in youth soccer players

With the multitude of training approaches available it can become difficult for today’s strength coach to determine which philosophy to follow in order to maximize performance of their athletes.  This is further complicated by the different demands athletes face throughout the year in regard to what aspect of the training season they are in (preseason, in season, post season, off season). Hammami et al. (2017) attempted to partially answer this question in a study of in season junior male soccer players.  Specifically they were comparing the effect of pure resistance training program as opposed to a contrast strength program (and a control group) on a battery of athletic performance measurements.

The study lasted for 8 weeks and took place during a competitive season when the athletes were practicing 4-5 times per week and playing one competitive match.  The strength training group replaced a portion of their regular training time with program that consisted of back half squats to 90° utilizing weights that were 70-90% of their 1 rep maximum.  This program was performed twice per week.  The contrast strength training group performed the same squat program but for the first 4 weeks of the program, after every set of squats they performed 3 consecutive countermovement jumps with aimed arms.  During the second 4 weeks of the program the contrast strength group preformed 1 countermovement jump with aimed arms immediately followed by a 15-meter sprint.

Athletic performance was tested through 8 different measures that included 40-meter sprints, 4×5-m sprints, 9-3-6-3-9 meter sprints with 180° turns, 9-3-6-3-9 meter sprints with forward and backward running, repeated shuttle sprints, repeated change of direction, squat jumps and countermovement jumps.

In all measurements except the repeated shuttle sprint ability the strength training group and the contrast strength training group showed significant improvement as compared to the control group.  In the repeated change of direction test and the 4×5 meter sprints the contrast group showed significant improvement as compared to the standard strength group.  In all of the other tests both experimental groups showed similar improvements though with a non-statistically significant but still measured difference favoring the contrast training group.

So what is the take away?  First, an in-season strength program completed twice a week improved actual performance measures that should translate to increased advantages in competition.  Secondly, while both training approaches work well, the contrast training plan appears to have advantages and is easily implemented.  Third, the strength training programs both consisted of nothing more than squats or squats plus the contrast movements.  In today’s You Tube/Cross-Fit influenced training world of more volume, high intensity and creative mixes of movements a very simple, straight forward training plan improved performance.  The pressure on strength coaches to integrate these new influences in training programs is significant and perhaps in some cases counter-productive.  Sometimes a simpler, more classical approach may work better. Though that is a subject for other studies.  Considering this study was conducted on in-season athletes who are already under tremendous demand both on their time and recovery abilities, a lower volume, simpler program may be more appropriate and productive.

Variable resistance increases upper body strength and power more than traditional training

Today it is not uncommon to walk into a gym and find someone slinging up large elastic bands or chains over their squat or bench press bar.  Sure it looks like the person knows something that you don’t but are they really onto something or is this just another adventure in being creative trumps actual science?  Well in this case they are actually onto something that can be beneficial for certain training populations.

Riviere et al. (2017) compared variable resistance training to traditional resistance training and measured strength and power adaptations in elite youth rugby athletes.  Both groups underwent an identical resistance training program twice a week with the first workout emphasizing strength and the second workout emphasizing power.  The only difference between the two subject groups was that the variable resistance group used elastic bands equal to 20% of the prescribed load on their bench press.

The researchers measured 1 repetition maximum (1RM) in the bench press along with mean velocity and power at 35, 45, 65, 75 and 85% of 1RM.  After six weeks of training the subjects were retested.  Both groups improved their 1RM but the variable resistance group showed greater results.

For mean velocity measurements the variable resistance group showed small improvements at 35 and 45% of 1RM, medium sized changes at 65% and large improvements at 75 and 85% 1RM.  The traditional training group only showed small improvements at all levels of resistance.

Results for mean power were similar to the velocity measurements with the variable resistance group showing smaller changes at the lower levels of resistance and greater improvements at higher resistance levels.  The traditional group saw only trivial improvements in absolute mean power at all resistance levels and for relative power saw trivial changes for all levels except 85% 1RM where the changes were considered small.

So what does this all mean?  Both groups did improve their bench press strength, velocity and power but the variable resistance group clearly had larger improvements, especially at higher levels of resistance in the velocity/power measurements.  This supports the results of other studies that showed strength benefits utilizing variable resistance were greater than with traditional training though this was, according to the authors, the first study to look at power under these circumstances.

The authors offer 4 possible reasons for why variable resistance resulted in greater improvements.  1) During the eccentric phase there is an increase in the storage of elastic energy within the body which can be tapped into during the concentric portion of the lift which could result in more training stimulus leading to the gains. 2) The point at which the movement arms are at peak mechanical disadvantage, the sticking point, is the limiting factor in force production and how much resistance can be utilized.  Variable resistance can be used to work around this sticking point so there is more muscle tension during the later stages of concentric portion of the lift. 3) Normally there is a deceleration phase at the end of the concentric portion of the lift which is overcome with a greater constant acceleration through the entire movement when variable resistance is used.  This constant acceleration through the end of the lift can add to greater strength and power.  4) Variable resistance training forces more neuromuscular adaptations including the recruitment of larger motor units in the eccentric portions of the lift.  Collectively these factors lead to greater changes over time.

The greater improvements in velocity that occurred at higher levels of resistance may have been because the subjects used higher levels of resistance during their actual training protocol.  This allowed the subjects to show greater improvement at testing levels closer to their training resistances and smaller changes at resistance levels they did not train near.  The variable resistance group also showed larger differences in power then the traditional group as the resistance levels increased.  This is most likely because of the increased gains in velocity the variable group experience at higher resistance levels which allowed them to produce more power at those same resistance levels.

Now that we’ve established that variable resistance appears to offer increased improvements over traditional training, at least in the bench press, let’s put the brakes on before you rush out and start wrapping elastic bands around all of your bars.  First, the study had a very small population and only used one lift with variable resistance.  As we all should know by now, studies with small populations have only so much power and may not hold true for all circumstances, groups and other variations in training.  Secondly the study was done elite youth rugby players.  This means they are young, healthy, and participate in a sport where increased upper body strength and power is related to performance.  While it is probably safe to say that other trained athletes can experience similar results this doesn’t mean every personal training client in the gym should suddenly be using variable resistance in this way.

I want to shake my head and scream every time I see a less experienced and educated trainer putting an inexperienced, older or relatively unstable and weaker client under a bar with bands attached to it just because they saw one of the stronger, more experienced trainers in the gym using this technique in their own training.  Even worse, when a more experienced trainer shares the technique without really understanding it and with more concern about how they look to their younger colleagues instead of what is best for a particular client.  If someone cannot do a few sets of great body weight pushups and already do a bench press with a respectable level of resistance they probably should never be using variable resistance until they have already developed a great strength base with traditional training techniques.

Note that the elastic resistance used was equivalent to 20% of the prescribed training load. This means the subjects weren’t trying to use exceptionally challenging level of variable resistance.  They wanted enough resistance to enable the desired adaptations but not so much that the focus of the lift became dealing with the variable resistance levels instead of maintaining great form and focusing on the overall lift.  It would be very interesting to see a study that compares different percentages of variable resistance but I would hypothesize that after a certain point we would see reduced benefits.  It doesn’t take a lot of variable resistance to work around the sticking points and provide greater acceleration at the end of concentric lifts.  I would strongly suggest until we have a body of literature suggesting otherwise that if someone uses variable resistance they choose lower levels of resistance and limit themselves to something in the neighborhood of 20-25% of their total load.  Certainly if they are training at total loads closer to their 1RM.

Works cited:

Hammami, M., Negra, Y., Shepard, R., Chelly, M. (2017) The Effect of Standard Strength vs. Contrast Strength Training on the Development of Sprint, Agility, Repeated Change of Direction and Jump in Junior Male Soccer Players. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 31:4: 901-912

Hwang, P., Andre, T., McKinley-Barnard, S., Morales Marroquin, F., Gann, J., Song, J., Willoughby, D. (2017) Resistance Training Induced Elevations in Muscular Strength in Trained Men Are Maintained After 2 Weeks of Detraining and Not Differentially Affected by Whey Protein Supplementation. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 31:4: 869-881.

Riviera, M., Louit, L., Strokosch, A., Seitz, L. (2017) Variable Resistance Training Promotes Greater Strength and Power Adaptations Than Traditional Resistance Training in Elite Youth Rugby League Players. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 31:4: 947-955

A Roadmap To Fitness

Olympic weight lifting, running, powerlifting, cycling, CrossFit, yoga, Pilates, swimming, body building, high intensity intervals, classic strength training, functional training, kettlebells, bodyweight, suspension training…the list goes on for different training techniques and approaches.  It’s difficult enough for an experienced professional to determine the best path for a client.  For the average individual it’s a confusing mix of names and sometimes very conflicting approaches to achieving fitness, or whatever someone’s individual goals are.

Most trainers/coaches tend to take the “I have a hammer, every client is a nail” approach and train whoever comes through the door with whatever techniques they tend to emphasize and practice.  If they teach yoga everyone needs yoga, if they coach kettlebells then that is tool that everyone is going to be driven towards.  Even multi-modality approaches like crossfit which use a mix of bodyweight/gymnastics/Olympic/power lifting still have a particular flavor that uniquely defines them. More educated and experienced trainers will have a larger variety of tools and approaches to pull from and have a more flexible approach towards training different types of clients but still tend to have approaches that define how they work and train clients.

If professional coaches have a hard time successfully adapting their training style to best meet the individual needs of a client, how do we expect the general public to intelligently pick the right trainer for them, let alone pick the right type of fitness practice to pursue either with a coach or on their own?

After nearly 25 years of coaching a wide range of clients I’ve begun thinking of choosing the right path to fitness like my drive to work.  I drive approximately 18 miles from my home to my gym.  That distance allows for a variety of different routes that I can choose.  Of those countless choices, there are three main highway routes that I can most logically take.  Regardless of all the other options, the quickest, most efficient path is always going to be one of these three routes.

For each of these routes there are multiple ways I can get from my home to the highway however for each main highway route, there are usually two most logical, efficient routes to the highway.  Under normal circumstances picking any way except one of the two main routes just doesn’t make sense.  Still, there are many times that local traffic blocks my first choices and I have to circle around another way.

Once I’ve made my way to my preferred highway path I may encounter any number of problems.  Heavy traffic, an accident, road work, bad weather, flooding or a lack of visibility (ok my drive to work isn’t that fraught with danger but in theory it could be and there is a great chance that traffic and accidents will certainly be a factor).  So on any given day I could choose to get off at any number of exits and take any of dozens of surface streets around the delay and get back on the highway further along or even take those surface streets all the way to my final location.

Usually I will get to work fastest if I stay on the highway but other times one of the side routes on surface streets will be a quicker, more sensible path for me to take.  Now that you’ve all learned about my horrible commute to work, what does it have to do with choosing the right type of exercise for you?  Well, it has a lot because whether you are choosing a type of exercise, a specific trainer for that technique or are coaches choosing the right approach for your client that decision is just like my decision about how to get to work.

Instead of starting from geographical location, your home, you are starting from your current level of fitness, or lack of it.  And instead of heading to work, your final destination is your fitness goal.  It may be a clearly defined objective like losing 25 lbs, running a marathon, bench pressing 225 lbs or a more subjectively defined goal like not having back pain, being able to go for a run without losing your breath, fitting into clothes that used to be tight, performing your favorite sport better or just feeling stronger and fitter.

Now that we have a starting point and a destination the first big question is what main route are you going to take?  If your end objective is a clearly defined activity like running or swimming then it is pretty clear that the path you should be taking most of the time involves performing that activity (don’t worry, there are still reasons to use the other routes to support your main path, we’ll get to that in a further down).  If you happen to love doing a particular type of exercise and are drawn to it than that will be the main path.  If you want to do yoga then any reason I give for doing a different form of exercise is secondary to your desire to do yoga and you should be on that route.

If your fitness goals would best be served through some form of resistance training then you are going to follow those routes but there are still multiple ones to choose from leaving the question, which one is most efficient?  Which one is right for me?  Unless your final location clearly reveals that one path is the optimal one or you happen to have enough knowledge on the subject to analyze the options then you are probably going to be steered onto a particular path by whatever outside influence you happen to consult .  It could be a friend, family member or trainer at your local gym.  Whatever approach they prefer using is the path you are going to be put on.  For the professional coach deciding what to do with a new client we would like to think that they would do a careful analysis of your situation and choose the route best suited to you but in reality they are going to put you on a path and train you based on whatever their education, experience and personal preferences are.  It might be a great path for you, it might be totally wrong for you or more likely will have some benefits but not necessarily be the quickest or optimal path for you.

The reality is there probably isn’t going to be one optimal route to follow but like my choice of three main routes to get to work, there will be a number of different main routes that get you from your starting point to your objective and they will all be roughly equally effective.  It doesn’t matter which one you take but you will probably find a preference for one over the other.  Now you are most likely sitting there thinking “Seth, you just spent two pages telling me it doesn’t really matter which path I take.  I want those five minutes of my life back”.  Yes, we just took a non-optimal route getting to this point but don’t worry, things are about to get much more complicated.

Even though I’ve just said you can pick any of a few main routes to get to your objective, and that you are going to pick one primary path there are still benefits to sometimes taking the time to drive one of the other routes.  Just like an event at a the local arena or road work may make you choose to drive a different way to work, you are often best served by getting off your main exercise approach and spending some time using a different approach.  Just like an alternative driving route to work avoids certain temporary problems and has different scenery, a different training path offers different stimulus to your body that may allow you to work around problems, emphasize some other elements that improvement in will serve you on your journey and the variety, the different scenery, is helpful in keeping things mentally stimulating.  Sometimes you just need to spend a short period of time driving this other fitness route, sometimes it will be a longer period of time and often you will be choosing to drive one main route some days of the week and another route other days.

Now what about those multiple routes to get on the highway in the first place?  Just like you need to take a little time getting from your house to the highway, you can’t just get in your car, step on the gas pedal and start driving highway speeds in the middle of your residential neighborhood you can’t go from sitting on your sofa to exercising at full intensity with great form.  You may have injuries that need to be addressed before you can do certain exercises.   You could have movement limitations that need to be addressed.  There might be painful issues that need to be first corrected and you need to learn the basic techniques of the movements you are going to be doing.  And don’t forget your muscles and neurological system need time to adapt to the new demands you are placing on them.  We’ve all been sore from doing more than we were ready to do at some time.

Is there just one way to do this preparatory work?  Of course not.  There are a few main ways to get to the highway from your house and there are going to be a few ways to break yourself back into exercise.  They will probably involve the activities you are going to ultimately be performing, the exception being correcting movement limitations and addressing necessary rehabilitation prior to regular exercise.  For most people this drive to the highway, the preparatory work is going to be a fairly quick process lasting just a few weeks though for many individuals these activities are going to be the main routes to their goal.  There are no shortages of people with significant injuries, pain and limitations and resolving them is the big final destination.

Now let’s say you have done your preparatory work and have made it to the highway of fitness.  Some days you take you main route; in this example let’s say it is a classic strength training approach.  Because you are smart and carefully read everything above, one day a week you take a different highway route, perhaps a yoga class.  There are also days when you are only doing the short drive to the highway and not actually getting on.  These would be days that we might consider “recovery days” where you are focusing on just that preparatory work, mobility and taking care of your body.  But we mentioned that you can get off the highway at any point and take any number of surface streets.  In this example if classic strength training utilizing barbells and dumbbells are your main highway path, those surface streets might be a workout designed around suspension training, bodyweight or kettlebells.  It could be using the same tools (barbells/dumbbells) you were using but applying them differently doing a period of powerlifting or Olympic weightlifting.

For the experienced athlete or coach these changes would be planned out and part of a periodized training program.  Planed periods of time in the overall training plan that are designed to train different elements.  Elements that are related but still different and ultimately build upon each other to help the person maximize their results.  Traditionally we talk about hypertrophy (muscle growth), muscular endurance, strength and power but as time has gone by the list of objectives has grown to include other elements.  For the average person trying to improve their fitness there are benefits to training these different skills and objectives but they can be a bit more relaxed as to how they are integrated into the overall program. Instead of a carefully planned detour onto another path for a prescribed set of weeks it might just be the occasional change in route to mix things up and present something new to the body.

So even if you drive a particular main road to work, take a different highway once or twice a week for different stimulus, there still may be times you pull off to take those surfaces streets.  It would be great if it was always like the above paragraph and a well planned detour onto those roads but very often it is the result of unplanned consequences.  Just as weather and accidents and the like force me off the highway on the way to work, gym closings, holidays, work and family conflicts and injuries will force you off of your chosen path.  Force you to take some surface streets.  Change your training focus for a day or period of time.  You can be upset and curse at the traffic gods or see this as an opportunity to address something different.  To pay some attention to some aspect of training that you normally would not focus on so much.  If you are lucky it is just a short term detour and you get back on the highway fairly quickly, hopefully better for your detour.  Sometimes however you can’t get back on the highway.  Perhaps your make and model car are suddenly forbidden from driving on that highway (yes I know, that doesn’t happen, just go with the analogy for now).  No matter how much you want to drive that Jeep Grand Cherokee on the highway you are just not allowed and every time you get on it the police pull you over and force you off.  On your path to fitness it won’t be a car model that is forbidden but perhaps an injury that changes things for you on a permanent basis.  You might have been a runner before, or enjoyed heavy squatting and deadlifting but a particular knee injury could mean that you can never do those activities again or do them at the intensity and frequency with which you previously did.  Usually with an injury we hope the temporary detour onto surface streets allows you to rehab and get back to normal but sometimes there is a new permanent normal that doesn’t allow you back on the previous road.  For some people this injury might have happened before they even began their exercise program and certain routes are off limits to them from the beginning.  In these cases you either need to be on other highways or able to get off of a particular highway at the same point all of the time and take those surface streets the rest of the way to your destination.  It may be slower driving but you will still get there.

Many people never get off their main highway path.  Doing the exact same things day in day out, week after week, month after month.  Something we are starting to clearly see is a problem.  Many trainers have the opposite problem and they never clearly define a route for their clients to take and every day is a new search through the map and a totally random path taken.  As there has been a proliferation of new, less educated and experienced trainers/coaches coming into the field, many without a solid background in exercise science this has become a bigger and bigger problem.  It is not difficult to pick some exercises and make someone do them.  It is not difficult to make someone work hard and feel intense effort.  Doing those things for clearly defined purposes, with a clear path towards an objective however is becoming a rarer and rarer thing.  You don’t generally drive somewhere without knowing where you are going and how you are going to get there.  Your training shouldn’t be completely random either.  Now this doesn’t mean that general workouts, random boot camps and the like are all bad. Quite the opposite, they can be very stimulating, fun and contribute towards reaching your objectives.  You just have to recognize them for what they are, a stand alone good workout.  If you want to get somewhere specific you can have some of them as part of your plan but to do nothing but them, while still a particular highway path, is not going to be the most direct or effective one or even get you all the way to where you want to be.  And if you are choosing a trainer, one who only trains this way, is probably not the most educated, experienced or effective trainer.  They may make you feel like you are working hard but we’ve established, that is not difficult to do.  This doesn’t mean that younger and less experienced trainers aren’t good. I’ve met countless amazing ones.  What separates them from the pack, their desire to know not just things to do, but also why they are choosing those exercises/movements, how they work on a physiological level, how they are applying those exercises for specific objectives and how they are best integrated into a well thought out plan.

So there you have it, a roadmap to fitness.  Long, complex, often confusing and full of different elements that sometimes seem conflicting (sounds more like a relationship then an exercise plan).   Is there one best way to go?  Absolutely not.  Do different people need different paths?  Without question.  Do the best plans include different routes and a plan to use them?  Yes.  Do you have to be flexible and able to change routes for unforeseen issues? You better be.  Do fitness professionals know the best way to get you where you need to be?  Sometimes but often not, they can be as lost and confused as you.  The best of them, and there are plenty of good ones, do know how to read the map and more optimally guide you.

Now get up and get moving.  You can’t reach that destination sitting there.