Its NOT all about High Intensity
Time to talk shop a little and this may get
technical for some and this is completely my opinions so if what I say upsets
you, bad luck!
I want to talk about the idea that training at
crazy hard levels all the time is now "the way" everything has to be done.
Everything you see is "join our high intensity class" or my favourite
"constantly varied, functional movements, performed at high
intensity"
This idea just flies in the face of everything
that has been studied and practiced in strength and performance for the last 70 or so years. YES high
intensity has a place, as do all facets of training:-volume, density, speed,
power, etc. just not at the expense of all other principles.
What I want to focus on
today is a little perspective for you as with the flood of information you are
reading, this post included, you have to make some decisions on where to invest
your energy, time and money. So I want to utilise Prilepins chart, as it is
considered the gold standard for judging volume and intensity for weight
training (bodybuilding does need some tweaks) I have attached the chart to help
you understand what I am explaining here.
When you consider the goal
of your training, what is often lost is the fact that you can illicit the
necessary response at a variety of intensities as long as volume is matched
correctly. The long standing rationale is that most of you work should be
undertaken in the 70-85% range. Below 70% is generally not enough to create
enough stimulus (unless speed/ force are added into the equation) whilst above
85% intensities should be used sparingly to gauge progress and prepare for a
peak.
BUT the goal of many of
these modern classes, training programs and systems (if you can call them
that?) is to keep you working at a high intensity all the time! Some of these
systems show promise too but drop the ball when you look at overall
progressions with movements. They then use constant variety and say they are
developing all fitness domains equally. Unfortunately high intensity training
does not do this, you need specific time spent on endurance, on speed, power,
agility etc. you get sub par results when you focus on all of these things at
the same time!
So returning to Prilepins
chart, optimal reps in the "sweet spot" zone of 70-79% are 3-6 reps
and an optimal total reps of 18 for each exercise. This is the zone that most
coaches find that they can achieve a good balance of intensity, volume and
frequency, As all of these factors are key to progressing and improving but
again you need to find the correct balance! This means you need to repeat these
movements to get better at them, progress them, practice them and Ingrain them
into your central nervous system (CNS).
When you look at various
periodisation systems (linear, conjugate, daily undulating, etc) you may think
that some use much more variety than others, or utilise various aspects of
training at the same time (for example speed training in a strength cycle) but
they don't do them in a vacuum. They are focusing on the main goal, Strength, whilst
incorporating these other aspects in to assist
that development. Many use a specialised variety, which means doing
something that is very similar to the main task to build up weaknesses seen
with the main task. An example is using the Sumo deadlift to assist building
your conventional deadlift.
If you keep yourself at
sensible zones of intensity not only will your progress be faster but it will
be safer, more enjoyable and above all else more consistent. Whilst if you are
always at the limits of what you can do whilst doing a bunch of different
things all the time then injury, burnout and lack of progression are going to
follow very closely behind.
What I am trying to get
across here is that there may be many paths to achieve an outcome BUT if your
goal is to improve at something, get stronger, run longer, lose fat, whatever
then you need to commit to it and then break it down into manageable chunks
instead of trying to push your limits in all areas all at the same time and
achieving below average results.
