At this point, the article analyzes the effect of losing speed in the series of repetitions within strength training.

In this series of articles we deal with some of the most important concepts of strength training, collecting notes from the recently published book Strength, Speed ​​and Physical and Sports Performance written by renowned researchers Juan José González Badillo and Juan Ribas Serna.

SUMMARY

• The loss of speed in the series can serve as a predictor of the degree of metabolic stress caused by training, and therefore it is a good indicator to estimate fatigue.
• Doing half or less of the repetitions achievable in the series produces notable improvements in muscular strength and sports performance.
• People who train for improved health should not do even half of the possible repetitions in the series.
• Most experienced athletes with medium-high strength needs will probably be able to perform at most half or 1-2 repetitions more than half of the possible ones.
• A subject should not lose more than 20-35% (depending on each exercise) of the speed of the first repetition in the series.

This is the second question related to the definition of the stress character (CE) as a solution to the problems raised by RM and XRM. Speed ​​control not only makes it possible to know very precisely the true effort that a given load (mass) represents when doing the first repetition of a series, but also allows complete knowledge of the degree of effort made by knowing in what proportion or percentage speed is lost as repetitions are made within the series.

And this is important because the loss of speed is a highly valid indicator to estimate fatigue (Edman, 1992; Allen, Lamb, 8 Westerblad, 2008). This validity is based on the high relationship that exists between the loss of speed in the series and the loss of speed at a certain absolute load measured before and immediately after making the effort.

speed loss is a highly valid indicator to estimate fatigue

In turn, the loss of speed in the series can serve as a predictor of the degree of metabolic stress caused by training. Indeed, Sánchez-Medina and Gonzalez-Badillo (2011) carried out a study with 15 types of effort in the bench press and squat, with loads that could be done between 12 and 4 repetitions per series. These intensities correspond to mean relative intensities between 70 and 90% of the RM, although each subject did not really make the effort exactly with said intensities, but with the absolute loads with which they could do the marked repetitions.

The absolute loads used were those with which 12, 10, 8, 6 and 4 maximum repetitions could be done, which, on average, corresponds to relative intensities of 70, 75, 80, 85 and 90% of the RM. , respectively. The greatest effort with each load consisted of doing three series with the maximum number of repetitions possible (or one less than possible in the first series) and the least effort in doing three series with half the possible repetitions.

In addition, one or two more efforts were made with an intermediate number of repetitions. For example, with the load that 12 repetitions could be done, four efforts were made, performing three series of 12, 10, 8 and 6 repetitions in the series, which were represented as follows: 3×12(12), 3×10(12) , 3×8(12) and 3×6(12).

In total, 15 efforts were made with each of the exercises: bench press and squat. The valuation of The degree of fatigue generated with each effort was determined through the loss of speed with the load that could be moved at 1 m*s-1 before making the effort., as well as the loss of jump (really loss of execution speed) pre-post effort when the squat exercise was performed.

Before starting the squat training, the vertical jump test (CMJ) was performed after a specific warm-up. In both exercises, the warm-up began with progressive loads and when passing through the load that could be moved at approximately 1m*s-1, three repetitions were performed with it and the value of the load and the concrete average speed of the three repetitions were noted immediately after making the effort, the measurement was made again. jump (after the squat) and the load of 1 m*s-1 in both exercises.

Since the minimum load with which the efforts were made was approximately 70% of the RM, an approximate load of 60% was always used in the squat during the warm-up (load that moves approximately 1 m*s-1). and 45% in bench press (load that moves approximately 1 m*s-1).

In addition, after each effort, lactate and ammonium levels were measured. In figure 1 you can see the scheme of the execution of the efforts and the initial and final tests, in this case in the bench press exercise and with the load that could be done 12 repetitions: 3 series of 12 repetitions being able to make 12: 3×12(12).

In this case, the average speed before the effort with the load of 1 m*s-1 was 1.03 m*s-1. The subject continues his warm-up until he reaches the load with which he has to carry out the effort of the day: 3×12(12) and performs the 3 series at the maximum possible speed, with 5 minutes of recovery between series.

The speed with each repetition in the three series is represented by the three groups of central bars with a tendency to decrease. Immediately after (10-15 s) the last repetition of the last series, the load with which the speed of 1 m*s-1 was initially reached was measured again. In this case, the final average speed of the three repetitions was 0.71 m*s-1. The loss of speed, in this case 31.1%, reflects the quantification of fatigue.

The loss of speed, in this case 31.1%, reflects the quantification of fatigue.

Figure 1. Outline of the protocol followed in an effort of 12 repetitions, being able to do 12: 3×12(12), in the bench press exercise. Red bars, speed with the load of 1 m*s-1 before and after making the effort. Rest of the bars: speed with each repetition in the three series performed with the expected load (Sánchez-Medina and González-Badillo. Med. Sci. Sports 2011)

As a result of this study, high relationships were found between the loss of speed in the series and the loss of speed with the load that moved 1 m*s-1 before the effort, both in the bench press (r = 0, 97) as in the squat (r = 0.91), and with the loss of height (loss of speed) in the jump after the squat (r = 0.92). These results confirm that the greater the speed loss in the series, the greater the fatigue.

Later on, it will be analyzed more precisely how the degree of fatigue (loss of speed with the load of 1 m*s-1 and loss of jump) is dependent on the speed of the first repetition (real percentage of the RM) and of the series loss. Likewise, high curvilinear relationships were found between the speed loss in the series, the jump loss and ammonium [R2 = 0.89 in the bench press; R2 = 0.85 in the squat and R2 = 0.86 in the CMJ (figure 2).

Figure 2. Relationship between velocity loss and ammonium concentration with bench press (top figure) and squat (middle figure) exercises, and relationship between vertical jump losses after squat exercise and ammonium concentration (bottom figure). ). Note that from an approximate loss of speed in the series of 40% in the bench press, 30% in the squat, and 12% in the vertical jump, the ammonium concentration shoots up. (Sánchez-Media y González-Badillo, 2011)

An important and unique observation to date is that for an increase in ammonia to occur it was necessary to perform 1-2 repetitions more than half the number possible at any load and in both exercises. This can be seen in figure 3. The horizontal dotted line represents the baseline ammonium value. Only when more than half of the possible repetitions in the set are performed does the ammonium spike with an exponential trend.

For an increase in ammonium to occur, it was necessary to perform 1-2 repetitions, more than half of those possible, at any load.

This occurs in both the bench press and the squat, with very similar behaviors. Figure 2 also shows this trend.

Figure 3. Evolution of ammonium concentration in relation to the number of repetitions performed in the series with the bench press (left) and right full squat exercises. It is observed that for the ammonium to exceed the resting values, marked by the dotted line, it is necessary to do 1-2 repetitions, more than half of those possible in the series (Sánchez Medina and González Badillo, 2011). Figure taken from Sánchez-Medina’s Doctoral Thesis.

This behavior of ammonium could be at the base of the explanation of the proposals or hypotheses (based on experience and systematic observation, not on experimental data, when speaking of training to failure).) made in the 80s, with studies of the effect of non-maximal volumes (65 and 85% of the maximum achievable), or of training with half or less of the possible repetitions in the series of the National Field Hockey team of the 90s, or the first experimental studies that were designed in which one group did half the repetitions possible in the series and the other all the possible ones.

the appearance of ammonium above the basal values when lifting weights may mean that the effort is at the limit that should be reached.

And this is so because the appearance of ammonium above the basal values when lifting weights (in other types of exercises it may be different, and it certainly is) may mean that the effort is at the limit that should be reached.

The measurement of the loss of speed in each repetition and the degree of fatigue generated -measured through the loss of speed with the load of 1 m*s-1 and loss of jump- allow us to add much more precise information about this behavior. of ammonium than the simple count of the repetitions performed.

These speed losses in the series from which the ammonium is fired correspond to certain speed losses with the 1 m*s-1 load and height loss in the jump. The data with the following:

• With a loss of 40% speed in the bench press, ammonium is triggered (figure 2) and would correspond to a loss of speed of 17% with a load of 1 m*s-1.
• With a 30% loss of speed in the squat, ammonium is triggered and would correspond to a loss of speed of 12.5% with the load of 1 m*s-1.

With a 12% loss in jump height, ammonium shoots up and would correspond to a loss of speed in the series of 32% (Sánchez-Medina and González-Badillo, 2011).

It can be observed how the same fatigue generated when performing the squat, with 30 and 32% loss of speed in the series, is estimated in an equivalent way by the loss of speed with the load of 1 m*s-1 (12.5 %) and height in the jump (12%), respectively. This indicates that the loss of speed is an accurate indicator of fatigue, since its quantification before the same effort (loss of 30-32% of speed in the squat) can be done at different speeds, giving practically identical results.

In this case, the initial speed of 1 m*s-1 in the squat and the speed of the vertical saint have been used, which, on average, is performed at a clearly higher average speed, which could be approximately more than 1.5 m-s. * on average, which would be equivalent to a little more than 45 cm of initial jump.

If now the two variables used are analyzed: the loss of speed in the series and the number of repetitions performed, it can be confirmed that in the bench press exercise the loss of speed when half of the possible repetitions has been done is between 25 and 30% (González-Badillo et al., 2017) of the speed of the first repetition, that is, slightly below the loss caused by the ammonium shot, and that in the complete squat the loss of speed when doing half of the possible repetitions it would be approximately 15-20% (Rodríguez-Rosell et al., 2019), that is, also below the loss of speed caused by the increase in ammonia.

Therefore, if it is known what degree of effort (degree of fatigue) means each percentage of speed loss in the series, the application of speed as a training control method is very useful, it is probably the best procedure to estimate with high precision and immediately the training load.

ammonium concentration above quiescent values can be controlled by the loss of speed in the series

This load would be determined by the degree of fatigue caused by the joint effect of the volume and intensity used in training. Therefore, the ammonium concentration above the resting values can be controlled by the loss of speed in the series, since there is a close relationship between the loss of speed in the series and the percentage of repetitions performed (González-Badilo et al, 2017; Rodriguez-Rosell et al., 2019).

If, furthermore, it is known, through extensive practical experience, that doing half or less of the repetitions achievable in the series produces notable improvements in muscular strength and sports performance, it would not be very advisable to frequently exceed (in some cases it would never be necessary) half of the repetitions that can be done in a series. This practical experience has been reinforced by experimental studies in which it has been proven that losing 10-20% of the speed in the series, which is equivalent to performing half or less of the possible repetitions in the series, in the exercise of squat offers better results than losing 30-40%, which leads to a situation at the limit of ammonium increase (30% loss) or very close to muscle failure (40%) (Pareja-Blanco et al., 2017 ; Rodríguez-Rosell, Doctoral Thesis).

In addition to the relationship with ammonium, velocity loss also showed high positive linear correlations with lactate concentration: [r = 0.95 in the bench press, r = 0.97 in the squat, and r = 0.97 in the the jump (figure 4)].

Figure 4. Relationship between velocity loss and lactate concentration with bench press (upper figure) and squat (middle figure) exercises, and relationship between vertical jump losses after squat exercise and lactate concentration (lower figure). ). (Sánchez-Medina and González-Badillo, 2011).

Doing half or less of the repetitions achievable in the series produces notable improvements in muscular strength and sports performance.

If the regression equations corresponding to each of the relationships of the three exercises with lactate are applied, it is verified that before a 40% loss of speed in the bench press series, which is when ammonium is triggered, the lactate would be 5.3 mmol/L, in the squat, when ammonium increases, when losing 30% of the speed, lactate would be 7.2 mmol/L, and in the jump, when 12% is lost jump and the ammonium increase begins, the lactate would be 7.7 mmol/L.

As can be seen, the height loss in the vertical jump (12% jump loss and 32% speed loss in the squat) when ammonium is fired it corresponds to practically the same concentration of lactate than when ammonium is triggered by the loss of speed in the series in the squat exercise (30%).

Which corresponds to the behavior observed when analyzing ammonium. Therefore, ammonium begins to rise when lactate is 5.3 mmol/L in the bench press and 7.2 mmol/L in the squat (figure 15.14). From this relationship it can be deduced that, although it is not the most practical and viable option, if one wanted to analyze the possible behavior of ammonium without measuring it, given its greater difficulty and price, one could measure lactate to predict at what moment the lactate begins to be triggered. ammonium.

Although, naturally, the most precise, economical, easy-to-perform procedure and with immediate information is the control of speed loss in the series.

Figure 5. Relationship between lactate values and ammonium firing in bench press and squat exercises (Sánchez-Medina and González-Badillo, 2011)

There were also high relationships between stalling and testosterone (r=0.83), growth hormone (r= 0.82), and insulin (r= 0.88). These relationships increased for ammonium (p = 0.94-96) and lactate (p = 0.98) when Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient was used (data from the same unpublished study). All these relationships indicate that the higher the speed in the series, the greater the mechanical, metabolic and hormonal stress tends to be, the greater the degree of effort generated.

the greater the speed loss in the series, the greater the mechanical, metabolic and hormonal stress tends to be, the greater the degree of effort generated.

The question that should be asked as a result of this knowledge is what should be the optimal loss of speed in each case. This question, of course, does not have an easy answer, but being able to ask it, and having the appropriate mechanical and physiological data available to try to find an answer, is already a great advance.

In the next articles, useful studies for the practice of training and that provide answers to many of these questions will be reviewed.

Conclusions

From the above it can be deduced that the knowledge of the relationship between the loss of velocity in the serle and the loss of velocity with the load of 1 m*s-1 and the height of the CMJ, as well as the metabolic stress allows us to conclude the following:

• The fatigue caused by a training session of three sets with loads that allow you to do between 12 and 4 repetitions per set depends on the percentage of speed lost in the set.
• The training load can be quantified by the loss of jumping capacity and the loss of speed before a determined load (mass) in each session.
• The relationship between the loss of jump and the loss of speed could be verified before a determined load per session and the effect of the training.
• The loss of velocity in the series with the load of 1 m*s-1 and in the CMJ are accurate estimators of the metabolic stress caused by the training session.
• Depending on the metabolic stress generated, a subject should not lose more than 20-35% (depending on exercises) of the speed of the first repetition in the series:
  • Performance is probably not better if you lose a higher percentage of speed. In the squat exercise, an average loss of speed in the set of 10-20% offered better results than a loss of 30-40%.
  • In the bench press exercise, a mean loss of 27.7% outperformed losing 53.3% (unpublished laboratory data).

a subject should not lose more than 20-35% (depending on exercises) of the speed of the first repetition in the series

• If you do a training session of three sets with any load between those with which you can perform between 12 and 4 repetitions per set, performing a range of repetitions between half and the maximum of the possible repetitions in the series, ammonium increases exponentially from a loss of speed of 40% in the bench press and 30% in the squat. In the case of the vertical jump, the increase in ammonia occurs when a pre-post effort jump loss of 12% is reached.
• As a practical application of synthesis, it is suggested:
  • People who train for improved health should not do even half of the possible repetitions in the series.
  • Most experienced athletes with medium-high strength needs will probably be able to perform at most half or 1-2 repetitions more than half of the possible ones. Although we also estimate that athletes with lower strength needs probably, even if they are very experienced, do not need to perform even half of the possible repetitions in the series at any time.

In this entry, a review of the training stages will be made based on the need for strength.

In this series of articles we deal with some of the most important concepts of strength training, collecting notes from the recently published book Strength, Speed ​​and Physical and Sports Performance written by renowned researchers Juan José González Badillo and Juan Ribas Serna.

SUMMARY

• The duration of the stages depends mainly on the age of the subject at the time they start training.
• The development of training based on the need for strength through sporting life is proposed in four stages.
• The older the subject, the less time will be spent on training the first stage and part of the second.
• Therefore, the duration of each stage can be on average 1-2 years, but can be highly variable depending on the response of the subjects.

Taking into account the division of sports based on their strength needs, it is necessary to make a proposal on the evolution of training loads throughout the sporting life of each of these groups. Table 1 presents a scheme of this proposal.

Tabla 1. Proposal for the degree of load to be used throughout sports life in groups of sports with different needs for force development.

The data that appears in the table would be applicable to the full squat exercise. Subsequently, some adaptations of these loads to other exercises will be made. The development of training based on the need for strength through sporting life is presented in four stages. The number of stages that is proposed is the one that has been considered sufficient so that the training characteristics of the different groups can be expressed and differentiated in a reasonable way.

Each stage does not necessarily correspond to a season or year of training. The application time of the training proposed for a stage may be greater than one year, which will be the most frequent. The duration of the stages depends fundamentally on the age of the subject at the time he begins to train.

The older the subject, the less time will be spent training the first stage and part of the second

The older the subject, the less time will be spent on training the first stage and part of the second. But there is a condition that must be met, and that is that you must go through all the stages, whatever the age of the subject when you start training.

However, regarding the time dedicated to training in one stage or with one of certain loads, it should be remembered that the best situation that can occur for the coach and the athlete is that they can spend a long time training with the same relative intensities, while the performance improvement is maintained with the only increase in absolute load.

Therefore, the duration of each stage can be on average 1-2 years, but can be highly variable depending on the response of the subjects. The load indicators proposed for each stage are the maximum at the end of each stage. This means that before carrying out the training proposed for the first stage, several training cycles with lower loads must be carried out.

It also means that when going from one stage to another, the maximum training proposed for the new stage is not done directly, but several cycles with intermediate loads between the maximum of the previous stage and the maximum of the stage in which one enters.

For each stage and group the words “minimum” and “maximum” appear. These two terms indicate the minimum and maximum load of the final training cycle of each stage or cycle of greatest load within the stage. Both loads are expressed as an effort character (CE) and as an approximate percentage of the RM that would correspond to that CE.

For example, the minimum load of the final cycle in the second stage of group A is expressed with a CE of 8(20) (do 8 repetitions while being able to do 20), and the corresponding percentage is 55%, and the maximum load of the cycle is 6(12) and a percentage of 70%. Regarding speed losses in the series, 10-15% is suggested for the minimum load and 15-20% for the maximum.

Naturally, if speed were measured, the references for all these indicators would be the speed of 55 and 70% of the RM, as indicators of relative intensity, and the loss of speed in the series. Then, a specific and common number of repetitions would not be programmed for all the subjects, and, therefore, the expression of the CE in terms of repetitions performed and possible or achievable repetitions would disappear.

If you train with an exercise for which the speed that would correspond to each percentage is not known, this can be roughly estimated if the RM speed is known. Exceptionally, the RM could be measured on occasion with a few subjects who perform the exercise well, to find this value in an approximate way. Once known, we know that the speed corresponding to each percentage will be in relation to the speed of the RM.

exercise of which the speed that would correspond to each percentage is not known, this can be estimated in an approximate way if the speed of the RM is known.

Comparing this speed with that of the exercises whose RM speeds we already know, it is possible to have a useful estimation to know the speed with each percentage and organize the training. Although the estimated speed for each percentage had a higher error than the rest of the exercises, as well as the loss of speed in the series, and these two issues are the most important.

Therefore, the utility of speed would be very high, and preferable to any other way of controlling the training load. We can see that in the fourth stage of all the groups a range of maximum percentages appears in bold. These are the approximate maximum intensity values ​​that each of the groups should reach at the end of their sporting life.

It is probable that for many subjects these relative intensities were not necessary, especially in the squat exercise, which is the one analyzed in this table, but it is proposed as the maximum “admissible” percentage. It must be taken into account, however, that these percentages, as will be seen later, even if you train with them, do not apply to all sessions of a training cycle.

Finally, to the right of the table the maximum percentage of repetitions in the series that could be done in each of the groups is indicated. To do this, half of the possible repetitions in the series are taken as a reference, indicating whether more than half, half or less than half of the possible repetitions in the series are done at most.

This maximum percentage of repetitions per series would not be done from the beginning of the training of “sporting life, but would be advanced to the maximum proposed as the stages are covered. Again we have to indicate that if speed can be measured. These percentages will be determined by the loss of speed in the series, knowing that in the face of certain loss of speed, a specific percentage of the possible repetitions in the series is done.

It is important to comply with the fact that with groups D and E you should never perform even half of the possible repetitions in the series, with group C you could reach half and with groups A and B you can reach do 1-2 repetitions more than half of the possible.

Therefore, this simple proposal turns out to be very useful due to the influence it can have on the adjustment of the load. If we look at the table from left to right, it can be seen that the relative intensity and loss of speed in the series are increasing until the last stage in all groups.

And if you look at the table from top to bottom, the trend is for the relative intensity and the loss of speed in the series to decrease. This trend naturally indicates that the lower the need for force development, the lower the training demand or load. The greatest demand is manifested in the relative intensity and in the Effort Index (IE), which does not appear in the table.

In the first stage, the IE with the maximum load of the cycle is the same for all groups (10-11). Subsequently, the maximum value of the IE programmed with the maximum load of the cycles in groups A and B is approximately 17, although it can reach 20 with the minimum loads of the last stages, in c 15-16, in D 12 -13 and at E 11-12. As indicated, the loads included in this table are more precisely tailored to the squat exercise.

Training adaptations to consider between squats and bench presses

For push and pull exercises with the worst limbs, such as the bench press (PB), the following adaptations should be made:

• The possible repetitions with each percentage would be 2-3 more in PB than in the squat (S).
• However, for the same percentage and the same loss of speed, the repetitions performed in both exercises are practically the same.
• The loss of speed in the programmed series could be increased by 5-10% in PB with respect to the S.
• The relative intensity (actual percentage of the MR) could be 5-10% higher in PB than in S.
• For the same percentage and loss of speed, the IE of the S is on average 30% higher than in PB, since the speed of each percentage in S is higher.
• But if, as we have indicated, in the PB the loss of speed in the series increases by 5-10% with respect to the S, the average IE in PB will be, approximately, only 5%, less than that which results for S.
• The maximum loss of speed in the series that produces a positive effect in S can be between 20 and 25%, while in PB it can reach approximately 35%. These are maximum losses, so they would only apply to subjects with extensive experience and high strength needs.

This article reviews the evolution of training loads to define the previously described force programming schemes.

In this series of articles we deal with some of the most important concepts of strength training, collecting notes from the recently published book Strength, Speed ​​and Physical and Sports Performance written by renowned researchers Juan José González Badillo and Juan Ribas Serna.

The progressive development of the programming of the groups is presented below. First, the loads of the initial and final cycles of all the stages of each group are presented.

Tabla 1. Basic scheme of programming the initial and final cycles for all groups in the squat in the first stage.

• The initial cycle of the Stage and the final cycle of the Stage are programmed.
• In each Stage several intermediate cycles are developed between the two programmed here.
• BP: body weight; PV: loss of speed in the series; EI: effort index.

Regardless of strength development needs, it is considered that the first stage of training should be the same for all sport groups. The differences between the groups will be manifested by the time that this type of training will be maintained and the different progression in the training load from the second stage. The sports specialties with more strength needs could spend less time in the first stage and should increase the load more quickly.

The differences between the groups will be manifested by the time that this type of training will be maintained and the different progression in the training load from the second stage

Table 1 shows the minimum and maximum loads of the initial cycle and the initial cycle and the final training cycle of the first stage. As indicated in the header of the table, on the left are the minimum loads and on the right the maximum. In the first row are the load variables, in the second row the loads of the initial cycle and in the third those of the final cycle.

Minimum initial cycle charge. In the section of the minimum loads of the initial cycle, no load value is determined. EThe subject would train without any added external load, would perform 2-4 sets of full squats of 6-10 repetitions per set, doing the eccentric phase in a controlled manner, at medium speed, not maximum, and the concentric phase at the maximum or almost maximum speed possible, with the transition from the eccentric phase to the concentric phase (rebound) in a moderate way, at low or medium speed, with about 2 minutes of recovery between sets.

Between each repetition there are 2-3 seconds of pause. The trainer observes the ease/difficulty with which the subject performs the exercise. Therefore, it is not considered that there is an appreciable loss of speed nor, of course, is any IE determined.

Maximum load of the initial cycle. It is expected that after having done the exercise without added load for 2-4 weeks, about twice a week, the ease / speed of execution is high and it is justified to start adding some external load. At the end of the cycle the load can be from 5 to 20 kg, to do 2-4 series of 6-8 repetitions per series.

It is understood that this added load has been done in progression, starting with 5 kg or less, depending on the subject, and increasing it as an increase in ease/speed of execution is observed. Theoretically, the ease of execution with which the cycle ends, with the corresponding added load, should be close to or equivalent to the ease with which the subject performed the last training sessions without loads.

In this case, it is not appropriate to talk about the percentage of 1RM or IE, and the loss of speed could be null or very small, like 3%. Before reaching the proposed loads for the final cycle of the stage, the subject must carry out a few cycles of progressive training, in such a way that he trains with approximately 30-35 kg.

Before reaching the proposed loads for the final cycle of the stage, the subject must carry out a few cycles of progressive training, in such a way that he trains with approximately 30-35 kg.

After training with these loads it would be appropriate to start the loads of the final cycle of the stage. Minimum load of the final cycle. At the beginning of this cycle you could be programming the training with relative intensities and character of the effort (CE). In this case, the CE is very low, since 2-4 series of 5-8 repetitions would be done with loads that can be done many times (30-40).

This could correspond to 30-40% of the RM. The speed loss would be 5-10%, with an IE of 14-16. Naturally, if speed is measured, the relative intensity is determined by the speed value and the repetitions are not programmed, but each series is performed until the programmed speed is lost.

Maximum load of the final cycle. Over the course of the development of the cycle, the relative intensity is progressively increased, which means that the number of possible repetitions (number in parentheses of the CE) is reduced until reaching the proposal to perform at the end of the cycle about 2- 4 series of 6-8 repetitions, being able to do 18-20 repetitions in the series, which would correspond to approximately 55% of the RM, a 10-15% loss of speed in the series and a effort index (IE) of 14-16. It must be taken into account that this last cycle must be carried out 2-3 times before moving on to the first cycle of the next stage.

As soon as the maximum load of the day begins to be equal to or greater than 50% of the RM, you should do 1-2 warm-up sets with the same repetitions per set that you are going to perform with the maximum load of the day or something more. As the maximum load of the day increases, the warm-up series will be longer.

The programming of the initial and final cycles of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th stages of each group will be presented below. Table 2 presents the proposal for group A.

Table 2. Basic programming scheme of the initial and final cycles for group A in Squats in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th stages.

• The initial cycle of the Stage and the final cycle of the Stage are programmed.
• In each Stage several intermediate cycles are developed between the two programmed here.
• BW: body weight; PV: loss of speed in the series; EI: effort index.

The first row of Table 2 shows the load variables. In the second row are the initial and final cycles of the 2nd stage. Within this stage there are two rows, the first with the training sessions of the initial cycle of the stage, with its corresponding minimum and maximum load, and the second with those of the final cycle. The meaning of the numbers corresponding to each variable are the same that we have described when talking about the first stage.

It can be seen that the first stage ended with an approximate relative intensity of 95%, which had to be done at least 2 times (two cycles with the same loads), and the initial cycle of the second stage reaches 57-60%. This would be roughly the progression from the first to the second stage.

Between the initial and final cycles that are proposed, some intermediate cycles will have to be carried out. The reference to get from the initial cycle to the end should be the value of the relative intensity that is proposed in the final cycle. The intensity increase in this case is approximately 7.5-10%. If 2 cycles were done with the initial cycle charges, another 2 could be done with the intermediate charges and then reach the final cycle, which should be done at least twice before entering the next stage. In total, 5-6 cycles would be done at this stage.

What could be a season and a half. The development of the following stages would be done in a similar way to that described for the second stage. Table 3 shows the proposal for group B.

Tabla 3. Basic programming scheme of the initial and final cycles for group B in the squat in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th stages.

• The initial cycle of the Stage and the final cycle of the Stage are programmed.
• In each Stage several intermediate cycles are developed between the two programmed here.
• BW: body weight; PV: loss of speed in the series; EI: effort index.

Table 3 presents the same characteristics as Table 2. Everything that has been commented is valid for this proposal. There are only differences in the proposed loads, which are especially expressed in the relative intensities, which in this table experience a slightly smaller progression and end up with somewhat lower values.

Tables 4, 5 and 6 present the proposals for groups C, D and E. All the indications, adapted to the loads of each of the groups, are valid for these new proposals. In all the groups, during the 2nd and 3rd stages there would be between 5 and 8 cycles, approximately, so that each one would occupy between one and two seasons.

For the 4th stage, a number of cycles cannot be determined, since, if the subject were to remain training for a long time in his sporting life, he would always do so without increasing the programmed relative intensities, since they are not expected to increase.

If these situations come to pass, it would be advisable to do a cycle with a lower relative intensity than expected, just as it would be advisable to do a cycle with a lower relative intensity than that expected as maximum and a little more loss of speed in the series (little), and then , in subsequent cycles, return to the load values ​​provided in the in stage.

It would be very important that, even in these moments of sports life, it be verified whether the way of increasing the absolute load works without increasing the relative one, which would be a good sign of a good response to training.

The general guidelines that we have given when talking about the alternatives in situations in which the subjects increase or do not speed above what is expected, would be of important application in these cases.

Tabla 4. Basic programming scheme of the initial and final cycles for the squat group in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th stages.

Table 5. Basic programming scheme of the initial and final cycles for group D in Squat in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th stages.

Table 6. Basic scheme of programming the initial and final cycles for group E in the squat in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th stages.

In this article, a series of actions are indicated to program the training in each of the cycles that are programmed throughout the sporting life of the trained subject, always keeping in mind the previous considerations exposed in previous articles.

In this series of articles we deal with some of the most important concepts of strength training, collecting notes from the recently published book Strength, Speed ​​and Physical and Sports Performance written by renowned researchers Juan José González Badillo and Juan Ribas Serna.

1. Select the variables that determine the load

Select the minimum speed of the first repetition in the series of the entire training cycle (relative maximum intensity of the cycle), the velocity loss in the series for the relative maximum intensity and the Effort Index (IE).

The IE is determined by the two previous indicators, and it could be the first thing to be programmed, if one had experience in the use of this index and data recorded and analyzed from previous training cycles, but since the same IE can be obtained with intensities different relative speeds and losses in the series, which would also give rise to different effects, First of all, it is necessary to choose the maximum relative intensity of the cycle (the load that moves at the slowest speed within the cycle) as a reference for the evolution of the training load throughout sporting life.

Therefore, in practice, it will be the first thing to decide. The second decision will be about the loss of speed in the series with the maximum relative intensity and the rest of the relative intensities.

The relative intensities could be expressed through real percentages of the RM, as it is more comfortable, intuitive and easier for assessment and communication between professionals and athletes. But these percentages of the RM will always be expressed and quantified through the speed with which the load must be moved, never by the calculation on a RM.

The decision on the values ​​of the relative intensities and speed losses in the series will be made based on age, experience in strength training, the strength needs of the sport and the initial situation of the subject.

2. Select the minimum intensity of the cycle and the loss of speed in the series with this load.

The next step to program training is to select the minimum intensity of the cycle (highest speed of the first repetition within the cycle), that is, the speed with which the first training sessions of the cycle are carried out, with the lightest loads, and the speed loss in the series for this relative intensity.

The speed losses with the lighter intensities will always be lower than with the higher intensities within the cycle. It must be taken into account that the same speed loss under a light load means greater IE (greater fatigue) than under higher loads. Therefore, the use of the same speed loss in the series before all the intensity would mean performing a higher IE with light loads. The basic orientation is that the loss of speed with light loads is lower.

With small loads, by reducing the loss of speed in the series, the repetitions performed will be proportionally further away from the possible repetitions in the series and the IE will be less than or equal to that achieved with high loads.

3. Determine the duration of the cycle.

This is a necessary step, but it is not conditioned by the fact that speed is used as a reference for training organization. The duration of the cycle, as a general rule, should not be more than 8-12 weeks. In addition, you can do cycles of 4-6 weeks that can also be very effective in certain situations. The duration of the cycle will tend to be longer at the beginning of the season and in the early stages of sporting life.

When the number of competitions in the season is not very frequent, for example, only in 2-4 short periods of time per year, the length of the cycles, apart from the adaptation times, is highly conditioned by the dates of the competitions. .

If the competitions are very frequent, what determines the duration or length of the cycles will be the adaptation times.

4. Determine training frequency

This is also a necessary step, but it is not conditioned by the fact of using speed as a reference for programming training. Two strength training sessions a week are compatible in most cases with the specific training of many sports specialties. But the most important thing is to choose well the frequency with which each exercise is trained, which preferably should not be more than twice a week. Weightlifting is naturally excepted from this general suggestion.

However, it must be taken into account that increased frequency does not necessarily mean increased load. If the same job is divided into two sessions, the frequency will increase, but the load will be the same or, with high probability, less, since the fatigue values ​​per session would be lower.

5. Distribution of the maximum intensities of each session, between the minimum and the maximum of the cycle

Depending on the values ​​of the minimum and maximum intensities chosen, it is decided how many intermediate maximum intensities will be used. For example, if the minimum intensity is equivalent to an intensity of 50% of 1RM and the maximum to 70%, 1RM (loads that, naturally, would be determined by speed), training could be programmed with intermediate intensities equivalent to 55, 60 and 65 % of 1RM.

Therefore, there would be five maximum intensities in total for all sessions. Once the training frequency of the exercise and the set of maximum intensities of each session are known, training can be programmed by distributing these intensities among the frequencies.

For example, if for the indicated intensities there were 20 sessions, which could correspond to 10 weeks of training, with two sessions per week the simplest distribution would be to train four times with each maximum intensity. Naturally, the distributions could be different depending on the cases.

This is not the time to develop all the possible alternatives, but as a guideline, it must be taken into account that given the same intensities and weekly training frequency, training can be programmed with different resulting global loads. This overall load will depend on the greater or lesser frequency with which the maximum expected intensities are used.

If instead of performing each maximum intensity four times, as indicated, 50% is performed 5 times, 55% 6 times, and the remaining three intensities are performed 3 times each, the average intensity of the cycle will decrease. If, on the contrary, a redistribution is made by increasing the frequency of the two higher intensities, the average intensity will rise. These changes in the frequency distribution of the maximum relative intensities is a way of modifying the load and progressing in the training demand without modifying the range of intensities used during the cycle.

6. Decide the number of series before each training intensity, especially before the maximum intensities of each session

The most frequent number of series to perform with each of these intensities will be between 2 and 4. And within this range, the most common is to do 3 series with the maximum intensity of the day. With the warm-up intensities, it is usual to use one series for each intensity, progressing until reaching the maximum intensity established (main load of the session). As already indicated, the repetitions to be performed in each series with the maximum intensities of the session are not programmed, as they will be determined by the selected loss of speed.

schedule training

Fatigue in different types of efforts can be characterized and measured in different ways depending on the duration and intensity of the efforts. In this entry we analyze the various factors that cause fatigue according to the duration of the effort.

In this series of articles we deal with some of the most important concepts of strength training, collecting notes from the recently published book Strength, Speed ​​and Physical and Sports Performance written by renowned researchers Juan José González Badillo and Juan Ribas Serna.

SUMMARY

• In short efforts the performance is highly dependent on the oxygen consumption capacity of the subject (VO 2max)
• In efforts of up to 30 minutes, the lactate threshold point (anaerobic) is decisive.
• In efforts that last more than an hour, fatigue is highly associated with the depletion of muscle glycogen stores.
• A good metabolic indicator of stress caused by exertion is the blood lactate concentration.
• The loss of execution speed is a faithful reflection of the fatigue state of the subject.

short duration efforts

From efforts as short as 100 meters of sprint (10-12 s) there are already losses of speed (decrease in performance) involuntarily, which is an indicator that during the test there is a phase in which it manifests itself. fatigue as a loss of capacity to produce force in the unit of time.

The causes of fatigue in this type of effort are multiple, but of all of them the decrease in availability is probably the most important. Considerable increases in the plasmatic concentration of hypoxanthine, ammonia and uric acid have been observed in this type of effort. These results indicate that there have been difficulties in synthesizing ATP via ADP + CP and that energy production has been resorted to through the ADP + ADP = ATP + AMP reaction. This indicates that you there has been significant metabolic stress in the muscle cell, which can be associated with injury to said cell, and the loss of purines that can negatively influence the phosphagen reserves of the muscle, which has repercussions in the reduction of the muscle’s capacity to produce energy quickly in the following days.

Metabolic stress on the muscle cell influences the muscle’s ability to produce energy on successive days.

It does not appear that acidosis is a determining factor in these cases. In addition to what has been indicated, this fatigue is associated with a decrease in the activation of motor units in the excitation-activation process and an increase in Pi and ADP. In other short efforts such as throws, jumps, Olympic lifts and the like, fatigue is related to the same mechanisms, but with less influence from metabolic factors. If the efforts are somewhat longer (15-40 s), the participation of the phosphagen pathway to provide energy is coupled in a very important and decisive way with the ability to rapidly provide energy through the anaerobic glycolytic pathway. For this reason, in this type of effort, all the factors responsible for fatigue in the previous type of effort are present and increased, plus those derived from a drop in pH.

Therefore, it is likely that the concentration of metabolites, the alteration of calcium transport (excessive accumulation of myoplasmic calcium), the accumulation of Pi and the excess of extracellular potassium are also present as responsible for fatigue in this type of effort. The same causes of fatigue occur in efforts that last about a minute, but the fundamental difference is in a greater influence of the pH reduction, which practically reaches its maximum in efforts of this duration. High acidity, in addition to the previously described effects on the cross-bridge cycle, acts on cionide channels (which mainly govern membrane excitability), depolarizing the membrane and leading to the inactivation of sodium channels, essential for the generation of action potentials, at the end of the effort.

In this situation, the hydrogen ions themselves act by priming the working speed of the mitochondria, shifting the burden of maintaining the energy supply to the mitochondrial aerobic pathway. Given the low rate of ATP generation from the mitochondria compared to the anaerobic glycolytic pathway, the rate is clearly reduced at the end of the effort. These same causes could be applied to efforts that last up to three minutes, with a greater dependence on the ability to provide energy aerobically.

long-lasting efforts

When the efforts last between 5 and 10 minutes, performance is highly dependent on the subject’s oxygen consumption capacity (VO 2max), but there is also significant phosphagen depletion and high acidity. Therefore, in this type of effort, fatigue may depend in part on the processes related to phosphagen depletion, and to a large extent on the ability to produce energy aerobically (power and maximum aerobic capacity), but also on the power and anaerobic capacity and problems related to the reduction of pH.

In efforts of up to 30 minutes, the lactate threshold point (anaerobic) is decisive.

In efforts that last up to approximately 30 minutes, the aerobic power of the subject is still very important, but the speed at the lactate threshold point (called anaerobic) seems to be more decisive. Therefore, fatigue may be closely related to the ability to capture, transport, and use oxygen for the oxidation of glucose by the aerobic route, but especially to speed or power in conditions of suprathreshold lactatemia. In the final sprint of some tests, the depletion of muscle CP reserves or excessive muscle acidity may influence. Another factor that may be related to fatigue is high body temperature, although this would be more relevant after one hour of effort.

In efforts that last more than an hour, fatigue is highly associated with the depletion of muscle glycogen stores., and, therefore, although all the factors indicated for the previous efforts are present to some extent, the availability of glycogen stores could be a factor causing the fatigue of this exercise. In addition, glycogen depletion is associated with fatigue as it may cause decreased calcium release from the sarcoplasmic reticulum and consequent effect on muscle activation, although the link to low glycogen is uncertain. with failure of calcium release (Allen et al., 2008).

In efforts that last more than an hour, fatigue is related to the depletion of glycogen stores.

Other factors such as an excess of ammonium, an increase in muscle Mg concentration, an excessive increase in body temperature or an insufficient capacity to use lipids to produce energy could also be the cause of fatigue in this type of effort.

Efforts to overcome external loads

As we have indicated when discussing the concept of fatigue, in addition to a decrease in force production, another aspect of muscle performance such as speed of shortening is also an indicator of fatigue (Allen et al., 2008; Edman, 1992). If we take into account that the loss of speed before the same load is a direct consequence of the reduction of the force applied to said load, we must admit that the loss of speed is a faithful reflection of the state of fatigue of the subject.

It is evident that when a subject is visually perceived to be “tired” (fatigued), we detect it by the loss of execution speed, whatever the activity the subject performs: displacing an external load or displacing his own body. Speed ​​also has an advantage over force as an indicator and quantifier of fatigue, and that is that it can be measured more easily and accurately than force, and also in competition and training gestures or actions.

The loss of speed in efforts to overcome external loads is a faithful reflection of the state of fatigue.

Therefore, when a gesture has to be performed at the maximum speed possible, knowledge of the loss of speed may be the best procedure to determine the degree of fatigue in which the subject is found during and after the effort. These reasonings lead us to propose that when training is carried out through the displacement of external loads, the loss of speed in the series is an accurate indicator of the fatigue (and the load) that carrying out the exercise supposes for the subject.

Given this premise, the validation of the loss of speed in the series as an indicator of fatigue is achieved if there is a high relationship between this loss of speed during and at the end of the effort, and the reduction in contractile capacity, which could be quantified. also through the loss of speed with respect to the speed reached when displacing the same load prior to the fatiguing effort. Specifically, as mechanical indicators we can use two exercises:

1) the loss of speed before the same load, which in our case is the maximum load that can be moved approximately 1 m*s-1, and

2) the loss of jump height (which is really also a loss of speed) after the effort.

To this main validation, the relationship with indicators of the degree of stress caused by the effort could be added, which could contribute to a better knowledge of the type of effort made and the possibility of replacing the measure of certain metabolites by the loss of speed (concurrent validity ). As metabolic indicators we consider the changes in the concentration of lactate and ammonium. Indeed, a good metabolic indicator of stress caused by exertion is the concentration of lactate in the blood.

Lactate production is related to the difference between the motor command of the central nervous system and the actual mechanical execution of the muscle. The greater the difference between what is commanded by the central nervous system and what is executed by the muscle, the greater the lactate production will be. In addition, lactate production, far from being detrimental to the functioning of muscle fibers, is actually an essential component to improve muscle fiber excitability by blocking chloride channels (Ribas, 2010; González-Badillo and Ribas, 2002). As shown later, the relationship between the lactate concentration and the loss of speed of movements executed at maximum speed is excellent, such that the greater the loss of speed, the greater the production of lactate by the muscle fibers (Sánchez -Medina and González-Badillo, 2011; Rodríguez-Rosell et al., 2018).

When designing a training schedule, the elements and factors that constitute a work plan are organized in a concrete and detailed way. In this case, the objective will be to improve strength qualities so that they contribute effectively to the achievement of specific performance in competition.

In this series of articles we deal with some of the most important concepts of strength training, collecting notes from the recently published book Strength, Speed ​​and Physical and Sports Performance written by renowned researchers Juan José González Badillo and Juan Ribas Serna.

SUMMARY

• Training programming is the organization of the sequence of efforts and rest times to achieve specific goals.
• Training must be quantified in order to make programming decisions based on data and not opinions.
• The evolution of the loads during the programming depends, fundamentally, on three determining factors: the initial situation of the subject, the strength needs in the sport specialty and the strength needs of the subject himself.

Introduction to the concept of programming

Programming is a way of organizing various activities to achieve specific goals, and for this reason it has nothing in common with carrying out training routinely, or based on improvisations that are not supported by a plan that justifies and delimits them. the margin of variation that can be admitted from what was planned. This means that programming must ensure, on the one hand, the unity of the training process and, on the other, its flexibility, as a consequence of the systematic and frequent control and evaluation of the process itself.

The programming of daily training is understood as a task made up of multiple subtasks, but unique as a process, whose objective is to improve the performance of the athlete or of any person, and which is expressed through a sequence of efforts duly adjusted according to specific objectives and the subject’s training needs and possibilities. This unit of the training process is fulfilled when said programmed sequence of efforts is respected.

Training programming is expressed as a sequence of efforts adjusted to objectives

But for this sequence to be respected, flexibility must also be given. The flexibility of the programming allows us to modify the specific load programmed (weights, series and repetitions per series) for one or several days so that the effort made is the one foreseen and not another different one. In other words, the target load (proposed load) is modified so as not to modify the programmed actual effort (actual load). Although the modification of the proposed load does not necessarily guarantee an improvement of the program or of the performance, rather it allows maintaining the programmed, the unity of the programming.

Only the evaluation of the elements of the training process can justify the opportune revisions of the programming in progress and of those that are going to be carried out in the future. From the foregoing it can be deduced that the trainer’s mission as a programmer, rather than determining a detailed series of activities to be carried out during training practice, is a permanent task of structuring, analyzing and constantly reviewing what he is doing. Among the functions of the coach is to observe daily the evolution of the athlete’s form, something that, especially in strength training, is not done frequently.

Only if this systematic observation is carried out, a true source of the coach’s experience, can it be said that someone is being trained. Otherwise, only a standard or average athlete model is trained that rarely, OR never matches the actual athlete. This has the consequence that the programmed loads will quickly stop adjusting to the true training needs and possibilities of the subject, and, therefore, the real load will not be the programmed one.

The trainer’s mission as programmer is the permanent structuring, analysis and revision of what is being trained.

This same observation also aims to analyze the variables involved in the process, which will allow us to discover the possible connections and reciprocal influences between these variables and between them and the results.

If we set ourselves the task of training in this way, we will be in the best conditions to understand, apply and adapt the contributions of science to our daily practice. This, necessarily, will lead to the development of an authentic training experience, which is what makes the coach improve his work and his knowledge every day.

The effects of training on physical and sports performance arise from the application of a series of stimuli organized in such a way that they allow a sufficient development of the physical condition and of the abilities of any sport specialty or type of performance that is intended.

At this point, it will be necessary to focus on the training that is usually considered as “strength training”, although all training aimed at improving physical condition and almost all sports performance are strength training itself.

The organization of the training is carried out through a schedule. Programming means “devising and ordering the actions necessary to carry out a project”. (RAE Dictionary). In the case of sports training, for some time programming has been defined as the expression of a series or ordered succession of efforts that are dependent on each other. This definition includes the concepts that define the term “programming”.

“Devise”, because it is thought with a determined degree of effort, is an idea, which is what is programmed. But, in addition, these efforts are actions that must be ordered, second concept of the definition, and in an interdependent way, to carry out the project of developing the physical and sports condition of the subject or sports group. However, in the literature and in the jargon of sports training, the term “periodization” is used very frequently to refer to the organization of training. Periodization means “action and effect of periodizing”, and periodizing means “establishing periods for a historical, cultural, scientific process…” (DRAE).

A training process that allows the correct use of loads and recovery times to avoid excessive fatigue

The most striking thing is that the term “periodization” is used as the solution to the training problem, because “periodized” training is considered as “a training process that allows the correct use of loads and recovery times to avoid the excessive fatigue” or “the division of annual training or a cycle into appropriate phases with the aim of reaching the peak of maximum performance at the appropriate and predetermined time” or “the process through which the intensity and volume of training is manipulated”. the right way for the athlete to reach their maximum performance at the right time, minimizing the risk of injury, stagnation and overtraining”.

But, of course, “periodization” by itself does not ensure any of this. In sports, establishing periods does not guarantee a good workout. In the same way, it is evident that, in a project, dividing the process into periods does not guarantee that it is a good project. For this reason, the term “periodization” is not useful and, furthermore, it is not adequate for what it intends to define, because “periodization” is not the “organization of the activities of a process (training)”, but the “division into periods ”

The term “programming” or “program” is the one that adjusts to what you really want to do, which is, as indicated, “devise and order the actions necessary to carry out a project”. Therefore, the appropriate term would be programming. Although saying that the training has been “scheduled” does not ensure anything either, since the programming can be good or bad. However, the term is correct. Its meaning corresponds to what is intended to be done: “devise and order the actions”, which in this case means above all organizing a sequence of efforts (loads) to achieve the intended objective, even if this sequence is not correct and therefore does not the objectives are achieved.

Therefore, the term “scheduling” should be used instead of “periodization.” This proposal is even more justified if one takes into account that when one speaks of “periodization” what one wants to express is a form of “programming”, of designing a program to systematically and specifically direct the training and the variation of the exercise. volume, intensity and exercises to achieve the best results at the right time. This would really be programming. The problem is that unnecessary terms tend to be introduced without considering their suitability.

But the matter is complicated when the term “non-periodized” is also used in the language of training. It would literally mean that something, training is supposed to “not be divided into periods”. If periodizing is dividing into periods, not periodizing would mean that the entire process, of whatever type, is considered as a unit, without changes that justify differentiating some moments from others, and therefore it would be a question of “a single period”, in the one that “everything happens or is done the same”: that is, every day the same load is applied, the same stimulus, the same training.

This situation is unrealistic, because, on the one hand, it cannot be guaranteed that the same load is always applied, and, mainly, because no person who is dedicated to training other people to improve their physical and sports condition can be happen to ignore one of the few principles or rules of adaptation that can be considered as such, such as the principle of the progression of the loads, and another that, in part, is already included in the first one, which is the variability of the loads. loads.

Therefore, this distinction does not seem very useful. Although much space has been devoted in the literature to comparing the effect of “periodized” versus “non-periodized” training. Generally, the “non-periodized” has always had the worst luck. Other terms related to the organization of training refer to the phases or periods that comprise a space of training time. It is very common to refer to the “preparatory”, “competitive” and “transition” periods, which occur in the order indicated.

At the end of the “competitive period” the competitions are held (maybe also within the “competitive period” itself). None of these terms, in our opinion, is appropriate, as will be seen below, nor does their name serve to improve the training program. If “preparing” is “performing the necessary operations to obtain a result or product”, why isn’t “competitive” also “preparatory”, if the athlete has not even competed yet? Doesn’t the athlete continue to “prepare” until reach the competition?, what is the indicator that the “preparatory period” is over and you are already in the “competitive”?, what change or magnitude of change in training justifies it?, do all the specialists understand what itself? Or is it simply a question of dividing or naming the total training time into two or three parts or denominations?

On the other hand, if “transition” is “the action and effect of passing from one mode of being (a state) to another”, “transition” would be the passage from each of the “periods” to the next, not the denomination of one of them. It would be much more reasonable to call this supposed “transition period”, “recovery” or “detraining” period, or something similar.

Very close to this denomination is the one that includes four other terms and is the one that divides the space of training time into “general preparation phase”, “special preparation phase”, “competitive phase” and “transition phase”.

training time in “general preparation phase”, “special preparation phase”, “competitive phase” and “transition phase”.

General preparation phase

In this case it is unlikely that all professionals understand the “general preparation phase”. Because by its very name, the “general” can include many activities of a different nature, which, in sport, in most cases are far removed from the type of performance typical of the specialty for which one trains. In addition, it would be necessary to consider which sports or sports specialties should “make a general preparation”, because if the “general” activity is not reflected in an improvement. of specific performance, it would not make sense for it to be carried out. A “general activity” remote from the mechanical and metabolic characteristics of competitive activity is at least unlikely to have (positive) transfer to competitive exercise, but rather could cause interference (negative transfer), or, in the best of log cases, being sterile and wasting time.

Special preparation phase

The “special preparation” phase could be understood to a greater extent, since it can be interpreted as the phase in which you train with the exercises closest to those of the competition and with those of the competition itself, including the speed / intensity values. and volume typical of the competition or close to them. Really, all the preparation time should be “special preparation”, if by this is meant the application of training that truly has a high probability of having a positive effect on specific performance.

competitive phase

About the “competitive phase” and “transition” comments have already been made previously. Another group of widely used terms is “macrocycle”, “mesocycle” and “microciole”. The first source of confusion with this terminology is that the range of time to which we can refer is not a specific one, but multiple, which means that using one of these terms without adding the time that we want it to understand will always be imprecise and will generate confusion. . For example, when we refer to a “macrocycle”, the time it comprises can range from several weeks (10-12) to several years, for example four, an Olympic cycle. But of course, there will be those who say no, that a “macrocycle” does not cover more than one year.

In other words, we already have three measures for the same term, and they are quite different measures and all of them are used. The same happens with the other terms, although the average time is lower for the “mesocycle” and even lower for the “microcycle”. But what deserves more attention is the justification for which the different terms are usually used. For example, if we train for a period of 12 weeks in order to improve strength, and we consider the first “mesocycle”, of three weeks, to be a “mesocycle” of hypertrophy”, we would be saying that during the remaining 9 weeks it is no longer stimulated nor does “hypertrophy” develop, or if from week 4 to week 6 we have the “mesocycle” of “maximum strength”, we would have to understand that in the previous “mesocycle” strength has not been trained or improved.

We consider that it is out of the question that none of these conclusions is reasonable, so it must be admitted that the naming of these time slots with any of these names does not serve to better understand training, nor to improve programmed training, nor for communication between professionals and specialists in the field of physical and sports training.

Training expressed through numbers can be analyzed and quantified, giving you the opportunity to draw data-driven conclusions and make informed decisions.

In short, the training is not organized through “names”, because these do not have the property of determining what the load is. Training training is organized through “numbers”. Training expressed through numbers can be analyzed and quantified, giving you the opportunity to draw data-driven conclusions and make informed decisions. It serves to express with greater precision than in any other way what the applied load is and to check the acute and medium and long-term effect it produces, and also allows communication between training professionals.

We understand that in connection with this aspect of programming terminology, only the term “cycle” should be used, ie “programming a training cycle”. Therefore, we only use the term “cycle” when we want to refer to the extension of a certain training period of time.

We define a training cycle as a training period of time in which all the necessary loads have been applied, according to the programmer’s criteria, to achieve the expected objective. It could also be expressed as the process in which the necessary evolution of the main characteristic variables of training load is produced: volume, intensity and type of exercise, to achieve the expected objective.

The evolution of the loads depends, fundamentally, on three determining factors: the initial situation of the subject, the strength needs in the sports specialty and the strength needs of the subject himself. At the end of the cycle there can be a competition or a test or even none of the two controls, and there will always be a recovery time before starting another training cycle. Although occasionally one can speak of “phases” within the training cycle, it really is a continuum in which to identify at what point in the cycle an athlete is, it could be added that he is in the “phase” of high, medium or low volume, or in the “phase” of high, medium or low intensity or any other reference of the variables that determine the training load.

The evolution of the loads depends, fundamentally, on three determining factors: the initial situation of the subject, the strength needs in the sports specialty and the strength needs of the subject himself.

The cycles can have different lengths. For this reason, for a better definition of the cycle, we must add its duration, generally indicating the number of days or weeks it comprises.. The adaptation processes oriented towards performance improvement are developed through cycles that are repeated periodically. Cycles aimed at improving a physical quality are common in all training sessions, whatever the sport, although they will not develop in the same way in all cases.

When the development needs of the physical qualities are high, the characteristics of each cycle (volume and intensity values, mainly) are more accentuated: the intensities and volumes are higher and the differences between the maximum and minimum values ​​are greater. The opposite occurs when the needs for these qualities are low.

The general objective of any training cycle is the improvement of the manifestation of strength, resistance and force production in the unit of time in specific actions, that is, the improvement of useful force. The way to develop each of these cycles will be different, as we have indicated, depending on the characteristics of the sports or sports specialties and the specialties of the subjects.

The degree of development of the physical qualities will be different according to the specialties. The need to significantly improve some quality above the others also determines the characteristics and orientation of the cycle. The duration of a complete cycle is conditioned by the characteristics of the sport, but fundamentally by the adaptation time. The adaptation time that most influences the duration of the cycle, is the one that is necessary for the development of physical qualities. Although good physical condition is not enough to ensure sports form (specific form), it is the first condition and absolutely necessary.

full cycle length for strength training should not exceed 14-16 weeks

In any case, the full cycle length for strength training should not exceed 14-16 weeks. The most effective length could be between and 12 weeks. Other shorter cycles can be used to maintain or recover or at least approach recently achieved levels of strength.

The effectiveness of a training cycle will depend to a large extent on the combination of volume and intensity values, but always, both the result and the values ​​of the variables themselves will be conditioned by the initial situation of the subject, state of performance. initial, initial work capacity, current training time, current detraining time, age… and to all this we must add the objectives that are sought and the strength needs of the sporting specialty and the subject. Naturally, all these nuances will be developed later in the contents related to training programming.

Training periodization is still a way to “schedule” or “organize training.” This article describes in detail what it consists of and provides an introduction to linear and nonlinear periodization.

In this series of articles we deal with some of the most important concepts of strength training, collecting notes from the recently published book Strength, Speed ​​and Physical and Sports Performance written by renowned researchers Juan José González Badillo and Juan Ribas Serna.

Without going into any type or model yet, the basic principle of “periodization” is the change in volume and intensity over the training time frame. The typical trend of these changes is from high volume with low intensity to low volume and high intensity. Naturally, they do not make sense, although it is not the most important thing, that this model of training organization (intensity and volume manipulation), already used by the Greeks in antiquity, is identified with a specific name and not with a term. generic that includes its characteristics in its definition, such as the term “programming”.

More specifically, it is considered that “periodization” has as its main objectives

1. The appropriate balance between training loads and preparation for competition during the season;
2. Control fatigue and reduce the probability of reaching overtraining; and
3. Getting ready for competition at the right time (DeWeese et al., 2015).

One would have to wonder if there is any model, plan, program, way… of training that does not seek these objectives. It does not seem reasonable to accept that by giving it a specific name all these objectives will be met. And, furthermore, it is said that this is achieved mainly by adequate (non-linear) variability, which can be achieved through manipulation of volume, intensity and selection of exercises. Naturally, there is no training program, whatever its name, that does not contemplate and apply this manipulation.

A differentiation between “periodization” and “scheduling” is sometimes proposed. Considering that in the first case it is “a division of training time into phases that guarantee when the necessary adaptations have to be made to achieve specific performance objectives”. While the programming is “the concretion of this work plan through the determination of the exercises, series, repetitions, intensities, pause times…”.

programming is “the realization of this work plan through the determination of the exercises, series, repetitions, intensities, pause times…”

Naturally, “achieving the appropriate adaptation or performance objectives at a specific time” is a wish (“periodization”), without any basis or justification, and that only makes sense if accompanied by the proper and adequate manipulation of the variables that determine the applied load is a big problem under study and not easy to solve) and the effect that this produces (the way to measure the effect is also an important problem, not always adequately solved).

Therefore, regardless of other considerations that question the use of the very concept of “periodization”, what is really important is, once again, the manipulation of numbers; intensities, series, repetitions, rest times… Therefore, “periodize” has no meaning or effect on performance without the expression of the variables that determine the load.

linear periodization

While the volume tends to increase from the beginning of the training cycle until it reaches its maximum value soon, and then decreases until the end of the cycle, the intensity presents a tendency to increase from the beginning of the cycle. When this occurs, the training schedule is referred to as “linear periodization” (PL). The term “linear” itself is not very consistent with reality either, since neither the volume nor the intensity evolve in a neal way, but with a tendency to increase or decrease, but necessarily with permanent ups and downs of greater or lesser magnitude.

When it comes to strength training, in LP four main phases or objectives or denominations are usually differentiated: “strength-endurance” or “muscular resistance” phase, “hypertrophy” phase, “maximum strength” phase and phase of “power”. The latter is sometimes divided into a “force-power” phase and another “power” and “RFD peak”.

When it comes to strength training, in PL four main phases are usually differentiated

This type of approach is also sometimes referred to as “block periodization”. All these names are meaningless because:

1. In the phase of “strength-endurance” or “muscular resistance” there is also an effect on hypertrophy, strength and power,
2. In the “hypertrophy” phase, muscular endurance, strength and power are improved, then there would also be resistance, strength and power phases: would it make sense to improve hypertrophy and not improve strength? strength, is it possible that the power does not improve? For both questions the answer is negative, an affirmative answer is not possible in either of the two cases,
3. From the foregoing it can be deduced that if strength improves (third phase), power will necessarily improve, and it is also probable that hypertrophy and resistance will continue to increase, then this phase is also one of power and probably also hypertrophy, and if the strength, surely it will also improve resistance to the same load,
4. It is not possible for power to improve in the fourth phase without strength improving.

In summary, “giving names” to the phases is, in addition to being useless, clearly wrong and indicates a lack of knowledge of the training effect. The approximate and typical loads of these phases are usually the following:

• In the “strength-endurance” or “muscular resistance” phase, training sessions are programmed with a high number of repetitions per series (15-20), with a stress character (EC) maximum, that is, 1-3 series of 15-20RM (maximum number of repetitions possible in the series, which is known as “until muscular failure”), and the recovery time is low, one minute maximum. The percentage of the RM could be of the order of 60-65%. This training is proposed for 2-3 days / week
• In the “hypertrophy” phase, training is scheduled with a high number of repetitions and series with maximum EC (4-6 series of 8-15 RM), and a recovery time between series of 1-2 minutes. The percentage of the RM would be approximately 65-80%. This training is proposed for 3-5 days/week.
• In the “maximum strength” phase, the number of repetitions per series is reduced (3-5 series of 3-8 RM) and “muscular failure” continues, the percentage of the RM would be estimated between 80 and 90 %, and recovery time between sets of 3-5 minutes. This training is proposed for 3-5 days/week.
• And in the “power” phase, the highest intensities are reached (3-5 series of 1-3RM), the estimated percentage would be 90-100% of the RM and 5-8 minutes of recovery 4-6 days / week ,

“Giving names” to the phases is, in addition to being useless, clearly wrong and indicates a lack of knowledge of the training effect

In the first three phases, single and multi-joint exercises are included, and in the fourth, multi-joint exercises are a priority, but always, as in the other phases, for muscles and small ones. In the first three phases it is usually indicated that the movement be carried out at a moderate speed, even setting specific and constant times for the concentric phase of the movements or a certain stable proportion of eccentric-concentric time, and in the fourth phase it is usually call phases of “morphological adaptation”, and the last two of “neural adaptation”.

With some small variations in the magnitude of the loads, this is the guide model that is proposed with great frequency in the literature to apply to athletes, whatever their specialty, and to non-athletes, although for these sometimes more are proposed. repetitions per series, because supposedly “it is a minor load”.

This approach, which is the most common and widespread, in addition to what is indicated in previous paragraphs, needs some comments.

We haven’t met anyone who, after doing, for example, a true 10-12RM set, was able to do, with a reasonable recovery time (3-5 minutes), a second let alone a third 10-12RM set. with the same absolute charge. For this reason, in addition to the observations that we have made in previous paragraphs regarding the name of the phases and their meanings, we consider that this type of training is not possible to carry out in practice, regardless of whether trying to do so may offer better or worse results than other less tiring workouts, which will be seen in another section.

The claim that the movement is done at a specific non-maximum speed and that muscle failure is also reached is not possible, because the speed of the last repetition must necessarily be equivalent to the speed of the RM, which would be the speed minimum at which the subject can perform the exercise. This means that, if a certain execution speed is to be maintained, all the repetitions would have to be done at the RM speed or, otherwise, the proposed execution times cannot be met, because, necessarily, there would be a decrease in the execution speed.

One more point needs to be made regarding the fourth phase, the “power” phase. According to the scheme described, in this phase it is considered that “power is developed”. In addition to the fact that it has already been indicated that power has been developed in all the previous phases, unless the effect of training had been null or negative for strength, contrary to what is proposed, this fourth phase is the one in which Probably less power will be developed, since the conditions for already high power levels in the execution of the training are the least ideal: maximum load and minimum speed of execution, which gives rise to minimum values ​​of power.

It does not seem reasonable to claim that the phase in which less power is generated in training actions is the phase in which power is developed the most.

Naturally, if only Olympic or partial Olympic exercises were used in this fourth phase, such as the clean or the power snatch, the power generated in each repetition would always be greater than performing a bench press or a sit-up. any other exercise, but this does not mean that power has not been developed earlier, nor does it mean that these Olympic exercises cannot or should not be trained in the earlier phases.

However, it is true that in some versions of the “periodized training” model, “maximum power” phases with explosive or ballistic exercises are proposed, especially based on jumps. Although these conditions would allow reaching higher power values ​​in each execution, this variety does not solve the mentioned problems, because the power will continue without improving if the maximum force does not improve before the loads with which it is jumped, then this still does not make sense ” new stage”.

The denomination of the phases as “morphological adaptation” or “neural adaptation” is not justified, since both types of adaptations are taking place at all times, especially neural adaptation, since the nervous system cannot be excluded from either physical activity or type of physical training that is carried out.

This sequence of “objectives” and types of loads is justified because it is assumed that the effect produced in each of the phases is necessary to obtain a better result in the next one. That is, to improve strength it is necessary to have previously improved or developed muscular endurance and hypertrophy, and to improve power it is necessary to have previously improved strength. None of this is justified or adjusted to reality:

neither greater hypertrophy nor greater training volume are necessarily accompanied by greater strength gains

On the one hand, neither a greater hypertrophy nor a greater training volume are necessarily accompanied by a greater gain in strength (González-Badillo et al., 2005; Pareja-Blanco et al., 2016; Schoenfeld et al., 2019). For the same maximum and relative intensity of each session, a volume of 65% of the maximum volume performed by a group of competitive athletes offered the same effect as the group that performed the maximum volume (González-Badillo et al., 2005).

Given the same relative intensity in each session, losing 20% ​​of the speed of the first repetition in the series produced better performance in the squat, jump and 20-meter race than losing more than 40% (situation close to muscular failure), at despite the fact that the group that lost more than 40% experienced a greater increase in muscle volume (Pareja-Blanco et al., 2016). Given the same relative intensity and number of repetitions per series in each session, performing five series produced greater hypertrophy than doing one or three series, but not greater strength (Schoenfeld et al., 2019).

On the other hand, it is absurd to consider that “before improving power, you have to improve strength”. The improvement in power at the same absolute load can only be achieved if the maximum force applied at said load has improved: more force applied at the same absolute load for the same distance means doing the same work in less ti increased power, which , necessarily, means that power has increased. If we consider power as a product of strength and speed, the conclusion is the same: more strength for more speed (less absolute load time, more power is impossible.

Therefore, with the same absolute load, it is impossible for “strength to improve without improving power”, in the same way that, in “in the power phase”, it is impossible for power to improve if at the same time it does not the maximum applied force is improving.

Naturally, the degree of load applied, and especially the degree of fatigue generated during the session, will cause the training effect to occur to a greater extent in some areas of the force-velocity curve than in others.

But, in whichever of the areas that the effect occurs, if the force has increased, the power will necessarily improve at the same absolute load. If presumed “maximum power” is measured through jumping, throwing, or lightly loaded actions, it is very likely that performance on these exercises will improve more when fatigue has been reduced, late in the process, by doing fewer repetitions per set. “and explosively” as recommended in the model. But coming to the conclusion that all the previous process is necessary to improve potency does not make any sense.

Periodization in linear or undulating periodization

The use of the same types of training described in the previous point, but applying one of them every day, every week or every two weeks, repeating the hypertrophy-strength-power sequence, in this same order or in other alternative orders, with a The tendency to increase intensity and decrease volume gives rise to what has been called non-linear or undulating periodization (NLP).

All the observations indicated for the LP would be applicable in this case, in addition to the fact that the physiological stress would increase even more, since very high intensities would be reached from the first training sessions. It is argued that this model is justified by the need to provide even greater variability to training, facilitating adaptation and recovery from different loads.

It is likely that, indeed, there is more variability in volume and intensity, but achieving greater or better adaptation and recovery between loads by including all the phases (3 or 4) mentioned in the same week is not guaranteed.

These 8 errors related to strength training contribute to the confusion and paralyzation of the development of sports training methodology. When programming a training, a series of objectives and types of training are usually proposed that are not always correct.

In this series of articles we deal with some of the most important concepts of strength training, collecting notes from the recently published book Strength, Speed ​​and Physical and Sports Performance written by renowned researchers Juan José González Badillo and Juan Ribas Serna.

Mistake 1: proposing power training as an objective and sometimes as a phase of a training cycle

This proposal, already discussed in other sections, is wrong because there is no such thing as “power training”. This is so because power is trained in each strength training session. Only improving the applied force (maximum force before the same load) is guaranteed to improve power. In other words, any training that has the effect of improving strength will produce an improvement in speed with the same load, which necessarily means an improvement in power: the same work in less time.

Therefore, it would not make sense either to consider the objective or the “strength-power” phase within a cycle, which is very common in many training proposals. It is not possible to improve power if strength does not improve, and therefore, all training. of strength that produces an improvement in strength performance will mean an improvement in power.

any training that has the effect of improving strength will produce an improvement in speed for the same load, which necessarily means an improvement in power: same work in less time.

Training with the maximum power load can ensure power improvement in the training exercise itself, but only temporarily. In addition, the improvement of power in the training exercise does not guarantee the improvement in the competition exercise. Performance improvement is nothing more than moving the same load at a higher speed, and this necessarily means that power is improved.

Ignorance about this error is so serious that in “scientific” publications it is even considered as a “key finding” that there is a high correlation between strength and power, and especially between changes in strength and power, and therefore This leads to the advice, as a practical application of the “finding”, that it is very important to improve maximum strength if power needs to be improved, something obvious.

Mistake 2: proposing a “transfer phase” in a training cycle

There is no “transfer phase” in a training cycle, because the transfer is intended or sought from the first training to the last, not from a specific day. What has happened if before starting the “transfer phase” the performance has improved? When an exercise is being trained, nothing about it is “transferred”, just said exercise is trained.

There is no “transfer phase” in a training cycle, because the transfer is intended or sought from the first training to the last

It is unreasonable that by the will of the person who schedules a training session on a specific day, a transfer effect begins, at the same time that, also by human will, no transfer has occurred prior to that day. This problem arises from a misinterpretation of the concept of transfer.

Mistake 3: Proposing an “explosive strength phase” in a training cycle There is no such thing as an “explosive strength phase” in a training cycle.

“Explosive force” should be understood as force production in unit time (RFD). Like the transfer, the improvement of the RFD / “explosive force” is intended from the first moment of the cycle until its end. Whenever you try to apply force as quickly as possible (reach maximum speed if there is displacement, maximum slope in the force-time curve, maximum RFD) you train the RFD (“explosive force”), not from of a certain day, nor during a specific period of time “ordered” by whoever schedule the training.

Mistake 4: Proposing a “maximal strength transformation phase” in a training cycle

There is no such thing as a “maximal strength transformation phase” in a training cycle. The transformations (physiological, anatomical, technical…) that give rise to the development etjera transformation, modification, change naming. There would be no training if there were no positive or negative transformation, modification, change (neural, structural, metabolic, enzymatic). The maximum force value reached cannot be “transformed” into anything. What can be transformed is the force-velocity curve, but this is intended from the beginning of the cycle, although sometimes it is not achieved, which would mean that there has been no change in force performance.

Mistake 5: proposing to perform “maximum strength training” at some stage of the cycle

There is no “maximum strength training” but an indeterminate number of workouts for the improvement of maximum strength. Maximal strength can be improved and with any training load (although not all loads work for all subjects). The problem arises from a misinterpretation of the concept of maximum force.

There is no “maximum strength training” but an indeterminate number of workouts to improve maximum strength

Before each load there is a value of maximum force or maximum force applied. All training is necessarily maximum strength. It is not possible to perform other types of | strength training other than for the improvement of maximal strength, regardless of the load with which training is carried out and the load with which maximal strength is measured. The only possible goal when strength training is to improve maximal strength.

Mistake 6: proposing to perform a “speed training, but not maximum strength”

It is not possible to improve speed under a load without improving the force (maximum force) applied to said load. That is to say, a speed training that is not at the same time of maximum strength is not possible. Only improving strength will improve speed.

Error 7: proposing a “ballistic” training against a training with high loads or any training mistakenly considered as “maximal strength”

When speaking of “ballistic” action, we must understand an action in which the effort is made to apply the force as quickly as possible, that is, an action, static or dynamic, in which an attempt is made to reach the maximum slope in the force-curve. time or maximum RFD. If the form of force application meets the indicated requirements, the training could be called “ballistic”, although the use of the term is not necessary nor is the term the most appropriate. Therefore, a “ballistic” training is not the one that is carried out with light loads or performing jumps or throws, but all that in which the RFD is the highest possible, whatever the load and even if the action is static.

a “ballistic” training is not the one that is carried out with light loads or performing jumps or throws, but all that in which the RFD is the highest possible

As has been commented, there is so much contradiction in the literature, that there is talk of both “ballistic training” to refer to light loads and high speed of execution, and “isometric force ballistic training”, in which there would be no displacement and therefore velocity would be equal to zero.

Error 8: proposing a training considered as “resistance training to loss of strength” (the term strength-resistance to force is commonly used)

It does not exist or it should not exist, because all training is “resistance to loss of strength”. Resistance to loss of strength is trained with specific training or exercise, which includes the specific degree (opposition to movement). All training is resistance to loss of strength.

The improvement of the strength before an absolute load necessarily improves the resistance before that load because said load becomes a relative intensity. lower, which means that you will be able to move more times (which is less relevant) or that you will move faster (which is important) for the same time or for the same distance, because the effect of the training on the resistance it is measured by the changes in the average speed during the time or the distance that the effort lasts.

8 most common mistakes related to strength training. 8 most common mistakes related to strength training. 8 most common mistakes related to strength training. 8 most common mistakes related to strength training. 8 most common mistakes related to strength training.

The organization of intensity and volume in training loads is a basic aspect in training programming. In this entry the considerations of combining volume and intensity are evaluated and the key questions regarding the programming of the loads are answered.

In this series of articles we deal with some of the most important concepts of strength training, collecting notes from the recently published book Strength, Speed ​​and Physical and Sports Performance written by renowned researchers Juan José González Badillo and Juan Ribas Serna.

summary

• By increasing or keeping the intensity and/or volume stable, the effect on training is positive. In all other cases the effect is not defined or is negative.
• Stimulus levels should be applied when it best suits the subject’s capacity and produces a positive effect.
• The application of excessive loads almost always has negative consequences such as the risk of injury and the difficulty of executing a correct technique.

Changes in the training load are produced by modifying some of its factors: volume, intensity and type of exercise. Regarding the exercises, the difficulty and load increase, regardless of other factors, as a greater number of joints and muscle groups are involved, which is generally accompanied by greater technical difficulty and greater mechanical work due to unit of action (repetition).

But if we keep an exercise or group of exercises stable, the changes in volume and intensity are what will determine if the changes in the load are positive, negative or null for performance. When we talk about intensity, unless otherwise stated, we always refer to relative intensity, not absolute (weight).

Changes in the training load are produced by modifying some of its factors: volume, intensity and type of exercise.

Taking into account all the possible combinations in the change of these factors within a training cycle: increase or decrease the volume y The intensity As well as the possibility that one or both of them remain stable, there can be nine situations, which we are going to analyze below, indicating their effect on performance depending on the way and when they are used.

1. The volume and intensity increase: the effect will tend to be positive.

Whenever this combination occurs within the training process, there is an initial improvement in performance, unless both variables (volume and intensity) are already at a very high degree of load in relation to the subject’s possibilities. If this last circumstance occurs, the effect will be null in the best of cases, and almost always negative. If this circumstance does not occur, and therefore the effect is positive, it must be considered that this load trend would only be valid for three or four weeks in a row, and must be modified later.

Only very slight increases in the load and with very low training frequencies allow this trend to be maintained for a longer number of weeks.

this trend of the loads would only be valid for three or four weeks in a row, and must be modified later

2. The volume increases and the intensity remains stable: the effect will tend to be positive

The effect will be positive if the trend does not continue. Only between two and six sessions would the positive effects be maintained without increasing the intensity. It is a form of progression suitable for the Beginnings of a training cycle.

3. The volume increases and the intensity decreases: the effect is not defined.

It would be useful when you want to increase muscle mass or you want to make a deep change in the training system to break a state of negative adaptation (stagnation). However, in any of these cases, it would always be necessary to increase the intensity again after a few workouts, otherwise the aforementioned objectives would not even be obtained.

4. The volume remains stable and the intensity increases: the effect will tend to be positive.

It is an always positive trend change for strength performance. Its best application may be at the point in the cycle when a considerable volume of work has already been achieved. One or two weeks with this tendency can have a very good effect.

5. Volume and Intensity remain stable: the effect is not defined.

This situation should not continue for more than two or three sessions in a row. If this is done, the effect could be positive, otherwise it would be negative.

6. The volume remains stable and the intensity decreases: the effect will tend to be negative

We cannot expect anything positive from this trend that is worthwhile in strength performance: there is no increase in the stimulus in any of the variations, and neither could we expect an improvement in form due to the recovery effect, since the volume does not decreases. Seeking recovery by only reducing intensity is not appropriate for strength.

Seeking recovery by only reducing intensity is not appropriate for strength.

7. The volume decreases and the intensity increases: the effect will tend to be positive.

This trend may be valid for: a) maintain the performance achieved b) recover the body without loss of strength and c) occasionally, to improve performance after a high volume phase.

Its most effective application occurs in the 2nd phase of the training cycle.

8. The volume decreases and the intensity remains stable: the effect will tend to be positive

It is positive only as a recovery, well in a week of unloading before a competition.

9. Volume and intensity decrease: the effect is not defined.

It would never offer positive effect for strength improvement. It would make sense as a form of deep recovery in phases of active rest. Within the training cycle it can be used in a session as a way of unloading.

To all these possible combinations, we should add the combination that we could consider the most favorable and desired, which is the one in which the relative intensity remains practically stable while the absolute intensity increases, with volumes also practically stable or minimal oscillations, or In any case, a downward trend. This trend will continue as long as it remains positive, during all training cycles.

As a synthesis of the previous assumptions about adaptation to strength training, we can say that each level or degree of stimulus should be applied at the time it is most necessary, best suited to the athlete’s capacity, and produce a sufficient positive effect. Once a charge has been used successfully, it has little or no effect if we want to use it again.

Each level or degree of stimulus should be applied at the time it is most necessary, best suited to the athlete’s ability, and produce a sufficient positive effect.

Therefore, if we are capable of providing successive adjusted stimuli, each time more demanding, within the strength needs, and with real variability, it is more likely that the progression in the results will be maintained for longer and greater. By using a small stimulus, but one that is enough to provide great progress, we are not only applying adequate training, but we are preparing the athlete to be able to face other higher loads when necessary.

If heavy loads are used, even if they are not necessary, there is also great initial progress, but this almost always has negative consequences: risk of injury, rendering useless the application of lighter loads that would have been effective at the time, not creating the adequate conditions for the correct learning of the technique in some exercises that require it, reduce and range of stimuli applicable throughout sporting life, and therefore, the possibilities of variability.

As a conclusion, the following can be stated:

1. In strength training it is easy to progress in the first cycles of work, but this should not lead to violently increasing the training demands with the intention of progressing more quickly. The efforts required by each stage of sporting life must be respected. A lower degree of effort does not mean that progress is necessarily less. An effort adjusted to the real needs of the athlete can mean a greater and better development of strength both in the short and long term.
2. The degree of effort must be strictly adjusted to the circumstances of age and experience.
3. Almost any training can be effective for a few weeks or months, but progression over many years, improvement in technique, and joint and muscle health are more likely to be achieved with rational training, according to the adaptation assumptions indicated.
4. The magnitude of the load depends fundamentally on the volume, the intensity and the exercise that is used.
5. The introduction of a higher load magnitude is allowed and justified when the preceding ones have been assimilated. That is, when these loads are below the current stimulation threshold of the neuromuscular system, and therefore the organism no longer presents a positive reaction to said loads. In this situation we can say that the charges used up to now have already produced their effect.
6. The charges lose their effect firstly in absolute terms, due to the continued use of the same weight, and then in relative terms, due to the continued use of the same percentage. This means that as performance increases, smaller percentages may become less effective.
7. Certain modifications of the volume and intensity of the training produce a positive effect, while others have no or negative effect.
8. The positive effect of a cargo modification and its validity period also depend on the circumstances in which said modifications occur.

The application of large loads almost always has negative consequences: risk of injury, making useless the application of more effective light loads, difficulty in learning the correct technique, etc.

But before programming a training session, a series of questions must be answered, the answers of which will establish the reality on which action must be taken. Once this reality is known, it will be necessary to also take into account a series of basic methodological considerations derived from the theory of training and from experience in sports practice. These considerations can be addressed through a series of key questions about training scheduling.

When should you start strength training?

The moment of the start of strength training in an athlete who is going to the competition could be determined in the first place by the needs or strength demands of the sport or sports specialty. However, it is considered that starting to improve strength through training especially aimed at this objective from the very beginning would always be positive whatever strength needs may be in the future.

The important thing, and the “risk”, is not the moment to start the strength training, but the way to carry out said training. The correct training of strength from the earliest ages does not present any indication in the physical and technical development of the athlete and it is recommended as a way to avoid injuries and improve performance (Payne et al., 1997).

How much force do you have to develop?

In this case, when we ask ourselves this question, we are referring to the maximum degree of force development, assessed through the RM estimation, but not by its direct measurement. The degree of development of these strength values ​​must be directly related to the needs of the sport or specialty. To know our objectives, the strength values ​​achieved by the most outstanding athletes in the specialty can be taken as a reference point, but mainly the effect of strength improvement on performance improvement in competition or in specific tests can be considered.

But in addition to the maximum force expressed as , the useful force (another maximum force value) must also be considered, in other words, the maximum force value that the athlete is capable of applying when performing the specific gesture, as well as the ability to produce force in the unit that the improvement of the maximum force (in this case the estimation of the RM) presents a positive relationship with the improvement of the performance and with the useful force, the development of the force must continue to be maintained .

If there is an increase in strength but it is not accompanied by an improvement in performance, we should consider reducing resistance training and looking only to maintain it until the specific performance improves. There may come a time when inadequate strength training (even if RM improvement occurs) is related to the loss of one’s own specific performance. In this case, strength training would have to be reduced or changed—or both.

What exercises should be used?

Although in the first steps of training an athlete it is necessary to stimulate all muscle groups in a balanced way and ensure a solid strengthening of tendons and joint ligaments, specific performance is achieved by training those movements, muscle groups and responsible energy systems. of performance in competition.

For this reason, since the athlete begins the path of high performance (since he decides to practice a sport with the aspirations of becoming a high-level athlete in the future), the work program must especially include only non-specific exercises. most useful and specific strength-building exercises applicable to your specialty.

the work program should especially include only the most useful non-specific exercises and the most specific exercises for strength development applicable to your specialty

How often do you have to train?

As infrequently as it produces sufficient force development. In some moments the frequency should be only what is necessary to maintain the force. The training frequency must necessarily increase as sporting life progresses, although the margin of increase is very small if the same volume is not distributed in different sessions. The greater need for strength in a specialty also demands a greater frequency of training.

In some cases, the limiting factor of the training frequency is not the lesser need for strength in the specialty, but the frequency of competitions and the possible interference between training and the development of more or less antagonistic qualities. A higher frequency does not necessarily mean a higher load. The same proposed load (understood as a synthesis of volume and intensity) carried out in two sessions, on the same day or on separate days, implies less real load than if it is done in a single session. That is, we would talk about more frequency but less fatigue.

What relative intensity (%1RM or speed of the first repetition) should be used?

The most suitable maximum relative intensity of training is directly related to the strength needs in the specialty. That is, the greater the need for strength, the greater the maximum intensity that must be reached through sports life, as well as the frequency with which it is used. But it is convenient to add some other orientations that complete this aspect that is so decisive and dangerous in the training schedule. Among these aspects, we highlight the following factors to define the relative intensity:

The subject’s initial training level. The degree of training of the subject takes precedence over the strength needs of the sport. It is not possible to train with the typical intensities used in a specialty if the athlete, given his level of training, neither can nor needs to use high intensities to sufficiently improve his strength.

Speed ​​and phase-angle-position of the competition gesture in which the force will be applied. The speed at which the force will be applied in competition is decisive in the choice of training intensity. It will be necessary to consider to what extent the improvement in maximum strength (1 RM) has an effect on the force applied at competition speed (useful force). The force applied at the competition speed will be the reference point to assess the effects of strength training. Many of the exercises and training intensities will need to be close to competition speed and the angle at which force is applied.

Time that can and should be devoted to strength training. The strength training load is subordinated to the frequency of competitions. When competitions are very frequent throughout the season it is necessary to allow recovery before and after each test, which means that the time dedicated to strength training cannot be high. The time that can be dedicated depends on this circumstance. Although, on the other hand, it would be necessary to consider the time that must be dedicated to strength training for the desired effects to be produced. It is necessary to take into account both conditions and adjust the training so that it is effective and not useless.

What is the specific musculature involved and the type of muscle activation? Both determining factors determine the range of exercises to be applied in strength training and the form of performance. The greatest training potential is found in the most specific exercises. The problem of training is not solved by performing many and very varied exercises, but by using those that have a more direct influence on performance.

Other questions such as what are the limiting factors from the point of view of strength performance, as can occur in endurance sports, or what is the need to maintain a certain degree of strength during the competitive phase, the number of competitions that have to be held and the distribution of them, what are the strengths and weaknesses of the athlete or what role the athlete plays in the case of team sports, must also be taken into account before making decisions about the work to be done.

This post describes and analyzes the 4 strength training schedules based on the variation in intensity and volume throughout the training cycle.

In this series of articles we deal with some of the most important concepts of strength training, collecting notes from the recently published book Strength, Speed ​​and Physical and Sports Performance written by renowned researchers Juan José González Badillo and Juan Ribas Serna.

Summary

• Introduction of the four training programs: stable intensity (PIE), progressive intensity (PIP), mixed progressive intensity (PIPM) and accentuated oscillations (PAO).
• The PIE is the most suitable if the subjects are little or no trained or if they are very young or both.
• PIP is the most common and useful for most subjects.
• The PIPM is a programming that should be applied only to subjects with medium or high strength needs, who have worked with the previous programming and with experience in strength training.
• PAO is probably only necessary in the case of subjects with very high maximal strength needs and with a lot of training experience.

Evolution of loads through a training cycle

It seems that both the overload and the variation of the load are positive to maintain the improvement of strength and sports performance for a long time. A problem that is further from the solution is how to carry out the manipulation of volume and intensity to provide adequate progression and variation of loads. The results of the studies that have addressed this issue do not allow for the time being to reach definitive conclusions.

The current solution is in a suitable mixture of the contributions of the science and of the “art” and common sense of the trainer. This entry describes the basic alternatives that can be used, adding explanatory comments on the possibilities of use.

Programming of a progressive increase in absolute intensity with stable volume and relative intensity.

This model can be called “stable intensity programming” (SIP), and would correspond to what has already been commented regarding “non-periodized training”, because, apparently, there is no “variation” in the load of training. The intensity is stable or even in regression in relative terms, the volume practically stable and the absolute load (weight) in progression.

This model is characterized by maintaining the same training format throughout the cycle. If you train to failure, you choose a number of maximum repetitions per set, say six, which corresponds to a relative intensity of 6RM, and you do three sets. We would thus have a training with a relative intensity and a permanent volume, in this case 3x6RM, which is performed with a determined resistance (weight), which represents the absolute intensity.

When the subject is capable of performing more than 6 repetitions per series, the resistance is increased, so that the relative intensity is maintained and the absolute intensity is increased.

The figure shows the schematic evolution of volume and absolute and relative intensity.

(PIE). The volume and relative intensity are theoretically stable. The absolute intensity (weight) used should increase progressively throughout the cycle.

But this model, as described, should never be used, since it is based and controlled, as usual, on training to muscle failure. However, this model, without failing, would be applicable especially to beginners but also to any athlete for as long as it produces a positive effect.

The PIE model, as described, should never be used, as it is based and controlled on training to failure. It should be applied without ruling.

Because this model is the Ideal: each time you can move more absolute load representing the same relative intensity, the same effort or degree of fatigue, and even in the most favorable cases, representing an increasingly lower relative intensity.

This means that performance is permanently improved. If the relative intensity is controlled through the speed of execution, the number of repetitions per programmed series must represent a non-maximum effort character, being able to choose the one that is considered most appropriate, although a moderate or low one would be the most recommendable. If the loss of speed in the series is added to the control of the speed of the first repetition of the series, the control of the training load would be the most complete and, with high probability, the most precise.

Among other reasons, because if the loss of speed in the series is controlled, the number of repetitions is not programmed, since this would mean training with the same relative intensity, but with different degree of effort, due to the differences in the number of repetitions before the same relative load that each person can perform (González-Badillo et al., 2017).

In this way, the trainer can make mistakes in the choice of speeds and in the losses of serial speed, but will have available the necessary information to know what training is being done and is responsible for the results obtained, which will allow him to take decisions based on the analysis of the relationship between the load and its effects, which is the only way to improve the training methodology itself.

Once a relative intensity has been chosen, preferably through the speed of the first repetition of the series, the athlete will maintain the absolute load that represents it until the speed of the first repetition is 7-9 hundredths of a meter per second higher than the reached in the first session with said absolute load. At this time, the absolute load should be increased to the extent necessary for the speed to return to the programmed speed.

In this way, the relative intensity throughout the cycle will be very stable, but it will oscillate from the programmed level to a lower level of approximately 5%, which is what decreases when the speed increases by 7-9 hundredths of a meter per second, according to the exercise in question. The volume will stay the same with the same repetitions per set or it will fluctuate in a range of about two repetitions per set.

Although this will be discussed later, the relative maximum intensities in this type of training will be the lowest in sports life. This training programming scheme would be ideal if it could be applied at all times, throughout sports life. But as performance increases, intensity stability, whatever it may be, may no longer be useful, since, on the one hand, lower intensities will not suffice, and on the other hand, medium and high intensities cannot be matched. / should be used from the first session nor can they be maintained constantly over time.

Therefore, within this scheme, it is possible to program progressive intensities, not totally stable, within the cycle, but in a very small range, such as, for example, from 45 to 60% of the estimated initial RM. Once these relative intensities have been chosen, the absolute loads corresponding to each percentage would be programmed, and when the time comes to increase the weight, if the speed of execution tells us that the intensity represented by the new weight is below the programmed relative intensity , the new weight will be maintained, without increasing it to equal the expected relative intensity, even if the relative intensity remains stable or even in regression, and below the programmed one.

It will pass, or will be, in the following programming model when the subject needs a relative intensity to improve their performance equal to or greater than the real 70-75% of the RM.

Programming of a progressive increase in intensity and a progressive reduction in volume

This model can be referred to as “stepping intensity programming” (PIP). What has come to be called “periodized training”. This can be considered as the classic form of training variation. As its own name indicates, it basically consists of progressively increasing the intensity during the training cycle while reducing the volume, although in the first two-four weeks there can be an increase in both volume and intensity.

The progressive increase in intensity does not mean that each session has to increase it, and this would be practically impossible unless the cycle was extremely short. In the same way that the volume or the number of repetitions per series is not permanently reduced.

The base of this type of programming is in the increase of intensity, since the reduction of the repetitions by series is a logical consequence of the increase of the intensity.

The use of this programming scheme should be governed by the same control procedure as the previous one. Therefore, it should be dosed and controlled by speed of the first repetition and by the loss of speed in the series. The difference with respect to the previous scheme will be especially in the values ​​of the speed of the first repetition, which will tend to decrease progressively as the cycle progresses (tendency to greater relative intensity). The specific relative intensity values ​​will be seen in later sections, but we will never reach the character of maximum effort (muscular failure).

This model would be applicable to subjects who have passed the previous stage and have manifested stagnation. It is valid for all strength needs. The differences between the groups with different strength needs will be in the relative loads, which will tend to increase the greater the strength need, and somewhat in the speed losses in the series (the degree of fatigue) which will also tend to increase slightly. s strength needs are greater.

Schematic evolution of intensity and volume in PIP.

Programming of a progressive increase in intensity and a progressive reduction in repetitions per series with load oscillations.

This model can be referred to as “mixed progressive intensity programming (PIPM)”. This scheme would also be associated with what is understood by “periodized training”, but with oscillation of the maximum relative intensities. This type of programming would have the same characteristics as the previous one, except that the alternative reduction and elevation of the maximum relative intensity is admitted at certain moments of the cycle.

Until the relative intensity does not reach an effort equivalent to 80-85% of the RM, the intensity will vary in the same way as in the previous model. From here, high intensities will alternate with smaller ones. The need to alternate intensities occurs mainly for two reasons: the increase in the frequency of training the same exercise to three times a week and the increase in the maximum intensity reached, which is so high that a recovery is necessary, between sessions.

Until the relative intensity does not reach an effort equivalent to 80-85% of the RM, the intensity will vary in the same way as in the previous model. From here, high intensities will alternate with other smaller ones

It could also be justified by the need to smooth the progression of intensity. For example, it would probably be too stressful to have to do an effort equivalent to 85% of the 1RM for the first time in the cycle three times in a row in the same week, so using 75 or 80% in any of the sessions could better adjust to the current capacity of the subject and achieve a better adaptation.

Therefore, this way of programming is fundamentally progressive, but it is also slightly “wavy” or “undulating” between sessions. The dosage and load control should be done following the same procedure as in the previous schemes, and without considering the possibility of muscle failure.

Schematic evolution of intensity and volume in the PIPM.

The use of this scheme should occur in very few cases, since on few occasions the same exercise should be done three times a week. Except in the specialty of weightlifting, it will practically never be necessary to use the same exercise three times a week.

It would be applicable only to subjects who have passed the previous stages, have manifested stagnation, have to increase the frequency of training and exercises, and have high strength needs.

Programming of a progressive increase in intensity and a progressive reduction in repetitions per series, but with accentuated oscillations in volume and intensity

Let’s call this pattern “sharp oscillation (PAO) scheduling”. This scheduling model is characterized by a sharp oscillation of volume and intensity every two weeks or so. Increasing the intensity every two weeks approximately. The increase in intensity is very rapid from the first weeks. Two weeks —generally— of high volume and lower intensity are alternated with two weeks of higher intensity and volume, and the process is repeated until the cycle is complete.

Despite these oscillations, the volume values ​​tend to decrease as the cycle progresses, while the intensity tends to rise. It is argued that short bouts of high volume stimulating hypertrophy, alternated with short phases of neural stimulation (although neural stimulation is always present) may offer greater strength gains than continuous intensity progression models.

Probably this model is not necessary to apply it in any case. The load values, especially high volume and “hypertrophy” training until muscle failure, are not applicable to any sports specialty, as they do not provide better performance than lower loads before the same training exercise (Folland, e 2002; Izquierdo, Ibáñez et al., 2006: Sampson 4 Groeller, 2016; Drinkwater, et al., 2 Willardson, et al., 2008; Pareja-Blanco et al., 2016) nor on other untrained exercises (Pareja-Blanco et al., 2016).

Schematic evolution of volume and intensity in PAO.

As indicated, this model probably does not need to be applied in any case. If it were to be applied, it would be with subjects who have passed the previous stages, have manifested stagnation, have to increase the training frequency of some exercises and have very high strength needs.

Some of the works in which the effects of models with structures similar to those described have been studied, find that some are more effective in improving strength, while others conclude that there are no significant differences between the results obtained. However, it must be taken into account that the models that we have described are not applicable as alternatives at the same time for the same subjects, but as models that can be applied progressively as progress is made in the development of strength and level of performance. .

In the studies that appear below, they are not understood in this way, but as models with structures similar to ours that are applied at any time. In addition, it must be taken into account that the training sessions in these studies are practically always to failure, which should not be recommended at any time in sports life. Despite all these nuances, it is convenient to have an idea of ​​how the behavior of these models could be with subjects at different levels of training.

Baker et al., (1994) found no significant differences in 1RM squat and bench press, vertical jump, and body composition (fat-free muscle mass) between three groups that performed programming equivalent to one PIP/PIPM, one PAO and a PIE; equalizing volume and intensity. It seems, therefore, that by equalizing the volumes and intensity, no differences are found between different forms of the program.

It seems that by equalizing the volumes and intensity, no differences are found between different forms of the program.

Herrick & Stone (1996) used a PIP type of training that ranged from 3×10 to 3x2RM, and another of the PIE type of 3x6RM for 15 weeks. It is concluded that there were no significant differences in the strength gains between groups, but there did appear a tendency to produce a stabilization of the improvement at 15 weeks in the PIE type group, and the percentages of improvements, although not significantly. Significantly, they were higher in the PIP group. Volume is considered to have a greater effect than manipulation of reps per set and sets.

Bradley-Popovich, (2001) maintains that there are no reasons to consider that PAO programming is superior to the classical model (PIP/PIPM). However, Haff (2001) considers that the incorporation of intensity fluctuations could prevent fatigue and its negative effects on technique and injury prevention. In two reviews carried out by Fleck (1999, 2002) the conclusion is reached that despite the few studies carried out on this problem, PIP and PIPM programming offer better results in strength and power than PIE with a and multiple series.

The greatest strength gain may be related to the changes in training volume (volume reduction at the end of the cycle) that occurs in the PIP and PIPM. when talking about the comparison of the different programming models (“periodized and non-periodized”).

incorporating fluctuations in intensity could prevent fatigue and its negative effects on technique and injury prevention

In summary, although in these specific studies it seems that the PIP type programming and, above all, the PIPM type are the most appropriate to manipulate the volume and intensity if it is intended to improve strength in training periods that last up to 16 weeks Some issues should be taken into account.

A schedule of 16 weeks is too long a period of training time, so it is hardly applicable. The use, in many cases, of loads with different intensity and volumes does not allow an adequate comparison of the different models. Each of these basic types of programming has its most suitable application.

What training schedule to choose?

PIE is most appropriate if the subjects are poorly trained or untrained or very young or both, regardless of the degree of force development required by the subjects.

The results obtained in different studies by the authors suggest that to improve performance it is enough to maintain a certain degree of low effort stable, which in practice could be as low as the equivalent of 30-50% of the RM, for a period of time. from 6 to 12 months as long as the absolute load is gradually increased.

To improve performance, it is enough to maintain a certain degree of low effort stable, which in practice could be as low as the equivalent of 30-50% of RM, for a period of 6 to 12 months as long as the absolute load goes away. gradually increasing.

PIP is the most common and useful for most subjects. It should be applied to somewhat trained subjects with medium or high strength needs and who have already passed the previous stage, and to experienced subjects who have low or medium strength needs. Depending on the strength needs, the load will be increased to a greater or lesser extent.

The PIPM is a programming that should be applied only to subjects with medium or high strength needs, who have worked with the previous programming and, therefore, with experience in strength training, although it is considered that it would only be necessary in a few cases.

PAO is probably not necessary in any case, but if it is applied, it is only necessary in the case of subjects with very high maximal strength needs and with a lot of training experience.