![]() |
||
![]() |
Birth of a ParadigmMany credit Arthur Jones (the inventor of Nautilus equipment) with developing and popularizing the "one set to failure" paradigm. Jones argued that bodybuilders should work to the point of momentary failure, using one set per exercise/per session, rather than using multiple sets of multiple exercises. But Jone's commercial success may been potentiated by a long-standing tradition among young trainees (particularly men) who, in the absence of qualified supervision, regularly trained to failure as an intuitive way of obtaining objective feedback about their progress. Whenever an additional rep could be performed with a given weight, the trainee was psychologically reinforced, which further entrenched this "habit." Unfortunately, it also reinforced poor exercise form and the tremendous frustration that set in when, after several months of monotonous training, the inevitable plateau set in. This frustration then paved the way for numerous ill-conceived commercialized training "systems" that emerged over the past several decades. The result is an endless cycle of unsupervised trainees switching from one miracle method to another, in an endless search for the "perfect program." Before we criticize Jones or the authors of the many programs available today, it may be necessary to revise our expectations of what a training method should and shouldn't do. Remember that nearly any training method can be effective, at least temporarily, for the following reasons: 1) Beginners will make short-term progress with any training method, provided they aren't injured in the process. 2) Many people train in a very monotonous manner, rarely changing acute exercise variables such as choice of exercise, order of exercise, rest periods, and load (volume and intensity). When such a person changes programs, they will progress, at least temporarily. Conversely, NO training program is perfect because: 1) Everyone is different. No two people
respond exactly the same to a given program. The conclusion that might be drawn from these points is that all methods can be viewed as "tools" which have a certain degree of utility when used in the proper proportion and in the right context. The problem is when a proclamation is made that "This is the perfect program for all people all of the time!"
A significant impediment to discussing
this issue is the lack of consistent
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
a) Muscles can be worked more thoroughly by first training in an unstable environment (i.e, free weights) which challenge the stabilizers, and then moving to a stable environment (i.e, machines) [4]. To test this for yourself, first do a set of dumbbell bench presses to fatigue. Next, load a barbell with the same weight, and immediately do a set. You will find that you can lift this weight, despite failure on the DB bench. Next, go to a machine bench press, load it with the same weight, and you'll find that you can continue even further. This phenomenon is an example of "stabilizer failure," meaning that the motor cortex will limit neural drive to the prime movers when it senses that the body is unable to stabilize a load. This phenomenon has vast implications for the majority of trainees who primarily work prime movers through machine exercises only. b) Because fatigue is specific [5], greater workloads are possible if sets of contrasting exercises are performed back to back, as opposed to finishing all sets for a particular exercise before proceeding to the next. As an example, if you plan to perform bench presses and lat pulldowns in the same session, sets 1,3,5, etc., would be bench presses, and sets 2,4,6, etc., would be lat pulldowns. The more distant the two muscle groups are from one another, the greater the reduction in residual fatigue. Still another method of reducing fatigue is to alternate between low repetition sets, which fatigue primarily the nervous system, with high repetition sets, which fatigue primarily the metabolic system. The low repetition sets facilitate greater neural drive, which carries over to the high repetition set, allowing a greater overall workload to be performed. c) Except for beginners, a linear progressions of training load, where the athlete attempts to add resistance each and every workout, result in early stagnation and loss of improvement. A more productive approach is a "three steps up, one step down approach" [6] which allows for periodic regeneration and continued improvement. |
5) For hypertrophy development, remember that muscles consist of more than just contractile fibers. Use a variety of repetition ranges to stimulate all elements of the muscle cell including sarcoplasmic volume, capillary density, and mitochondria proliferation. (sarcoplasmic hypertrophy)
6) It is especially important to recognize the qualitative components of a good set elements such as the feel, control, and overall mastery of the movement. Over-reliance on achieving the maximum number of repetitions at any cost is an invitation to injury and long-standing technique errors. A useful guideline is "Once you find yourself cheating, you're already beyond failure!"
7) Stick to conventional
or "basic" training methods until they no longer yield
results. If your neuromuscular system experiences every strength
training method known to science in your first year of training,
what will you do when you hit a plateau? Save "advanced"
methods, such as partial repetitions, eccentric training, and
ballistic methods for later, when you're advanced.
The majority of trainees define training to failure as continuing a set of repetitions (including both the concentric and eccentric portions of the rep) until no further repetitions are possible without a considerable erosion of form, or assistance from a partner, or both. Frequently, after concentric failure is reached, the trainee will continue the set, either by cheating (utilizing co-contraction from additional muscle groups), or with the help of a partner by either 1) completing a certain number of eccentric-emphasized reps, 2) performing "forced reps" (ie., utilizing help on both the concentric and eccentric portions of the reps), or performing "strip sets," meaning, the partner continues to reduce the weight on the bar until no further repetitions can be completed.
Other authors have rightly pointed out the fact that failure is specific to fiber type. As an example, you may select a heavy weight, and reach failure after performing 3 repetitions. While no further repetitions are possible with this weight, it would still be possible to lower the weight (as in a strip-set) and continue even further.
Olympic lifters terminate their sets when the ideal tempo and/or coordination erodes beyond acceptable parameters. For this reason, Olympic lifters rarely if ever utilize spotters, even on their heaviest maximum attempts, since (at least in theory) the worst thing that can happen is that the last rep will be slower than desired.
|
Is One Set Really Enough?Many proponents of the "one set to failure" method justify their claims by suggesting that one set is sufficient to recruit a maximal number of motor units. While this may be true (although there is little solid data to support this statement), this approach assumes that simply recruiting a motor unit once is sufficient to fatigue it, which is a prerequisite to hypertrophic adaptations. For beginning trainees, it may be that single exposures to a training stimulus are sufficient to provoke an adaptation. But athletes with even moderate experience are likely to require multiple exposures (sets) in order to fatigue the target motor units. Hypertrophy of other biological tissues is accomplished not by stressing the tissue close to its limits, but by applying a stress which is slightly beyond what it normally encounters. Bone, as an example, hypertrophies when a force equaling approximately one-tenth it's breaking point is applied. This example supports the contention that gradual progression is the ideal method for achieving muscular growth. |
References:
1) Personal Communication,
February, 1996.
2) "Growth Hormone Release Following Single Versus Multiple
Sets of Back Squats". Bruce W Craig and Ho-Youl Kang at the
Human Performance Laboratory, Ball State University. Journal of
Strength and Conditioning Research, 1994, 8(4), 270-275
3) Personal communication with Dr. Fred Hatfield, January, 1996.
4) Program Design Video Series,
Paul Chek Center for Health & Performance, LaJolla, CA, 1996.
5) Zatsiorsky, V. M., Science and Practice of Strength Training,
p.p. 111, Human Kinetics, Champaign, 1995.
6) Bompa, T.O., Periodization of Strength, Toronto, Veritas Publishing,
1993, p.p. 53.
7) Telle, J., Beyond 2001: New Approaches to Scientific Training
for the Advanced Bodybuilder, EDICT, Denver, 1995.
8) Hatfield, F.C., Fitness: The Complete Guide, ISSA Publications,
Santa Barbara, 1995.
9) Fleck, S.J., & Kraemer, W.J., Designing Resistance Training
Programs, Human Kinetics Publishers, Champaign, 1987, p.p. 58.
10) Baechle, T.R., (Ed.) Essentials of Strength and Conditioning,
Human Kinetics Publishers, Champaign, 1994.
|
||
|
![]()
About The Author
|
His colleagues call him an iconoclast, a visionary, a rule-breaker. His clients call him The Secret Weapon for his ability to see what other coaches miss. Charles calls himself a geek who struggled in Phys Ed throughout school. Whatever you call him, Charles methods are ahead of their time and quickly produce serious results. His counter-intuitive approach and self-effacing demeanor have lead to appearances on NBCs The TODAY Show and The CBS Early Show. Currently, Charles competes in Olympic-style weightlifting on the masters circuit, with a 3-year goal of qualifying for the 2009 Masters World Championships. |
|
Learn
More About You can build muscle and strength and burn fat in as little as 15 minutes, 3 times a week with EDT...it works for EVERYONE - male, female, young, old...your body simply has no choice but to get results! Click
here to learn more ![]() |
![]()
|
Related Items The Ultimate Guide to Massive Arms
|
|
|