Thread: Study on Complexes...

21 people is a small group, but I'll take it at face value. I'll keep this in mind as I read Core Performance.

It was a within subjects design, 21 is alot of people, essentially 42.

There were insignificant differences, and it didn't measure progress over a long period of time, although it casts doubt on the theory behind complexes.

good stuff.

I will post more on complexes when I get a break at work.

There are a few different types of complexes that I have come across though. What you have up there is or was called the Russian complex which was training different strengths within on set....ie....strength, strength-speed, speed-strength...for example:

A1) back squat- 3-5 RM

rest- 60sec

A2) power clean- 2-3 reps

rest 60sec

A3) Jump squat- 8-10 reps

rest 3min and repeat.

There was another type of complex that Crosgrove talks about in which you load a bar and perform a specific number of repetitions for a few exercises without putting the bar down until you are done. For example:

all exercises done for 5 reps with the same weight, no rest until the complex is completed:

complex 1

snatch
overhead squat
back squat
behind the neck jerk
snatch pull
snatch grip bent over row



be back in a couple hours.

Originally Posted by P-funk

good stuff.

I will post more on complexes when I get a break at work.

There are a few different types of complexes that I have come across though. What you have up there is or was called the Russian complex which was training different strengths within on set....ie....strength, strength-speed, speed-strength...for example:

A1) back squat- 3-5 RM

rest- 60sec

A2) power clean- 2-3 reps

rest 60sec

A3) Jump squat- 8-10 reps

rest 3min and repeat.

There was another type of complex that Crosgrove talks about in which you load a bar and perform a specific number of repetitions for a few exercises without putting the bar down until you are done. For example:

all exercises done for 5 reps with the same weight, no rest until the complex is completed:

complex 1

snatch
overhead squat
back squat
behind the neck jerk
snatch pull
snatch grip bent over row



be back in a couple hours.

Those are in the Sandler book. They seem good for endurance, but I would imagine the latter exercise suffers. I guess you could counterbalance the order.

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

Those are in the Sandler book. They seem good for endurance, but I would imagine the latter exercise suffers. I guess you could counterbalance the order.

I haven't gotten that far in the book yet. I wil keep my eye out for it.

here is a Thibaudeau article on training complexes (like the russian complex).

Continuum Training


When I get home later I will post some more stuff. I believe Siff has somethign to say about this in supertraining.

Good read. Although it doesn't appear to enhance performance, it is still a good way to economize training time.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

Good read. Although it doesn't appear to enhance performance,

I wouldn't say that, there was improvement, it was just not significant.

Chu on Complexes

Mel Siff "Supertraining"

pg. 287


"Under natural training conditions, three equivalent groups of jumpers of average qualifications were used to compare the effectiveness of different systems of strength training. All of the groups used special jumping exercises in the first stage of the preparation period. Groups 2 and 3 switched to barbell exerises in the second stage while group 1 contiuned to do the jumping exercises. Group 3 switched to use depth-jumps in the thurd stage while group 1 continued to do the jumping exercises and group 2 did the barbell exercises"......

.....okay, there is a graph in the book..basically it goes:

group 1- stage one- jumps, stage 2- jumps, stange 3 jumps
group 2- stage 1- jumps, stage 2- weights, stage 3- weights
group 3- stage 1- jumps, stage 2- weights, stage 3- depth-jumps

....okay, continuing on

"the special strength training indicators displayed a clear tendency to stabilise in groups 1 and 2 after the first and second stages respectively, and in group 1 even to degree during the third stage. Thus, the sequntial use of means with higher, specific training effects clearly produces a positive result. At the same time, the use of the same means even with an increase in volume, not only does not produce a positive change, but decreases the existing level of special strength fitness (Verkhoshansky & Aganin, 1970).

Reseacher with novices and athletes of average qualifications leads us to make the following conclusions about the effectiveness of the variants studied for these athletes:

- the best results are obtained by consistently using those combinations or complexes of means which produce the optimal training effect (eg as shown in fig 5.13.....ie group 3 who progressed to depth-jumps in the third stage)

- a slightly smaller effect is obtained by the concurrent use of strength and speed-strength means in one training session or their sequential use in successive sessions.

- least effective is the sequence of strength followed by speed strength means during the same session."

Good reading P. I definitely think far too few people incorporate any type of training to promote a greater rate of force generation.

Originally Posted by P-funk

Mel Siff "Supertraining"

Another book on my to-buy list. Thanks P-funk.

Heavy squats prior to sprinting shown to improve performance

Post-activation potential (PAP) is defined as an increase in the contractile ability of muscle after a bout of previous contractions. The purpose of this study was to determine whether performing high force or explosive force movements prior to sprinting would improve running speed.

Fifteen NCAA Division III football players served as subjects. The heavy loaded squat protocol consisted of 1 set of 3 repetitions at 90% of the athlete’s 1 repetition max (1RM). The loaded jump consisted of a squat jump with a load of 30% of the 1RM from a squat performed on a modified Smith machine.

The results of the study indicated that 40-meter sprint time statistically improved following the heavy loaded squat protocol but not the vertical jump protocol. Based on this study, Fitness Professionals should consider different types of warm-ups for athletes involved in activities that require a single bout of maximal running speed. Other types of warm-ups such as stretching and jogging have been shown to decrease performance. Based on the results of this investigation, heavy squats performed 4 minutes prior to a 40-meter sprint can improve performance.

McBride, Jeffrey. Et al. The Acute Effects of Heavy-Load Squats and Loaded Countermovement Jumps on Sprint Performance. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2005, 19(4), 893-897

That makes sense. You'd figure that whatever exercise you did before an athletic event would prime the appropriate energy system (phosphagen, glycolic, or oxidative) depending on what you were doing.

If that reasoning is true then doing heavy squats should hinder the performance of a marathon runner. Sound reasonable?

Originally Posted by DOMS

That makes sense. You'd figure that whatever exercise you did before an athletic event would prime the appropriate energy system (phosphagen, glycolic, or oxidative) depending on what you were doing.

If that reasoning is true then doing heavy squats should hinder the performance of a marathon runner. Sound reasonable?

I don't know any marathon runner that squats heavy. In fact, I don't even think that they should squat heavy. It has nothing to do with their goals.

Originally Posted by DOMS

That makes sense. You'd figure that whatever exercise you did before an athletic event would prime the appropriate energy system (phosphagen, glycolic, or oxidative) depending on what you were doing.

If that reasoning is true then doing heavy squats should hinder the performance of a marathon runner. Sound reasonable?

I think some of it had to do with exciting the central nervous system. When you do something like that (Take a heavy ass barbell and stick it on your back so your body perceives a potentially stressful/dangerous situation), you inhibit the parasympathetic nervous system and excite the sympathetic nervous system.

Not that what you're saying doesn't happen, but this probably increases the effect.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

I think some of it had to do with exciting the central nervous system. When you do something like that (Take a heavy ass barbell and stick it on your back so your body perceives a potentially stressful/dangerous situation), you inhibit the parasympathetic nervous system and excite the sympathetic nervous system.

Not that what you're saying doesn't happen, but this probably increases the effect.

yea, it has to do with tricking your body.

One time last year i was reading an article that Lyle McDonald had written about training these two powerlifters. Their split was an upper and lower split and on the lower days it would be...day1- max effort squat/speed+assistance deadlift and then later in the week day2- max effort deadlift/speed+assistance squat. I emailed him about that since I had always believed it to be true that speed work (power training) would come before maximum effort work since (a) the power work is done at a lower intensity to allow for optimum velocity and (b) since it is done at a lower intensity it would be less fatiguing so you wouldn't have as much residual fatigue going into the heavy lifting as you would if you did it the other way around. This was his reply to me:

Some coaches do prefer to put the heavy stuff first which potentiates the nervous system and let's the athletes go faster on the speed work.

the lighter stuff simply feels lighter after yo'uve done heavy work. To test this, work up to a 2-3RM in one of your lifts, rest a few minutes and then take 65%. It'll feel so light that you can really fly with it.

I think I put the speed work afterwards becasue I considered the heavy work more important and didn't want any fatigue going into it for the girls.

just different ways of approaching it. I'd say the most common way of sequencing stuff within a workout is

skill/technique
speed/power
max strength
hypertrophy/GPP
endurance

Or you can take the WSB approach and put max effort and speed work on different days to avoid the whole issue.

That's simply not the only way to do it.
For powerlifting, I consider max strength to be more important than speed, making max strength work relatively more important. For a speed-strength sport or pure speed/power sport, I'd probably reverse it.

Lyle

I wonder if the sprint was increased after the squat because it is pure speed where as the vertical is more speed strength (possibly why it didn't increase and maybe even why the power of the vertical was also lower, as evident in Dale's study).

Originally Posted by P-funk

I don't know any marathon runner that squats heavy. In fact, I don't even think that they should squat heavy. It has nothing to do with their goals.

My point wasn't that marathon runners should do heavy lifts,. My point was that a sprinter (who uses fast-twitch muscle and the phosphagen energy system) would logically benefit from an exercise which stimulated the same tissue and energy system that he would need for sprinting.

My guess, with the newer study, is that the squat potentiates the recruitment of the high threshold motor units, but does not result in a performance decrement because of fatigue since the movements are so different. My guess with the first study is that since it is essentially the exact same musculature being recruited in the squat and the vertical jump, there may be a fatigue component to factor in.