Thread: Transition to Power Training

yes I do ,lol,but I can wake up early and I can stay up late if I need to I don't have a job yet even when I do I'll still work around it.

maybe i can help you out with some specific program design. I don't know how it would work since i have never done the online consulting thing and i have never had a client that i didn't personally evaluate right there...as well as all the other stuff that goes with working with a person, like adjusting training on the fly if things aren't going right or the person is tired, specific stretching, and soft tissue work.

but, maybe i can help you.

That would be great man.

I just wanted to mention something I have been doing lately conditioning wise. P mentioned using some circuits/callisthenics for conditioning work. Well, first of all, if you look through my journals you can see I have done a lot of this throughout my training career because I simply get bored doing traditional cardio!

Now, more recently I have done a sort of hybrid of what I was doing, but mixed in more mobility/prehab work one day a week, and I think it is great! I can still get my heart rate up there (I have worn a HR monitor during and I peak at like 81-84% of my max) while working on mobilizing my least mobile joints and keeping my shoulders healthy. I also include sled dragging and running up and down stairs to keep the intensity up a bit. I love it so far.

Also, as a real world example: I was only doing 1 day per week of high intensity interval training, and another 1-2 days per week of conditioning circuits a while back. I enrolled in a basketball course. There were, of course, multiple people from my school's basketball team in the class. Note: these are people who play the game on a regular basis. I suck at basketball, but the only place I had a leg up was that I could outlast all these people! So, this type of conditioning work does well in a sporting environment, at least in my experience.

Contrary to the opinions of many trainers, resistance training in and of itself will translate to almost no improvement on the field of play.

Resistance training can increase our ability to produce muscular force in two ways. One is via hypertrophy of the contractile proteins. The other is via more efficient neural recruitment. Neural recruitment is EXTREMELY specific, thus improvements in neural recruitment relative to a specific resistance exercise will have virtually correlation to on the field improvement.

Hypertrophy of the contractile proteins improves the force production capability of the musculature. This adaptation can be adapted to on the field play, but only via practice of sport specific movements.

I think this is where athletes lose their way to some degree. They practice exercises that they think will translate directly to on the field improvements (power cleans being a good example) and essentially make their training less efficient than it could be.

Originally Posted by chris mason

Contrary to the opinions of many trainers, resistance training in and of itself will translate to almost no improvement on the field of play.

Resistance training can increase our ability to produce muscular force in two ways. One is via hypertrophy of the contractile proteins. The other is via more efficient neural recruitment. Neural recruitment is EXTREMELY specific, thus improvements in neural recruitment relative to a specific resistance exercise will have virtually correlation to on the field improvement.

Hypertrophy of the contractile proteins improves the force production capability of the musculature. This adaptation can be adapted to on the field play, but only via practice of sport specific movements.

I think this is where athletes lose their way to some degree. They practice exercises that they think will translate directly to on the field improvements (power cleans being a good example) and essentially make their training less efficient than it could be.

yes, this is true. the skill transfer from the weight room to the gym is where most athletes and trainers loose it. typically because they focus on developing only one quality (usually strength) and don't have a well-rounded program which focuses on aspects of their sport (aside from being in the gym). I have seen this a lot with strength coaches who train their athletes as if they are powerlifters or olympic weightlifters. While strength is important, there are other things that need to be considered and athletes/coaches need to recognize that.

Originally Posted by P-funk

yes, this is true. the skill transfer from the weight room to the gym is where most athletes and trainers loose it. typically because they focus on developing only one quality (usually strength) and don't have a well-rounded program which focuses on aspects of their sport (aside from being in the gym). I have seen this a lot with strength coaches who train their athletes as if they are powerlifters or olympic weightlifters. While strength is important, there are other things that need to be considered and athletes/coaches need to recognize that.

Hey, where in AZ are you? I lived in the Phoenix/Scottsdale area for 18+ years.

Originally Posted by chris mason

Hey, where in AZ are you? I lived in the Phoenix/Scottsdale area for 18+ years.

I live in chandler.

where did you move too?

In Charlottesville, VA now.

Good stuff. I will be out to the Scottsdale area in Sept. for my 20 year reunion.

Chris

Originally Posted by chris mason

Contrary to the opinions of many trainers, resistance training in and of itself will translate to almost no improvement on the field of play.

Resistance training can increase our ability to produce muscular force in two ways. One is via hypertrophy of the contractile proteins. The other is via more efficient neural recruitment. Neural recruitment is EXTREMELY specific, thus improvements in neural recruitment relative to a specific resistance exercise will have virtually correlation to on the field improvement.

Hypertrophy of the contractile proteins improves the force production capability of the musculature. This adaptation can be adapted to on the field play, but only via practice of sport specific movements.

I think this is where athletes lose their way to some degree. They practice exercises that they think will translate directly to on the field improvements (power cleans being a good example) and essentially make their training less efficient than it could be.

I have seen studies to suggest there is some correlation, but it requires a pretty substantial increase in strength or power production in a movement like the squat to correlate to very minor increases in performance in something like running or jumping. However, if the difference between you and your competition is small, then you could gain an edge.

As well, it also depends on how advanced the person is. Someone fairly new to resistance training, new to heavy lifting, or, I postulate, even now to something like RFD/reactive training, can reap more significant benefits by improving these general neuromuscular qualities, as opposed to intermuscular coordination, as I believe you are suggesting here.

Also, there is the transmutation of training effects to consider. More specific work tends to be required to reap the greatest benefits from the more general work. Hence the traditional periodization scheme of transitioning from more general to more specific work as the competitive season approaches.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

I have seen studies to suggest there is some correlation, but it requires a pretty substantial increase in strength or power production in a movement like the squat to correlate to very minor increases in performance in something like running or jumping. However, if the difference between you and your competition is small, then you could gain an edge.

As well, it also depends on how advanced the person is. Someone fairly new to resistance training, new to heavy lifting, or, I postulate, even now to something like RFD/reactive training, can reap more significant benefits by improving these general neuromuscular qualities, as opposed to intermuscular coordination, as I believe you are suggesting here.

Also, there is the transmutation of training effects to consider. More specific work tends to be required to reap the greatest benefits from the more general work. Hence the traditional periodization scheme of transitioning from more general to more specific work as the competitive season approaches.

An increase in general force production capability, contractile hypertrophy, will lead to some improvement in many movements simply because the generalized increase in force production capability will allow the athlete to accelerate loads more quickly. In other words, if you can bench 400 lbs you can throw 135 lbs around a lot faster than someone who can only bench 200 lbs. A similar thing can be seen with sprinting. Via a generalized in leg and hip strength the athlete can realize a slight increase in sprinting ability simply because their muscles can move their own load more explosively due to their increased force production capability.

From a skill perspective, there truly is virtually no carryover from the weight room to the field.

Originally Posted by chris mason

An increase in general force production capability, contractile hypertrophy, will lead to some improvement in many movements simply because the generalized increase in force production capability will allow the athlete to accelerate loads more quickly. In other words, if you can bench 400 lbs you can throw 135 lbs around a lot faster than someone who can only bench 200 lbs. A similar thing can be seen with sprinting. Via a generalized in leg and hip strength the athlete can realize a slight increase in sprinting ability simply because their muscles can move their own load more explosively due to their increased force production capability.

From a skill perspective, there truly is virtually no carryover from the weight room to the field.

From a skill perspective, you are probably right. However, you can also improve the force-velocity profile of muscular contraction from what I understand. Again, I'm talking intramuscular coordination here. That is, things that are operating regardless of the movement pattern in which a muscle is involved.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

From a skill perspective, you are probably right. However, you can also improve the force-velocity profile of muscular contraction from what I understand. Again, I'm talking intramuscular coordination here. That is, things that are operating regardless of the movement pattern in which a muscle is involved.

I think you are correct about improving one's ability to quickly generate force, but that again goes back to specific movements and does not have a high correlation between different movements.

Originally Posted by chris mason

I think you are correct about improving one's ability to quickly generate force, but that again goes back to specific movements and does not have a high correlation between different movements.

So you don't think training a movement that involves, say triple extension, will have any significant impact on a movement that also involves triple extension but is fundamentally different? For example, a power clean and a vertical leap? I'm definitely not saying that correlation is 1:1, far from it, but it would seem to me that it is significant enough to warrant training the movement.

This seems to be further corroborated by Olympic lifters have some of the highest vertical leaps of any athlete out there, without any specific training with the movement.

That 5x5 Program Is Great For Shocking Those Fast Twitch Fibers!