View Single Post
 
Old 11-06-2008, 04:24 PM
EricT EricT is offline
Rank: Heavyweight
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,314
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DH
That's the problem with those dual factor articles that spread like wildfire around the forums a couple of years ago. Certainly a breach of fresh air, and a hundred times more beneficial than just going on a week's vacation (unless overtrained). Unless it's a specific type of programming that uses volume and intensity cycling, I've found that planning deloads too far in advanced is very "hit or miss" and about as unspecific as guessing the supercompensation wave.
To me, that right there was more of the same thing I was just talking about. The "dual factor" 5x5's, as they were popularized, were methods. Dual Factor theory itself is NOT a method. It is a training model. A theory, if you will.

One of my BIG problems is gurus discovering a new pet theory, coming up with a program and trying to tell you that a program is a principle.

Need I mention HST again. It's no different a phenomena. Take out "deconditioning" and you have short linear periodization. Takes the magic out of all the "theory" right there. Inefficient programming is inefficient programming.

As I've said about a million times, good training is builit on a sound knowledge of good training, not theories.

Keep in mind, as I say all this, that this is just me taking DH's article and sounding off. If I seem to differ with any detail that DH may have said, keep in mind it's only details. We do not disagree on the fundamentals. My purpose is to expand on and backup DH's stuff, not to debate it. I'm just excited and inspired by his articles.

You’ve been led to believe that this whole “DFT” loading thing is some kind of advanced strength protocol. I've probably said too many times already that any 5x5 is middle ground strength/mass work. It is one way to skin a cat IF it suits. And you can say that about anything.


But here is the big problem. It doesn’t really allow you to work on individual lifts based on your needs for those lift. It doesn’t allow you to periodize those lifts. It doesn’t allow you to pick one or two priority lifts to use more advanced protocols on….in short it is amateurish and shortsighted and you are simple trading volume for intensity and productivity. INTENSITY must CERTAINLY be a bigger factor than VOLUME in strength work.

Another big problem is QUANTITY over QUALITY.

We all know that sometimes that “effort” to get through that faitigue or to get up that one big rep, or even to fail helps us a lot. But that should not be the way the MAJORITY of our lifting is. All this downer trip I’m on about Rippetoes…that’s part of it. The whole damn thing is about reps, sets, VOLUME. That is all Rip knows, and I got news for you, bro, he knows a limited amount just like anyone does. So people spend all their time doing a bunch of shitty ‘reps’ intead of really learning the concept of quality. I know I'm preaching to the choir with some of you but I wonder if you've learned what that can mean.



Yes, the beginner only needs more general stuff but no, not everybody is the fucking same! LOL.

OK in order to distribute stress we basically need to understand about the effects of fatigue. The only reason you can load in this aggressive manner with volume loading protocols without getting weaker is, because, simply speaking the CNS effects are just not that strong. You’re basically getting metabolic “volume” fatigue and a generalized kind of fatigue in terms of your body’s reaction. The body does not distinquish between these stressors. Ask yourself how this concept of building up a lot of “faitigue” really relates to “gaining strength”. It only does in a very roundabout way. You are basically trying to juggle chainsaws, donuts, feathers, and needles at the same time. Because all you can FEEL is the endocrine effects. I.E. you only know when to stop when “you feel overtrained” or have started to overreach.

Pituitary-adrenal-gonadal responses to high-intensity resistance exercise overtraining.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9843563

Catecholamine responses to short-term high-intensity resistance exercise overtraining.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8...gdbfrom=pubmed

Resistance exercise overtraining and overreaching. Neuroendocrine responses.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9068095?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.P ubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pu bmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=5&log$=relatedreviews&lo gdbfrom=pubmed


PSYCHOLOGICAL VARIABLES ARE BETTER DETECTORS OF OVERTRAINING THAN PHYSIOLOGICAL VARIABLES
Theriault, D., Richard, D., Labrie, A., & Theriault, G. (1997). Physiological and psychological variables in swimmers during a competitive season in relation to the overtraining syndrome. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 29(5), Supplement abstract 1237.

MONITORING OVERTRAINING - ANOTHER ATTEMPT
Hill, M. R., Motl, R. W., Estle, J., & Gaskill, S. (1997). Validity of the stamina index test for monitoring elite athletes. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 29(5), Supplement abstract 46.

BIOLOGICAL MARKERS DO NOT RECOGNIZE OVERTRAINING
Van Heest, J. L., Skinner, J., Cappaert, J. M., Rodgers, C. D., & Ratliff, K. (1966). Monitoring training stress in elite swimmers using biological markers. Medicine and Science in Exercise and Sports, 28(5), Supplement abstract 1083.

BLOOD FACTORS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH OVERTRAINING
Rowbottom, D. G., Keast, D., Goodman, C., & Morton, A. R. (1995). The haematological, biochemical and immunological profile of athletes suffering from the overtraining syndrome. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 70, 502-509.

DIAGNOSING OVERTRAINING WITH BLOOD FACTORS IS OF LIMITED VALUE
Lehmann, M., Wieland, H., & Gastmann, U. (1997). Influence of an unaccustomed increase in training volume vs intensity on performance, hematological and blood-chemical parameters in distance runners. The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 37, 110-116.

BLOOD AND ENDOCRINOLOGICAL PARAMETERS NOT RELATED TO THE ONSET OF OVERTRAINING
Knizia, K., Gastman, U., Netzer, N., & Steinacker, J. M. (1997). Monitoring high-intensity endurance training using resting hematological, blood-chemical, and serum/plasma endocrinological parameters. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 29(5) , Supplement abstract 1267.

BLOOD FACTORS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH RESPONSES TO INTENSIFIED TRAINING
Mackinnon, L. T., Hooper, S. L., Jones, S., Gordon, R. D., & Bachmann, A. W. (1997). Hormonal, immunological, and hematological responses to intensified training in elite swimmers. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 29, 1637-1654.

But guess what, such a feeling wouldn’t be TOO much different than training for swimming. Does swimming make you stronger? It makes your stronger at swimming. BTW, the dual factor training model was developed looking at endurance athletes and swimmers in particular.

I hope this is making sense. This over-reaching is volume over-reaching. IF you were to over-reach with CNS intensive work you wouldn’t get ANY endocrine effects! You wouldn’t hardly have anything to go on except on thing…..you’d get weaker at whatever intensity range you had over-reached at.

But when you use “general fatigue” as a benchmark for periodization you get all these different fatigue affects but if you get weaker….you don’t know what the hell is up whether it’s the CNS or “you’re just tired” and need recovery time. So, when you mix it all together in this big lump, for one thing, you will never know how heavy you can and can’t lift and for how long. I could go on and on but sufficeth to say that this is all a big tadoo about nothing. Yes, we will be deloading. But no we don’t need to use fatigue as a METHOD of strength training. IT’s a SIDE EFFECT, lol.


When it comes to fatigue in general you can basically say that you have either more immediate but short lasting effects or less immediate but larger and longer lasting. Now, if you do really high intensity CNS intensive work you will basically feel it right after but the fatigue will dissipate really quickly. Why? Basically low volume. The actuall affects on the CNS you really won’t be able to tell. So keep that in mind for later on.

Bascially if you take out the notion of work at 90% of 1RM or above you can basically say that the fatigue from “VOLUME” will last longer than the fatigue from more maximal work of lesser volume. When I say more maximal I don’t mean MAXIMAL. It’s oversimplified because of “power work” and such but it will serve. (It doesn’t all have to be perfect it only matters if you get results).

http://www.bodybuilding.net/training...real-5236.html
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
or
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


If you act sanctimonious I will just list out your logical fallacies until you get pissed off and spew blasphemous remarks.

Last edited by EricT; 11-07-2008 at 04:42 AM.
Reply With Quote