Hypertrophy and Strength - Not so Different

[Ross86]

Ok, I was just making sure.

[EricT]

Yeah. If you look at Madcows original post, he points out, as I reiterated that neural adaptations are a good thing if you want to enhance your ability to make hypertrophy gains. But then he goes on to say he didn't mean you have to do peak strength training and singles and all of that.

So the question is why not do that? Why would a person feel compelled to make that qualification? I don't know why he made it but a lot of people don't want to be jumped all over with people talking about injuries, and CNS fatigue and all this other stuff.

You have to know how to use it and it is best to seek out as much info on how to approach it from people who actually use it. But one of the biggest problems in training is making assumptions about it instead of basing things on what actually happens to you or doesn't happen to you. And you can't know that unless your willing to experiment a bit.

It began to dawn on me a while back that we spend a lot of time talking about how strength is related to hypertrophy but it is always approached from a hypertrophy standpoint. In the end, if you say, work on the strenght gains from a "neural" standpoint then why are you talking about 5x5's or anything of that nature? It's certainly not the best way to approach that even with the "intensity" day which is still based on the assumption that the best way to gain strength is throught "volume" and then you test that with weight.

A deload will be different for different people. From the standpoint of "intensity" that is certainly a part of it. But it depends on programming and your training status how much volume you do and the kind of intensity you do.

Getting into the question of fatigue is really the nuts and bolts of the whole thing.

When your using less complicated programming with everything being of much the same character a delaod is pretty easy. Basically you just do less of what you do most of. For an intermediate using volume training approaches it's best to keep intensity high or even a bit higher and lower volume. Which begs the whole question of "cns fatigue" with this kind of training.

Needs can be quite different for different individuals but but there is a simple way to disprove the notion of the "serious" CNS affects (other than positive) with this kind of training. Because there is only really ONE way to even guess about CNS overtraining....loss of ability. The fact that so many can follow up a typical "5x5" with a period of not only the same intensity but HIGHER intensity kinda shoots it in the foot. Because the result of "nerual fatigue" if you can even call it fatigue is you get weaker not stronger. No, what is needed is a period of reduced volume.

[MONSTAFACE]

this may be a stupid question but if i dont ask it it will just eat away at me all night.............. is intesity also referring to tempo? like are you refering to your intesity of the workout like you loading the bar with weight that you could handle. like you may be able to military press 250 for 3x5 but every rep is slow and you are fighting to get the weight up, so that wouldnt be an intense workout. opposed to you loading the bar with 205 and doign the 3x5 and you can lower the weight slowly and pop it back up?

i know its kind of dumb but i want to make sure i got it right

[EricT]

For the purposes of this discussion, intensity is the weight on the bar relative to your 1RM. So the closer you get the higher the intensity...even if it's slow The first scenario was MUCH higher intensity although the second could be said to be intense of a different nature but it's best not to mix it up. You could consider the second to be more strength-speed, for instance, which has rewards as well.

[Ross86]

That makes a lot of sense. My big focus now is seeing how much volume I can handle with a high intensity. As I progress from week to week, I'll become perpetually more fatigued. Unless I change my volume fairly often, which might negate the need for a deload. But I don't think that would be the most efficient way to go about it...not for me anyway. And I guess varying or lowering the volume would be necessary (or doing a deload) if the intensity remains high enough to require it because of accrued fatigue.

[Kane]

Ross, in your case intensity is a very relative term since you're dealing with higher rep/set ranges. 4x8 isn't a high intensity at all, but it may be a high intensity if you compare each set to your 8RM. By that time you've kind of convoluted the meaning of intensity. With higher volume you'll accumulate fatigue easier, meaning a higher need for deloading or a shift in tempo to a lower volume. You need lower volume to have a higher intensity, the two go hand in hand. Which is why a 5x5 is the 'middleground'.

[MONSTAFACE]

oh ok. i was just making sure. because you know sometimes with some types of athlete training they refere to the intensity as the speed of the rep. thanks for clarifying

[Ross86]

Originally Posted by Eric3237

For the purposes of this discussion, intensity is the weight on the bar relative to your 1RM. So the closer you get the higher the intensity...even if it's slow The first scenario was MUCH higher intensity although the second could be said to be intense of a different nature but it's best not to mix it up. You could consider the second to be more strength-speed, for instance, which has rewards as well.

And the 1RM you're talking about is your 1RM for that specific day, correct?

[EricT]

Well Ross you have to define more what you mean by all that. Do you mean that you will simply keep ramping the weights with a certain volume until you can no longer do so?

Originally Posted by Ross

And I guess varying or lowering the volume would be necessary (or doing a deload) if the intensity level remains high enough to require it because of accrued fatigue.

Not sure what you mean there. I know it makes sense I'm just not getting exactly what you are saying

Originally Posted by Ross

And the 1RM you're talking about is your 1RM for that specific day, correct?

Absolutely if you're doing the kind of training where you would actually have a notion of that. Really impressed you picked up on that. But for general purposes, and the way most train they would only have a general idea. And let me say that you can't be doing a max single everyday of course! But technically, your true "intensity" is changing based on your preparedness on any given day. Ask Anuj how I feel about percentage based protocols . This is the very reason. There is def no need to be so exact but when your do a "max" it is really a "relative max".

I actually read an article about "CNS fatigue" recently and the writer said something about how you would test your "true" 1RM too often. I have to wonder what he thinks a true 1RM is. What is true today may be false tommorow

Most people who want to do strength trainig can test much more often than they do. They just need to understand the difference between a PR and a max. And keep in mind the notion of QUALITY.

[Ross86]

Ok, we're on the same page now.